Luminous Emptiness – a Dzogchen / Mahamudra blog

Flickering in the Wind

On 29/06/2005

It is said that trying to see the nature of mind without first training the mind in resting (or Shamatha) is like trying to see around an old dark room which is only lit by a candle which is flickering wildly in the wind.

How hard is it to see things, and even when we do, how can we be sure of what we see?

Mind resting naturally leads to clear seeing

When the mind is trained in resting naturally, whether on objects, or without objects, then we gain the ability to see clearly and deeply into what is, and what appears to be. So the basis for realising ‘how things are’ is the ability to rest the mind with stability. Mind Still.

Shamatha includes Vipassana

In practicing Shamatha, there is mostly placing of the mind, but there is also some analysis going on – a necessary work of checking up on our practice, noticing if there are any faults, and rectifying them with the appropriate remedies.

Vipassana includes Shamatha

In practicing Vipassana (the method of looking into the nature of the mind), there is most certainly analysis – the posing of questions as it were, for us to directly establish the answers via direct perception, but there is also placement too. Without the ability to remain at rest, our analysis would just decend into proliferation of thought, and we’d be lost in that thought and carried away by it.

So both Shamatha and Vipassana contain placement and analysis, just in differing amounts.

And without the ability to rest the mind, there would be no Shamatha and no Vipassana either.

So what does it take for us to cultivate the ability to rest the mind? And what does it take to support that ability?

Mind Moving and Mind Still

By Chodpa

On 27/06/2005

In Mahamudra

If both the moving and the calm aspects of the mind are the same, then why should we meditate and learn to reach the calm aspect?
Responses on a Dharma list

In an important sense, both aspects are not the same. From the relative point of view, are they the same? Do they both appear in the same way?

From the ultimate point of view, perhaps one could say they are both the same, in that they are both empty. Certainly they have ‘same taste’, but does that mean they are both the same?

The moving and the still are both empty

Perhaps the traditional way to say this is that both have the same essence – i.e. that of emptiness, or the nature of dharmata. Sometimes saying they have the same reality seems to create confusion for some people …. as if reality was ‘something’ which is in some way existent, whether ‘behind’ or ‘within’ what we perceive ….

Whether mind is at rest or mind is moving, it has the same essence – emptiness …

Why do we need to purify something like Karma which doesn’t actually exist?

Perhaps saying ‘it doesn’t actually exist’ suggests something too strong – maybe ‘doesn’t actually exist in the way we think or assume it exists’ is sometimes a more useful description? Sometimes we say ‘doesn’t exist’ as that strongly corrects our opposite assumption, but we can swing too far the other way too, and so ‘doesn’t exist in the way we assume it to exist can then be a useful corrective.

But regarding the point of doing purification of karma practices – well absolutely, they are a skilful means. And so is cultivating a still mind. In this case, the main reason we learn to cultivate the still mind is that it is the easiest place for us to start looking at the nature of mind. In other words, we cultivate mahamudra shamatha in order to practice mahamudra vipassana.

Seeing mind’s nature, at rest and in movement

Once we have some skill at shamatha, and are not swept away by thoughts that arise, then we are able to look at the mind at rest and see its nature, look at the mind in movement (i.e. with thoughts – usually by deliberately causing a thought to arise) and see its nature, and look at mind with appearances (i.e. the arisings from the other 5 senses), and again see its nature. What we will see will be the same essence in each case – emptiness. But the conventional nature will not be the same in each case.

So without the ability to reside in shamatha and not get swept away with thoughts, we are not able to cause thoughts to arise, and to see into their nature. We’d just be caught by those thoughts, and carried away, and then lose our ability to see deeply.

Not trying to get away from moving mind

So we aren’t trying to get away from mind with movement all the time, and just be in mind without movement, or still mind …. but using the practice of cultivating mind without movement so that we have the ability to look directly at the nature of the mind – however it is ….. when we can look at mind however it is, then it doesn’t matter any more how it is, we can always just look deeply. So all of life, all of our experience becomes fertile ground for seeing, all of it comes onto the path, and all of it is truly ‘practice’.