Resetting "Mahāmudrā" history?

Reception history is a method for studying historical events and figures by examining how they've been perceived and interpreted throughout history. It  shifts the focus from a straightforward chronological telling of events to analyzing how those events have been understood by different people in different times.

Markus Vinzent (Resetting the Origins of Christianity, A New Theory of Sources and Beginnings) applies reception history to the study of Early Christianity, and retrospectively. Traditionally, scholars have studied this period by analyzing historical documents at face value. Markus Vinzent argues for a  "retrospective" approach.  He examines how later Christians interpreted  earlier figures and writings. This allows him to challenge traditional assumptions and shed new light on the development of Christianity.

With this method one might look at how a writing from the 2nd century AD was understood by someone in the 10th century. By seeing how the meaning changed over time, one can gain new insights into both the original text and the later reader's perspective. Instead of going straight back to the ”original text” and its “initial reception” and then following their evolution throughout history, Vinzent's method looks at its receptions nearer to our times and then goes gradually back into history, to see where and how changes occurred.

“6:09 It occurred to me that when we take the movement backwards, we cannot have it as a continuous movement. All we can do is choose sections. Let's take [Bishop] Ignatius [of Antioch 35 AD to 108/110 AD]. We can take that section, and as soon as we reflect about that particular section, we have to give a chronological explanation. We think writing history is a continuous process, as we almost emulate when we say we write from the year zero to the year 100, as if we have a continuity. But when we reflect backwards, it is anything but continuous. It is always a choice of sections, and within those sections we then establish a pseudo continuity. So that was the rough framework”

“7:43 I've chosen to slice the history by those sections where the new consensus was created, slice by slice like an archaeologist, who traces back the findings in the ground. From today backwards, a few sections where a new kind of discourse had been established.” (Youtube Channel, New Books Network Book of the Day).

When we apply this sort of “retrospective reception history” to Tibetan Buddhism and more specifically to “Maitrīpa”/Advayavajra/Avadhūtipa, it could give us insights into how Maitrīpa and his role were perceived at different times. We have to be aware of the added difficulty that manuscript texts were hardly ever fixed, and were continuously recopied, with the possibility of later later amendments, interpolations, additions, “prophesies”, deletions etc. This needs to be looked into properly, with the proper means… and especially time. Below I will do a quick and dirty “reception history” (not really “retrospective”), to illustrate how it could be done. In what follows the selected authors and their opinions on Maitrīpa are simply those that come to mind first. I ought to have started with Jamgön Kongtrül for the retrospective method, but I went for Tsangnyön Heruka first.

Maitrīpa is firstly known through the texts that are attributed to him (Amanasikāra t. yid la mi byed pa’i skor), and through texts and commentaries attributed to those considered to have been his students. This scriptural “Maitrīpa” appears to have been a respected all-round scholar, and his “scholarship” was not a problem at the beginning of the second millennium, on the contrary. With the “Tibetan Renaissance” (Davidson), and the freshly imported “new” Tantras (gsar ma), things changed very quickly. Yogis became a very competitive new model, and tensions between monastic and yogic communities were the norm. When the new Tantras were generally accepted, mainly through their gradual canonization (e.g. Bu-ston Rinchen Grub 1290-1364), often based on an authentic Indic pedigree, their further evolution and continuing success became dependent on the so called “aural transmissions” (t. snyan rgyud), rediscovered revelations (t. gter ma), etc., allowing for new interpretations and updated doctrines and practices.

These new inputs, that did not necessarily come from an Indic cultural sphere, were often composed in Nepal or Tibet, needed to be authentified by attributing their origin to known Indian masters, and for yogic materials, very often to Indian mahāsiddhas, their direct disciples (fictional or not), and by establishing their Transmission lineages. Narratives were developed in order to authenticate the new transmissions, and hagiographies became the most popular genre. Approximately at the same time as the picaresque novels appeared in Europe.

The new canonized Tantras already came with their transmission lineages, sometimes including teachers that could not have received the newly appeared “aural transmissions”, but were important to authenticate the general transmissions of the more recently formed major Tibetan schools. If a new “aural transmission” had been integrated later in such a school, how could an important earlier teacher of that school have received and transmitted it? It was the job of hagiographists and chroniclers to explain this, and they used all the means they had, before all their creativity, to succeed in their missions.

Most mahāyāna sūtras had been taught by the Buddha in saṃbhogakāya settings. Most “aural transmissions” are said to have an Indian origin with often the following pattern. A saṃbhogakāya entity appears to an Indian (mahā)siddha and gives him an “aural transmission”. The (mahā)siddha passes it on to his Indic disciples, and at one point a Tibetan student (shing rta bgyad) that traveled to India or Nepal will receive it, bringing it back to Tibet. Or the Indic disciple of a (mahā)siddha travels to Tibet and passes it on to a Tibetan student. Often exclusively and in exchange for gold.

Later on, time passing as it always does, gaps could appear in these --let’s call them fictional lineages-- hagiographers used various solutions to fill up the gaps. One of the earlier solutions was an exclusive lineage (t. gcig brgyud) for lack of a better translation. A teacher would pass on the transmission to one student at the same time. That student would do the same, and this would last for several generations (five, seven). The teacher would indicate to the student for how many generations the transmission needed to be kept secret.

Theses and other procedures allowed for Tibetan Buddhism to develop in ways that fitted in best with Tibetan society and its particular needs in later times. Because of the requirements regarding “authenticity” and “transmission”, narratives were needed to explain why the early masters (Milarepa, Gampopa, …) of a lineage did not completely fit in with later forms of Tibetan Buddhism. Maitrīpa was one of them.               

Famous hagiographers and chroniclers such as Tsangnyön Heruka (1452-1507), Dakpo Tashi Namgyal (1511, 1512, or 1513 – 1587), Padma Karpo (1527-1592), Tārānātha (1575-1634), Jamgön Kongtrül (1813–1899) showed and/or explained why Maitrīpa was a special case that didn’t fit in seamlessly, and yet was an important chain in the transmission.

Tsangnyön Heruka (1452-1507) is like Mary Poppins, he never explains anything. He simply tells things as he thinks they were/are. Nāropa and Maitrīpa are important chains in Rechungpa’s Tantric Yogic Kagyu lineage (pace Gampopa!), and there hardly is a difference between them. He has Marpa say so himself in the hagiography dedicated to this Tibetan lotsāva. The English translation team (with Chogyam Trungpa) of Tsangnyön Heruka’s Life of Marpa the Translator,  write that Saraha wrote “three cycles of dohās”, and was “a teacher in the lineage of mahāmudrā, that Marpa received from Maitrīpa” (p. xliv). Marpa saw Saraha in a dream.

Saraha wearing a freshly flayed human skin (Tsadra website)
For a Saraha with bone ornaments: here

“In the cool shade of a grove of plakśa trees.
On a tira corpse seat
Sat Lord Saraha, the Great Brahman.
I had never before seen such majestic brilliance.
He was flanked by two queens.
His body was adorned with charnel ground ornaments.
His joyous face was beaming.” (Life of Marpa, p. 45)

Saraha/Śavaripa, illumination Nepalese Dohākośagīti manuscript

In Life of Marpa, Marpa later remembers his gurus Nāropa and Maitrīpa with nostalgia. Marpa's hagiography author Tsangnyön Heruka seems to totally identify with Marpa, as he imagines him.

Maitrīpa doing tantra (detail HA 60674)

“Lord Marpa thought,“If it were my gurus Nāropa and Maitrīpa, they would prefer to actually sit on a corpse and acquire human flesh in the charnel ground. If they could not acquire these, they would visualize them through samādhi, and so enjoy them. Even when rows of kśetrapala ḍākinīs lined up in person to receive torma, they would not be afraid. But tonight these people are afraid of the howls of the jackals in this empty valley and the natural sounds of the elements.” (Life of Marpa, p. 122)

Lakṣmīṅkārā (ལྕམ་ལཀྵྨཱི) as a mahāsiddha, the alleged
authoress of the Sahajasiddhi-paddhati.
The sweeper Hāḍipa Jālandharanāth looking at her? (detail HA65204)

Dakpo Tashi Namgyal (1511, 1512, or 1513 – 1587), abbot of Gampo (t. dwags lha sgam po) tries to make a compromise between Gampopa’s contemplative “direct perception” approach and Tantric techniques (t. thab lam), nonetheless giving full priority to the latter. He is likely to have read Maitrīpa’s writings, and being aware of the gap, he could have been expected to have a more mitigated view of Maitrīpa. He was one of the teachers of the eighth Karmapa Mikyö Dorje, who was quite outspoken about his post-classic Mahāmudrā preferences. 

“Maitripa, also, having been dissatisfied with his proficient knowledge of the sutras and tantras followed [the mystic teacher] Śavarivara and received the illuminating instructions on the quintessential great seal, which were not based on the tantric teachings[1].” (Lhalungpa, p. 101)

Dakpo Tashi Namgyal accepts the full heteroclite “Mahāmudrā” system as it was transmitted at his time, and defends non-tantric “Mahāmudrā” against the attacks of Sakya Paṇḍita (Lalungpa p. 109). Perhaps following the semi-fictional 12th century Par phu pa Blo gros seng ge and others, he establishes the “Mahāmudrā” lineage of the Kagyu schools as originally descending from Buddha Vajradhara (Lhalungpa, p. 116). In order to account for all the heteroclite “Mahāmudrā” materials, integrated in different ways and in different times, Dakpo Tashi Namgyal introduces or reaffirms a role for two saṃbhogakāya bodhisattvas, Mañjughoṣa  and Avalokiteśvara, whom the Buddha, “at the city of Vidarbha” in the South of India, prophesied as being the future expounders of “this quintessential dharma”. These two bodhisattvas “reincarnated” as “Devaputra Ratnamati and Devaputra Sukhanatha” and are said to have transmitted this teaching to Saraha. “It was said that [Saraha] achieved liberation instantly”. “Ratnamati was the reincarnation of Buddha himself, and Sukhanātha that of Guhyapati [bodhisattvaVajrapāṇi].”

“Saraha transmitted it to [the Tantric] Nāgārjuna, who was renowned as the second Buddha. Both of them were the gurus of most of the great Indian saints. Nāgārjuna especially guided Śrī Śavariśvara toward his liberation.”

“According to certain traditions, Śavari later received the quintessential dharma from the two bodhisattvas and also from Saraha. They had achieved enlightenment through illusory form or the spacelike mystical form.  It is said that these masters appeared before fortunate devotees at the mountain retreat of Śrī Parvata until recent times.” (Lhalungpa, p. 117)

In this transmission ("the quintessential dharma") Dakpo Tashi Namgyal includes “the Druppa Dedun [grub pa sde bdun] of mahāmudrā, the Nyingpo Kordruk [snying po skor drug], the twenty-four [sic] sections of [Advayavajra’s] Amanasi[kāra], and the extensive and concise texts of the Dohā [that] were known in India.” Or authored later in Nepal, Tibet or elsewhere… Maitrīpa is said to have seen “the spacelike mystical form” of Śavari in Śrī Parvata, and “received the instructions on "the quintessential dharma” from Śavari, implying he received the whole set.

As for the lineage of “Maitrīpa’s Mahāmudrā” mentioned above by Dakpo Tashi Namgyal, some elements are found back in the Complete works (t. gsung ‘bum) attributed to the 12th century Tsalpa Zhang. These works are not all by his hand (often memos etc. by members of his school), and may have undergone modifications at various times. In one of his works (Phyag rgya chen po thog babs, translated in German[2]), we find a transmission lineage that follows Dakpo Tashi Namgyal’s one: 1. Vajradhara  2. Ratnamati 3. Śavaripa  4. Avadhūtipa/Maitrīpa 5. Vajrapāṇi  6. Lha rje gtsang shod pa 7. Me lha khang pa 8. Yer pa ba 9. Zhang[3]. It is always possible that Zhang’s Tsalpa lineage had its own source. What source and when? What would be the origin of the Ratnamati narrative? Dakpo Tashi Namgyal continues:

“The fact that the mahāmudrā instructions, made known in Tibet by Maitrīpa's disciples such as the Indian Vajrapāṇi by way of the treatises like the Dohā, the Datsa [Brda-rtsa], and the Sangjor [Rgya-gar gsang-spyod[4]], were identical with those of Gampopa's affirmed the authenticity of the mahāmudrā system. This being so, some [teachers] asserted that any meditation on the perfect meaning of reality must be based only on the classical commentaries of the sūtras. They criticized the key instructions of the great saints [of the mahāmudrā lineage], which emphasized the attainment of insight from the beginning. Such criticism would imply their disregard for the exponents of the tantric instructions, especially their sources like Nyingpo Kordruk [snying po skor drug] and the Truppa Dedun [grub pa sde bdun].” (Lhalungpa, p. 144)

As Dakpo Tashi Namgyal wrote, Śavari was still saṃbhogakāyically hanging around in Śrī Parvata “until recent times”, because the Kagyu yogi Lhatsun Rinchen Namgyel (lHa btsun Rin chen rnam rgyal 1473–1557), Tsangnyön Heruka’s disciple is said to have received the “brDa-tsa” and the “Rgya-gar gsang-spyod” from Śavari himself in his “spacelike mystical form”, a vision actually. What Lhatsun Rinchen Namgyel received at that time (15-16th century) was probably thought to be, at least essentially, the same set of instructions as the ones Maitrīpa received 500 years earlier, but hadn’t made public… A saṃbhogakāya is not a spatiotemporal dimension. And therefore a “lineage” isn’t either. For a full list of instructions received saṃbhogakāyically by Lhatsun Rinchen Namgyel, see Michaela Clementes’ “The Literary Work of Lha bTsun Rin chen rNamrgyal”. The consequence of these extratemporal additions is that according to the tradition, Maitrīpa's transmisison of  "the quintessential dharma” from Śavari can’t be reduced to the writings attributed to Maitrīpa in the 11th century. Do we want to rely on faith or on history? If history has some importance, then some important mahāsiddhas may not have existed, and if they did, they probably didn't look like their representations above. If faith prevails, then the sky, and beyond, is the limit.  

Padma Karpo (1527-1592) is pretty tough on Maitrīpa. He recognises his “full” heritage, but for him something went wrong with Maitrīpa, no doubt due to his scholastic patterns (t. mtshan nyid pa) and past training. Padma Karpo gives a full account of Maitrīpa’s encounter with the “spacelike mystical form” of Śavari[5], and repeatedly insists on the fact that Maitrīpa had doubts about his teacher. In order to show the reader how Maitrīpa ought to have behaved, he introduced another character, prince Sakara, a fellow traveler of Maitrīpa, who behaves like a model student and complies with all the requirements in this regard, as known in the 16th century, especially faith. It is because of Maitrīpa's deficiency that Padma Karpo has Śavari say: “Since you had doubts about me, you won’t receive the ultimate accomplishment in this life. When you die Vajrayoginī will come and meet you and you will receive the ultimate accomplishment[6].”

After delivering this prophecy the mystical form of Śavari disappeared. What is the reason behind this consistent hagiographic defiency of Maitrīpa? 

In his Seven Instruction Lineages[7] (t. bka’ babs bdun ldan), Tārānātha (1575-1634) follows Padma Karpo’s line, including the incomplete spiritual career of Maitrīpa and his students, due to lack of faith. See my blog Maitripa et ses disciples vus par Tārānātha (01/10/2010).

Jamgön Kongtrül (1813–1899) probably follows up on the 8th Karmapa’s division between what later what be called sūtra mahāmudrā and tantra mahāmudrā[8], and creates a three-fold mahāmudrā.

“Kon sprul Blo gros mtha' yas (1813-1899) thus distinguishes in his Shes bya kun khyab mdzod (Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khan 1982 vol. 3, 375f.) besides the generally accepted mantra mahāmudrā, a sūtra mahāmudrā and an essence mahāmudrā. Mantra mahāmudrā is transmitted according to the methods taught by the Mantrayāna, and this involves Tantric empowerment. Essence mahāmudrā leads to the sudden or instantaneous realization of one's natural mind (tha mal gyi shes pa)[9].” (Klaus-Dieter Mathes, Can Sūtra mahamudra be justified on the basis of Maitrīpa's Apratiṣṭhānavāda?, 2007)

Kongtrül specifies:

“This means that at a time when a degenerated understanding was widespread, people with great potential (skal) and extraordinary dispositions for the Vajrayāna were very rare, but that in spite of this, people of lesser potential and mediocre faculties could follow the gradual path of the three individuals and eventually further their potential, become fit to receive the instructions of the Mantrayāna and [SKK III. p. 388] obtain liberation in one lifetime. Even failing that, as many people were to glimpse the meaning of the Mahāmudrā by this means, they were thus setting out on an irreversible path. At least that is what [Gampopa] must have thought[10].”

Obviously “Essence Mahāmudrā” can only occur “suddenly” after a long preparation in Mantrayāna, at least according to Kongtrül:

“This is the direct and powerful path to the sudden (t. btsan thabs su) realisation of the deep heart (t. zab mo’i snying po), even deeper and more wonderful than the previous two. It is the grace (adhiśṭhāna; byin rlabs) of consecration (abhiśeka; dbang) of indestructible gnosis, conferred by a realised lama, which descends upon a highly predisposed disciple and awakens ordinary knowledge in the heart centre, simultaneously producing realisation and liberation without artificial technique or learning process. This happened frequently in the hagiographies of the siddhas of the four great and eight small schools of the Kagyupa lineage.[11]”

There is no mention of Gampopa’s third path of direct perception, beyond sūtra and tantra. According to Kongtrül, the path of direct perception does not correspond to “Essence Mahāmudrā”, since “Essence Mahāmudrā” requires a “consecration (abhiśeka; dbang) [ ] by a realised lama”. Consecrations are not beyond tantra. 

Once more, this is not about the name of a method/realization, in this case “Mahāmudrā”, a tantric term, but about the unifying method (t. zung ‘jug s. yuganaddha), thought to have been taught by Maitrīpa/Advayavajra, inspired or not by Saraha’s Dohākośagīti, the first one, not the other two dohākośa that were written later. A method beyond “sūtrayāna” and “mantrayāna”, but that certainly can be combined with “sūtrayāna” and “mantrayāna” practice, or not… It is considered as a liberation (s. mokṣa), it is compatible with the Apratiṣṭhānavāda view, and it is accessible through an Introduction (t. ngo sprod) by a teacher who realized “yuganaddha” himself. It is also called “Mahāmudrā” by some, perhaps to imply its realization is similar. Could this be how this method is compatible with mantrayāna (t. sngags kyi lugs kyi rjes su mthun pa)? On the level of the result, on the level of liberation?

Mantrayāna wants to go further than simple liberation. It goes for “full Buddhahood”, with three fully realized Buddhakāyas, especially the saṃbhogakāya and the nirmāṇakāya. As a bodhisattva, the follower of mantrayāna wants to have all possible powers of a Buddha to save all sentient beings and to empty saṃsāra to the best of their ability. Salvation happens through liberation (s. mokṣa t. grol ba), and on the level of dharmakāya. The other two form bodies (rūpakāyas) allow a Buddha to act as a Buddha. Some believe an enlightened activity (t. phrin las) is the natural natural outflow of liberation. Others think that to be a powerful Buddha, a bodhisattva needs to work real hard, follow mantrayāna, accumulate merit, wisdom and siddhis, rely on a guru, on the most powerful mantric expedients (upāya) and to identify with a deity, sometimes, as in the case of Tsangnyön Heruka, theopathically.

Mantrayāna’s project is in fact a transexistential career, consisting of liberating (t. grol ba s. mokṣa) but also and foremost “ripening” (t. smin pa) those to be saved, together in short “smin grol”. Liberation for their own benefit, and “ripening” for the benefit of others. “Ripening” is done through giving empowerments and entering mantrayāna. Such is the theory. Liberation requires a teacher who realizes direct perception, who knows the nature of mind, and who can guide others in this regard. “Ripening” requires a whole religious set-up and everything required for the survival thereof. 

***

[1] Mahāmudrā, The Quintessence of Mind and Meditation, Takpo Tashi Namgyal, Translated & Annotated by Lobsang P. Lhalungpa, Foreword by Chogyam Trungpa, Shambala, 1987

[2] Andrea Prax, Edition und Übersetzung von Lama Zhangs Blitzschlag[gleicher] Mahāmudrā, Wien 2013, Adviser Klaus-Dieter Mathes

[3] Andrea Prax, Edition und Übersetzung von Lama Zhangs Blitzschlag[gleicher] Mahāmudrā, Wien 2013

[4] “The oral instructions of the essential meaning of rGya gar gsang spyod’ (rGya gar gsang spyod kyi don bsdu’i man ngag rnams) was composed by Rin chen rNam rgyal after a vision of Mar pa.” Clemente, M. (2015), "The Literary Work of lHa btsun Rin chen rnam rgyal". In: From Bhakti to Bon. Festschrift for Per Kvaerne, edited by H. Havnevik and C. Ramble, Oslo: Novus Forlag, pp. 185-200

[5] In Padma Karpo’s Brug pa’i chos ‘byung, xylography of Dodedrak Monastery, starting on page 87.

[6] “khyod nga la the tsom zos pas tshe ‘di la mchog gi dngos grub mi thob/ ‘chi kar rdo rje rnal ‘byor mas bsus ste bar dor mchog gi dngos grub thob par ‘gyur ro/ p. 89

[7] Templeman, David, Library of Tibetan Works and Archives (1983)

[8] “Ce n'est pas le siddhi authentique de la Mahāmudrā de la lignée Kagyupa, transmis du Dharmakāya Vajradhara jusqu'au grand Nāropa, qui est présent dans les intuitions analogique et réelle (dpe don gyi ye shes) authentiques[14], qui ne sont pas manifestes (ngon sum) avant les trois initiations supérieures des quatre initiations (mchog dbang gong ma gsum) mais ce sont le Parāmitāyāna causal[15] de nos jours et la tradition des instructions communes de Samātha-Vipassana qui viennent d’Atisha et font partie du chemin graduel de l’éveil, enseignés par Gampopa et Pamodroupa (1110-1170) pour répondre à la demande des étudiants de l’époque dégénérée, friands des enseignements les plus élevés, et qui l'ont appelés pour cette raison la mahāmudrā intégrée naturellement (phyag-chen skyes-sbyor). Dans la pratique de la plupart des étudiants de Gampopa, les instructions de la Mahāmudrā furent données avant l'initiation, ce qui est appelé la Tradition commune du Sūtrayāna et du Mantrayāna." Quoted in Shes bya kun khyab mdzod (Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khan 1982 vol. 3, See Déclassement de la mahamudra de Maitrīpa 27/06/2011
'Di la dgongs nas rje mi bskyod zhabs kyis/ chos sku rdo rje 'chang chen po nas brgyud pa'i nA ro chen po'i bka' brgyud kyi phyag rgya chen po'i dngos grub mtshan nyid pa ni mchog dbang gong ma gsum gyi dpe don gyi ye shes mtshan nyid pa mngon sum du ma gyur pa la yod pa ma yin la/ deng sang gi rgyu phar phyin theg pa dang thun mong ba'i zhi lhag gi khrid srol mgon po a ti sha nas brgyud pa/ byang chub lam sgron gyi man ngag rje btsun sgam po pa dang mgon po phag mo gru pas/ snyigs ma'i gdul bya theg pa mtho mtho la dga' ba'i ngor phyag chen lhan cig skyes sbyor gyi ming btags par mdzad pa zhes gsungs la/ dwags po'i thugs sras phal mo che rnams kyi phyag bzhes su dbang bskur sngon song la phyag chen gyi gdams ngag bstan te mdo sngags thun mong gi lam srol du bzhed pa yin no//

[9] Essence Mahāmudrā may have been inspired by this observation:

“The meditational system of the Takpo Kagyupa order consists of two systems. The first system, which meets the needs of seekers inclined toward an instantaneous illumination, directs them, at the outset, to master the vision of reality by clearing doubts and distortions concerning the natural foundation of existence and then settle the mind [in a nondual] state. The second system, which meets the demands of seekers of gradual illumination, directs them first to achieve tranquility of mind and then gradually strive toward insight. The former method would be more suitable for highly intelligent and passionate persons. Nevertheless, I shall elucidate the latter at this stage because it is widely known in the country.” (Lhalungpa, p. 144)

[10] [SKK III. p. 388] de dag gi don ni snyigs ma shas cher bdo ba'i dus su son pas rdo rje theg pa'i thun mong min pa'i skal ldan ches nyung bar gyur kyang*/ dbang rtul skal ba dman pa'i gdul bya rnams la skyes bu gsum gyi lam rim gyi khrid pas/ mthar skal ba rab tu 'phos pas sngags kyi thun mong min pa'i snod du gyur te tshe gcig la grol ba thob pa'am/_de ltar ma yin kyang thabs des mang dag cig phyag rgya chen po'i don mthong nas/ phyir mi ldog pa'i lam la bkod pa la dgongs pa yin pa'i phyir ro//

[11] [SKK III. p. 389] snying po'i lugs ni/snying po rdo rje'i ye shes 'bebs pa yis// dbang rab smin grol dus gcig 'byung ba'o// snga ma gnyis ka las zab cing ngo mtshar la khyad par rmad du byung ba zab mo'i snying po btsan thabs su rtogs pa'i lam ni/ rtogs ldan gyi bla mas skal ldan gyi slob ma ches dbang rnon du gyur pa la rdo rje ye shes kyi dbang gi byin rlabs 'bebs pa tsam gyis/ tha mal shes pa snying dbus su sad nas rtogs grol dus mnyam du 'gyur bas spros bcas kyi thabs dang sbyangs pa'i rtsol ba la ma ltos pa'i phyir/ bka' brgyud che bzhi chung brgyad kyi grub thob sa chen po'i rdul tsam byon pa'i rnam thar dang lag rjes mngon sum snang ba 'di nyid yin cing*/

Deities, eternal bliss and luminosity

Copper Coloured Mountain, detail HA90027

I remember someone in our retreat group (1984-1987) asking Tenga Rinpoche (1932-2012) whether deities really existed and whether they actually came from their natural dwelling place, after having been invited (t. spyan drang) and returned there after the sādhana. When Tenga Rinpoche answered they didn’t, being visualized and empty, and that it was merely a practice (sādhana), some in our group were quite surprised. For others, having read about a more pragmatic use of deities[1] or “meditation gods”, such as in e.g. Sāṃkhya and Yoga, or considering them more psychologically as “archetypes” etc., it confirmed their expectation. I have no idea how Tibetan Buddhist practitioners (East and West) see and live deities nowadays, on a more intimate level.

Dr. Benoytosh Bhattacharya (An Introduction to Buddhist Esoterism, chapter XII The Deities p. 109), recalls that Advayavajra says “in a characteristic stanza” that “the deities are nothing but manifestations of Śūnya and are by nature non-existent; and whenever there is manifestation it must be Śūnya in essence.” Bhattacharya quotes some verses (MSP 14) from Advayavajra’s The Manifestation of Great Bliss (Mahāsukhaprakāśa). Below is Klaus-Dieter Mathes’ translation (A Fine Blend of Mahāmudrā and Madhyamaka):

“Being mere dependent arising,
[Bliss] is neither existence nor emptiness (i.e., nothing at all);
And [its] manifestation in the form of deities
Naturally lacks an own-being. (MSP 14)

No matter how [bliss] appears,
It will always have the nature of emptiness;
Whether [bliss] be taken as duality or not—
Here, [in tantric practice,] it is the fruit of mental imprints. (MSP 15)”

Bhattacharya then explains “the process of evolution of deities from Śūnya”, quoting from the same text (MSP 4[2]).

“The process of evolution has four stages: the first is the right perception of Śūnyatā, or voidness; the second is the connexion with the germ syllable, the Bīja; the third is the conception of an Icon [bimbe]; and the fourth is the external representation of the deities. This statement gives a direct lie to the theory that later Buddhism was nothing but gross idolatry. It shows, on the other hand, that their conception of godhead was philosophically most profound, a parallel to which is scarcely to be found in any other Indian religion.”

“Therefore, everything arises in dependence”, so ends Advayavajra’s MSP4, including Bliss and its manifestation in the form of deities (MSP14). Also, Bliss [...] is the fruit of mental imprints (MSP15). As for the “dwelling place” of the deities, Bhattacharya adds:

“Occasionally information is obtained about the residence of the deities contained in the pantheon; and, so far as can be gathered from the stray references, it can be asserted without hesitation that the abode of the Vajrayāna deities was in the Akaniṣṭha heaven (t. 'og min), which is the topmost of the Rūpa heavens.”

Bhattacharya gives the example of the Vajravārāhī sādhana (Sādhanamāla, 11th c.). In this sādhana, “the rays draw down "a mass of buddhas and so on" from their dwelling place in the Akaniṣṭha heaven, where they reside in a body of enjoyment (saṃbhogakāya).[3]”

“Bliss” is imagination, neither existence nor “nothing at all”. It is freedom, the highest form of pleasure. Aesthetics and beauty. A mixture of sensory experiences, emotions, thoughts, feelings, aspirations. “The fruit of mental imprints”. It is “incarnated” and experienced. In dualistic terms it needs both “body” and “mind”. It is neither one nor the other, but where both “meet” in emptiness, in “the topmost of the Rūpa heavens”, “the extreme summit of [ ] reality [bhūtakoṭiṃ]”.

Where does a visualized deity come from, and where does it part? Where does a symbolic body (saṃbhogakāya) come from? Where do memories, dreams, “visions” etc., i.e. “mental imprints” (s. vāsanāphalam), come from? What is their nature? Emptiness, mere dependent arising.

Bhattacharya gives the origin of the Mahāsukhavāda doctrine. Madhyamaka originated with Nāgārjuna who stated that “Nirvāṇa is nothing but Śūnya, [ ], a condition about which neither existence nor non-existence, nor a combination of the two, nor a negation of the two, can be predicated.” This was not entirely “satisfying”, and the Yogācāras “came to their rescue”:

“They retained the term ‘Śūnya’; but formulated that it was not an empty Śūnya, as proposed by the Madhyamakas, but a positive Śūnya with a positive element of Vijñana.”

“On the attainment of Nirvāṇa, therefore, the individual neither attains complete extinction, nor does he go out like a lamp, nor pass into a condition which cannot be conceived.”

Finally a “satisfying” solution was found with the introduction of “mahāsukha”, great bliss.

“This new introduction was known as the Mahāsukhavāda, and the form of Buddhism which was based on this Mahāsukhavāda was known as Vajrayāna, or the adamant-vehicle. In Vajrayāna Nirvāṇa had three elements: ‘Śūnya, Vijñana and Mahāsukha.’ This triple combination of Śūnya was termed by them as Vajra; because, as they said, it is firm and sound, unchangeable, unpierceable, impenetrable, incombustible and indestructible. They formulated that Śūnya is Nirātmā, and a goddess in whose eternal embrace the individual mind, i.e. the Bodhicitta, or Vijñana, is locked, and there remains in eternal bliss and happiness.”

Note that Bhattacharya here explains vijñana as Bodhicitta (t. byang sems). The triple nature of “Śūnya” and “Nirvāṇa” according to Mahāsukhavāda and Vajrayāna seems to relate to the triple experience (t. nyams gsum) of the natural state (t. gnas lugs): bliss (t. bde ba s. sukha), clarity (t. gsal ba s. prakaśa/prabhāsvara) and non-conceptuality (t. mi rtog pa s. nirvikalpa).

Bhattacharya points to the definition of Mahāsukha in chapter 7 of the Jñānasiddhi (t. Ye shes grub pa) attributed to Indrabhūti. My translation:

‘Bliss produced through the two organs
Is true reality (tattva)’, say [some] bad individuals.
“This is great bliss”
The supreme victorious one didn’t teach this. (7.1)

How could anything produced by dependent arising (s. pratītyotpādasaṃbhūtaṃ)
Ever be proven as knowledge of true reality (tattva)?
In any [dependent arising]
Nothing exists as an essence (svabhāvena) (7.2)

The knowledge of all tathāgatas (sarvatāthāgataṃ jñānaṃ)
Has self-awareness as its essence (svasaṃvedyasvabhāvakam)
This being the principal bliss
It is called “great bliss” (mahāsukha). (7.3)[4]

Could that “self-awareness” be related to the triple experience mentioned above? Bliss, clarity and non-conceptuality? Or to the triple “nirvāṇa” of Mahāsukhavāda, also called “vajra”? In this combination, clarity (t. gsal ba) refers to “self-awareness” (s. svasaṃveda), “bodhicitta”, for which metaphors of (self-)illuminating, etc. can be used, but which is not luminous, luminescent, light etc. in the sens of “giving off or reflecting light”, “shining in the dark; giving out light” or of a “luminous” appearance.

In Atiśa’s Pointing out instructions (Instructions for Selected Disciples - lKog chos), this triple experience is explained as follows (translation by James B. Apple (University of Calgary). These are the instructions of a so called “Introduction” (t. ngo sprod): “In Indian and Tibetan forms of Buddhism “pointing-out instructions” (t. ngo sprod) generally signifies an introduction to the nature of mind by a spiritual teacher to a qualified disciple.”

“Directly pointing out [serenity] has three topics: nonconceptuality, clear awareness, and blissful experience. First, non-conceptuality, one resides with one-pointedness of mind (cittaikagratā) non-conceptually by bringing to cessation all subtle and gross discursive thoughts based on external objects and all subtle and gross conceptualization based on the mind within.
Clear awareness [t. rig pa gsal ba]: one resides with one-pointedness of mind in non-grasping selfluminous awareness which, at first, does not engage with conceptually grasping on to vivid sense objects, and then later is free from identifying with the luminous nature of the lucidity of one’s own mind.
Blissful: in a diminished unity of emptiness and lucidity that is free from all torments of afflictions and conceptuality that is possessed in previous experience, and having halted even-minded feelings of suffering, one resides with one-pointedness of mind in naturally occuring unconditioned bliss[5].”

Further precisions are given in the Instructions for Selected Disciples, where the “three characteristics” of Mahāsukhavādin nirvāṇa are explained: emptiness (t. rang bzhin, s. prakṛti?), clarity (t. ngo bo, svabhāva) and what corresponds to aesthetic “bliss”, the “characteristics” indivisibility of clarity [t. gsal ba] and emptiness.

“(1) First, the union of the ground which is the basis: there is not a buddha which is made manifest through realization [t. rtogs], there is not a mistaken sentient being through nonrealization [ma rtogs], remaining spontaneously perfected from the very beginning, the natural condition being in itself the general ground of all of cyclic existence and nirvāṇa has three characteristics. (a) Its own nature [t. rang bzhin] dwells in emptiness. (b) The nature [t. ngo bo] abides in clarity. (c) The characteristic [t. mtshan nyid] abides indivisibly.12 (a) Among these, first, its own nature dwells in emptiness, there is not an emptiness which is destroyed, entrusted, or purified. It abides as emptiness of inherent nature [t. rang zhin] from the very beginning, free from all phenomenal marks [t. mtshan ma] such as shape, color, and so forth. There is not a realization [t. rtog pa][6] which apprehends a non-existence within. It is the unobstructed clarity of the radiance [t. rang gi mdangs] of one’s own awareness. Abiding like the sun rising in pure space or like the wind of pure space. (c) The characteristic: the indivisibility of lucidity [t. bsal ba = gsal ba] and emptiness, inseparable like a conch shell and its whiteness, abides primordially free from conceptuality[7].”

The singular conch is the result of dependent arising (emptiness), the whiteness of the conch is a characteristic, a conceptualized abstract property. Characteristics or distinguishing marks (s. nimitta) are related to the imaginary nature (s. parikalpita) according to the Yogācāra three nature view. They can be "irreducible particulars” (s. svalakṣana) or universals (s. samanyalakṣana), correctly cognized or not, considered pure (śuddha) or impure, considered conducive to purity or to impurity. This is where moral and religious factors tag on, the triad Ground, Path and Result is introduced, and the “Pointing Out”, the Introduction to the natural state (t. gnas lugs ngo sprod), becomes more than simply pointing out the natural state. It turns into a project, a religious project.

The “Ground” covers the actual Pointing out. But recognizing and knowing is not enough. The ”Path” introduces a necessary action to be carried out. A distinction is made between “appearances” (t. snang ba): “karmic appearances”, (ii) “delusive appearances”, and (iii) “meditative appearances”. These “appearances” all are “the luminous essence of one’s own mind” (t. rang gi sems kyi ngo bo gsal ba), but not all are conducive to purity (s. śuddha). I would like to point out here that ngo bo gsal ba could also be translated as reflections (t. gsal ba) of the essence of mind (t. rang gi sems kyi ngo bo), and to remind that the essence of mind is triple.

“(iii) Meditative appearance [t. nyams snang] is the appearance of one’s own mind, at the time of abiding in non-conceptual meditative stabilization though an appearing external object ceases, the factor of clarity does not cease the appearance of the mind within, like mirage, smoke, star, drops of light [t. ’od kyi thig le] and so forth, subtle and coarse colors and shapes mostly appear, utterly empty like a cloudless sky.”

During the “Path”, impure appearances gradually disappear and make place for “luminous” pure appearances. These are the results of practice (Path), consisting in the gradual purification and transformation of impure in pure appearances. The results, apart from recognizing and knowing the natural state including the nature of the “appearances”, is that all “appearances” are henceforth merely pure appearances: Buddha bodies, pure realms, celestial mansions etc. Pure appearances, religious appearances.

“The very embodiment of the awakening mind, one’s own mind, the luminous essence of pristine wisdom [t. byang chub sems kyi rang gzugs rang gi sems ye shes kyi ngo bo gsal ba], wisdom appears like the moon reflected in water and a rainbow in the sky. (c) The unified characteristic: all the bodies, pure realms, celestial mansions and so forth, appearances of true pristine wisdom [t. yang dag pa’i ye shes kyi snang ba], like an illusion, and the actualized realm of reality [s. dharmadhātu] just-as-it-is are inseparably merged. For example, like the inseparability of the sky and a rainbow. The good qualities and activity that manifest from that inseparability mature and liberate those to be trained.”

Technically, individuals, or accomplished Buddhas, have reached their goal, and could abandon the raft on which they crossed the ocean of suffering. They could throw away the ladder they used to climb to the Akaniṣṭha heaven, and live there happily ever after, but they are bodhisattvas and will continue to help others to cross the ocean and to climb the ladder in turn. To do so, they still need the raft and the ladder as is, the Ground, the Luminous Path, and the Luminous Result, until the whole of saṃsāra will have been emptied. This is, in theory, the project of all those engaging themselves in Vajrayāna or already engaged in Vajrayāna. Deity practice and associated practices are not optional. As Ratnākaraśānti said:

“(1) If one meditates on the mind alone, then one would only obtain mundane mental concentration (ting nge ’dzin, *samādhi) like the stage of the infinity of consciousness (rnam shes mtha’ yas skye mched, *vijñānānantyāyatana).

(2) Yet if one meditates on emptiness above all, that [result] too becomes only complete cessation, because of not perfecting the actions of purifying the Buddha qualities.
(3) Or, if one meditates on [the mind] only as having the nature of the deities, in this case, one does not even become awakened at all through that alone because the perfection of actions is incomplete.

(4) Or, if one meditates only on the true nature of what the deities stand for and not the deities, then in this case too, one would attain Buddhahood in many countless aeons but not quickly.

(5) Therefore, the meditation of both [the mind as deities and the true nature of the deities at the same time], because it is extremely pleasant to the mind and because it is a special kind of empowerment, causes one to obtain the highest perfect awakening very quickly.[8]”

Buddhist deities may well not “really” exist, but what deities do? What would be the difference? The rafts and ladders that are maintained by every new generation are real enough. The ”Path” (“mechanical practice” BG12.12?) that is followed is real enough. As for the Result? The Ground basically remains an intimate mystical experience.

***

[1] E.g. Bhagavad-gītā 12.12: “Better than mechanical practice is knowledge; better than knowledge is meditation. Better than meditation is renunciation of the fruits of actions, for peace immediately follows such renunciation.” (śreyān dravyamayāt jñānam jñānāt dhyānam viśiṣyate
dhyānāt karmaphala-tyāgas tyāgāt śāntir anantaram)

Yogasūtras, Patanjali, I.23, "Or by surrender to Ishvara" (īśvarapranidhānād vā).

Where a personal god, īśvara, is merely a placeholder or a means to another end (mokṣa) than īśvara.

[2] “From the awakening towards emptiness, a seed [syllable] arises. From it, an image [of a deity and so forth]. And for [such] an image there are projection and dissolution [phases]. Therefore, everything arises in dependence”. (MSP 4)
śūnyatābodhito bījaṃ bījādvimbaṃ prajāyate |
bimbe ca nyāsavinyāsau (sa)tasmāt sarvvaṃ pratītyajam ||

[3] VAJRAYOGINI, Her Visualizations, Rituals, & Forms A Study of the Cult of Vajrayogini in India" Elizabeth English, Wisdom Publications 2002

[4] Guhyadi-Astasiddhi-Sangraha, Padmavajrapada, Paperback, CIHTS, Sarnath, Varanasi, 1987

saptamaḥ paricchedaḥ
sukhaṃ dvīndriyajaṃ kecit tattvamāhurnarādhamāḥ । taccāpi mahāsukhaṃ naiva pravadanti jinottamāḥ ॥1॥
pratītyotpādasaṃbhūtaṃ na tattvaṃ jāyate kvacit । na tatsukhaṃ svabhāvena vidyate sarvadā yataḥ ॥2॥
sarvatāthāgataṃ jñānaṃ svasaṃvedyasvabhāvakam । sarvasaukhyāgrabhūtatvāt mahāsukhamiti smṛtam ।।3।।

dbang po gnyis byung bde ba ni//
de nyid yin zhes skye ngan smra//
de ni bde ba chen yin zhes//
rgyal ba mchog gis ma gsungs so//

rten cing 'brel 'byung las skyes pa//
gang du'ang de nyid shes mi 'grub//
gang phyir 'di de thams cad du//
ngo bo nyid kyis yod ma yin//

bde gshegs kun gyi ye shes ni//
rang nyid ngo bo nyid mkhyen pa'i//
bde ba kun gyi gtsor gyur pas//
bde ba chen po zhes bshad do//

[5] Instructions for Selected Disciples (Lkog chos), pp. 513-514: ngo sprad pa la gsum / rnam par mi rtog pa dang / rig pa gsal ba dang / nyams bde ba’o / / dang po ni / phyi yul la brten pa’i rnam rtog phra rags [514] dang / nang sems la brten pa’i kun rtog phra rags thams cad ’gags nas rnam par mi rtog pa la sems rtse gcig tu gnas pa’o / / rig pa gsal ba ni / dang po dbang po’i yul gsal ba la kun rtog gi ’dzin pa ma zhugs pa dang / phyi nas rang sems dang ba’i ngo bo gsal ba ngos bzung dang bral ba’i rig pa rang gsal ’dzin med la rtse gcig tu gnas pa’o / / bde ba ni snga ma’i nyams dang ldan pa’i dus na nyon mongs pa dang rtog pa’i zug rngu thams cad dang bral nas stong gsal gyi nyams pa dang ldan te / sdug bsngal dang btang snyoms kyi tshor ba ’gags nas rang byung zag pa med pa’i bde ba la rtse gcig tu gnas pa’o /.

[6] This ought to be concept (t. rtog pa) not realization (t. rtogs pa).

[7] Instructions for Selected Disciples (Lkog chos): [518.23] / ngo sprad pa la gsum / gnas pa gzhi’i zung ’jug dang / mtshon pa lam gyi [519] zung ’jug dang / grub pa ’bras bu’i zung ’jug go /.

Instructions for Selected Disciples (Lkog chos): [519.1] dang po ni / rtogs nas mngon du gyur pa’i sangs rgyas dang min / ma rtogs nas ’khrul ba’i sems can ma yin te / ’khor ’das kun gyi spyi sa gzhi dngos po’i gnas lugs ye nas lhun grub tu gnas pa’i gnas lugs la gsum / rang bzhin stong par gnas / [gegs bsal ba la gsum / bla ma’i sku la brnyas pa dang / dam pa’i chos spangs pa dang / mtshams med pa’i sdig byas pa dang gsum spang bar bya ste / ma skyes pa mi skye / skyes pa nyams par ’gyur ba’o / (“Dispelling hindrances has three, despising the body of the spiritual teacher, abandoning the holy Dharma, committing a heinous evil dead. These three should be eliminated, and that uncreated should not be created, and what has been created should degenerate.”] (The sentences in brackets seem out of place and have been removed from the translation.) / ngo bo gsal bar gnas / mtshan nyid dbyer med du gnas pa’o /.

Instructions for Selected Disciples (Lkog chos): [519.7-12] / de las dang po rang bzhin stong par gnas pa ni bshig pa dang bcol ba dang sbyangs pa’i stong pa ma yin te / ye nas rang bzhin gyis stong pa nyid du gnas te / dbyibs dang kha dog la sogs pa’i mtshan ma thams cad dang bral ba / nang na med pas ’dzin pa’i rtog pa ma yin pa / rig pa rang gi mdangs ma ’gags par gsal ba / nam mkha’ rnam par dag pa la nyi ma shar ba dang bar snang dag pa’i bser bu lta bur gnas so /.

Instructions for Selected Disciples (Lkog chos): [519.12] / mtshan nyid ni bsal ba dang stong pa dbyer med pa dung dang dung gi dkar po ltar du dbyer med rtog bral du ye nas gnas pa’o /.

[8] Daisy S. Y. Cheung, “Madhyamakanising” Tantric Yogācāra: The Reuse of Ratnākaraśānti’s Explanation of maṇḍala Visualisation in the Works of Śūnyasamādhivajra, Abhayākaragupta and Tsong Kha Pa, 2023

For comparison:

BG 12.6-7: “But those who dedicate all their actions to Me, regarding Me as the Supreme goal, worshiping Me and meditating on Me with exclusive devotion, O Parth, I swiftly deliver them from the ocean of birth and death, for their consciousness is united with Me”

.

"Let the eagle soar" (speculating with mythemes)

Tap dancing Roman bronze eagle, 100-200CE (Gettyvilla Gallery 209)

Zeus’ lightning and thunderbolt holding eagle were no different from Zeus himself, and symbolised his power, majesty, and dominance. He would send his eagle down to strike those defying him or those showing excessive pride (hubris). Imperialist rulers would use Zeus’ attribute to symbolise their own will to power, power, majesty, and dominance, such as the Achaemenids, Alexander the Great and the Roman emperors. 

Zeus/Jupiter, his lightning (vajra). Coin, Epirus 234BC

However widespread their empire, the large-winged eagle would find and strike the rebellious ones. Nothing would escape his sharp eyes.

Emblem of the Roman empire, Jupiter's eagle and lightning

Zeus, eagle and Prometheus (c. 560 BC, Louvre), thunderbolt at the bottom?

“Ready-witted Prometheus he [Zeus] bound with inextricable bonds, cruel chains, and drove a shaft through his middle, and set on him a long-winged eagle, which used to eat his immortal liver; but by night the liver grew as much again everyway as the long-winged bird devoured in the whole day.” Hesiod, Theogony 507 ff (trans. Evelyn-White) (Greek epic C8th or C7th B.C.)

Heracles frees Prometheus from "the Caucasian eagle" (theoi)

Later, the demigod Heracles, Zeus’ son, probably with the approval of Zeus, made an end to Prometheus’ suffering by slaying the eagle. Heracles also slayed the Lernaean Hydra, a multi-headed water serpent. The latter theme and associated subthemes have been shared in Indo-european cultures.

"[Zeus] drove a shaft through his middle" (Hesiod)
Here a thunderbolt nail or peg (phur-ba, tsakli)

Three types of vajras (site)

The thunderbolt (vajra) bearing Indian god of storms and war Indra defeated the monstrous serpent-like asura Vritra, In another Indra myth, Garuda appears, as Amṛtaharana, the "stealer of amṛta", not the stealer of fire this time…

“The Vedas, composed in approximately the second millennium B.C.E., provide the earliest reference to Garuda, though by the name of Śyena (Sanskrit for "eagle"). In Rg Veda (1700–1100 B.C.E.), this mighty eagle fetches soma, the intoxicating ritual elixir, from either a crag in a rock or from heaven itself. Both the Mahabharata (c. 400 B.C.E. - 400 C.E.) and the Puranas, which came into existence much later, have Garuda performing similar mythological tasks, suggesting that Śyena and Garuda are one and the same figure.” New World Encyclopedia

The "high crags of the Kaukasos (Caucasus)" (Apollonius Rhodius, Argonautica 2) ?

Marduk fighting Tiamat (Assyrian cylinder seal, ca. 800-750 BCE)

In the Garuda purāṇa (9-11th century) we are told a myth that reminds the one of Marduk destroying his grand-mother Tiamat (saltwater) in a titanic battle, found in the Poem of Creation (Enūma eliš), written during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar I (1125-1104 BCE). The Garuda purāṇa:

“One day, Vinata [Garuda’s mother] entered into and lost a foolish bet with her sister Kadru, mother of serpents. As a condition of her defeat, she became her sister's slave. Resolving to release his mother from her newfound state of bondage, Garuda approached Kadru and her serpents and asked them what it would take to emancipate his mother. Kadru decreed that Garuda would have to bring them the elixir of immortality, also called amrita. This was a tall order indeed, considering that the amrita was at that time in the possession of the gods in heaven. Indra, the mighty king of the gods, guarded it jealously. In order to protect the elixir, the gods ringed it with a massive fire that covered the sky. They had also blocked the way to the elixir with a fierce mechanical contraption of sharp rotating blades. Lastly, they had stationed two gigantic poisonous snakes next to the elixir as deadly guardians.

Undaunted, Garuda hastened toward the abode of the gods, intent upon robbing them of their treasure. Well-aware of his powerful design, the gods met him in full battle-array. Garuda, however, defeated the entire host and scattered them in all directions. Taking the water of many rivers into his mouth, he extinguished the protective fire the gods had thrown up. Reducing his size, he crept past the rotating blades of their murderous machine. And finally, he eluded the two gigantic serpents they had posted as guards: even the quickest glance of these snakes was deadly, and so Garuda subdued them by blowing dust in their eyes. Taking the elixir into his mouth without swallowing it, he launched again into the air and toward the heavens. En route, he encountered Vishnu, who was impressed with Garuda's might. Rather than fighting the bird, Vishnu decided to reward him with a boon: the gift of immortality, even without drinking from the elixir. In return, Garuda gratefully requested that he become Vishnu's mount. Flying onward, Garuda encountered Indra. The king of the gods hit Garuda with his thunderbolt, but Garuda was virtually unscathed by the blow, losing but a single feather. Fully aware of Garuda's power, Indra called for a truce with Garuda, and so another exchange of pacts was undertaken: Garuda promised that once he had delivered the elixir, thus fulfilling the request of the serpents, he would make it possible for Indra to regain possession of the elixir and to take it back to the gods. Indra in turn gave permission to Garuda to have the nagas as food.” (New World Encyclopedia)

Garuda statue, Phnom Penh, 10th century (ANI)

Several older myths of gigantic powers seem mixed here. One could speculate Garuda is presented here certainly not as a creator of heaven and earth, but as one that puts an end to chaos and restores order, like Marduk who uses a net to entrap Tiamat (saltwater) and to split her in half, using her upper half to create the heavens (heavenly waters), and the lower half to create the earth. At the same time there is the soma (amṛta) theme. In the case of Garuda the amṛta was ingested (without swallowing) and spit out again towards heaven in order to restore the balance. After putting an end to the chaos (of mingled heavenly and earthly waters, flood), Garuda remained at the service of Viṣṇu (and no doubt Indra), as the heavenly creature capable to use and dominate the fluid element (nāgaloka), and everything associated to it.

The universal dimensions of Zeus' eagle and Garuda can be found back in narratives of giant birds such as Peng and Roc. 

The 9-11th century Garuda Purāṇa contains many elements Tibetan Buddhist traditions may have well been interested in, specifically the details about the ghost world (pretaloka, pitṛloka) and the funeral rites.

“2.22.7 Sinful persons meet with death at the hands of candalas, infuriated brahmanas, serpents, animals with curved teeth or in watery graves or struck by lightning.

2.22.8-13 Those who meet with foul death such as committing suicide by hanging from a tree, by poison or weapon, those who die of cholera, those who are burnt to death alive, those who die of foul and loathsome diseases or at the hands of robbers, those who are not cremated duly after death, those who do not follow sacred rites and conduct, those who do not perform Vṛṣotsarga[1] and monthly pinda rites, those who allow śūdras to bring sacrificial grass, twigs and other articles of homa, those who fall from mountains and die, those who die when walls collapse, those who are defiled by women in their menses, those who die in the firmament and those who are forgetful of Visnu, those who continue to associate with persons defiled due to births or death, those who die of dog-biting or meet with death in a foul manner, become ghosts and roam over the earth."

A last anecdote regarding Zeus’ eagle (Aetos)

“There is a story of Zeus’s eagle which should be told at this point. There was a boy named Aetos, eagle, who was born of the earth, like the Idaean Daktylos, Kelmis, of whom I have already spoken, and who, like the last-named and the above-mentioned Aigipan, was supposed to have been a playmate of the child Zeus. He was beautiful, and Hera turned him into an eagle because she suspected that Zeus loved him.” The Gods of the Greeks[2].

This boy is also known as the youth Ganymede, that Zeus, having taken on the form of an eagle, transported to Mount Olympus. The eagle was placed among the stars as the constellation Aquila alongside Lyra.

Aquila constellation

Vajrakila (rdo rje phur ba), HA21299

***

[1] “Setting at liberty of a male and female calf (as a rite in funeral solemnities) : also of a bull (as a religious act generally)”. Wisdom Lib

[2] Kerenyi, Karl (1951). The Gods of the Greeks. London: Thames and Hudson. p. 95. Quoted from Aeneis, Virgilius, I.394.

All you need is Light, Luminous monism

All you need is light (DALL·E)

In this blog I want to show through some quotes how what started as a lamp or light metaphor ended up in a doctrine of proudly assumed Luminous monism. The doctrine of Buddha nature, passing from non-self to a “Great Self” or “Luminous Self”, and the doctrine of non-duality (devoid of subject and object) served as bridge. The doctrine of non-duality initially led to the union of emptiness and clarity (yuganaddha, etc.), and in the end “emptiness” (a metaphor itself) was outshone by sheer Luminosity or "Light" and the "unity" became Luminous monism.

In Luminous monism, Light (“pure Awareness” for the more philosophically inclined) is devoid of subject and object and therefore “non-dual”. The strawman “Emptiness” became a simple lower reality of Light in order to rule over the domain (gocara) of reason, logic and causality. Whatever experience is produced in mind, “mundane or sublime”, “is and can only be an expression of this light of awareness”. Why deal with such a limited level of reality and not settle for the ultimate authority, plugging one's luminous nucleus directly into Light itself, or into its earthly nexuses and outlets (so above, so below), and getting the full whack of spiritual awakening, energy, power, immortality etc., with a rainbow body as a bonus (see below).

The “Luminous Self” present/immanent in every human body, translated in yoga (reintegration) language, is an immortal “luminous nucleus”, that essentially remains unchanged in all its “intermediate processes”, participating in the great Divine Light (Nous). Its “ luminous manifestations” (Logos) are both those of the “luminous nucleus” and the great Divine Light, directly connected. Whatever may seem like separations in the Light is due to residual distorted appearances (t. ’khrul snang) that prevent one from accessing the “final holistic vision” (Dowman). One's terminal needs further cleaning.

“In the Secret Cycle, The Totally Radiant Seminal Nucleus (Thig le kun gsal) has another fourfold typology that substitutes meditation for dying: (i) natural intermediate process (rang bzhin bar do), (ii) intermediate process of contemplation (ting nge ’dzin gyi bar do), (iii) intermediate process of reality’s radiant light (chos nyid ’od gsal bar do), and (iv) intermediate process of rebirth (srid pa bar do).

The discussion clearly points to a Seminal Heart-like scheme: the intermediate process of reality is defined as the cessation of distorted appearances (’khrul snang) followed by luminous manifestation of one’s own primordial gnosis for up to five days. It also has a discussion of light channels in the body, a characteristic of Seminal Heart texts that is bound up with the internal illumination of buddha-nature that shines externally in the postmortem visions.” The Funerary Transformation of the Great Perfection (Rdzogs chen) (2005), David Germano

Whatever the axiomatic Buddhist claims (four seals, non-self, emptiness) and the justification thereof Tibetan esoteric Buddhism advances to invoke the Buddhist pedigree of their doctrines, the fact remains that a post-mortem Self (or “Totally Radiant Seminal Nucleus”) and a post-mortem “luminous manifestation of [its] own primordial gnosis” point into another and conventional religious direction. Especially in the case of a post-mortem Luminous body with “light channels” and “light seeds” (t. thig le, Dowman). The “Totally Radiant Seminal Nucleus” is what used to be dharmadhātu in Trekcho language, here in Keith Dowman’s book (see below) 'the sole all-inclusive megapixel' (t. thig le nyag gcig).

The author of the above mentioned article, David Germano, was very enthusiastic about the “luminous” English translation of the “Thig le kun gsal” by Keith Dowman.

“This evocative translation for the first time brings into luminous English one of the most important and influential of Great Perfection tantras. We owe a great debt to Keith Dowman for his painstaking and yet creative rendering to bring this text and its world across great distances into intimate reach of a contemporary international readership.” -David Germano, U. of Virginia

The title of Dowman’s English translation is “Everything is light : the great explanatory Dzogchen tantra Thig le kun gsal chen po'i rgyud : the circle of total illumination”, English translation published by Keith Dowman in 2017, Dzogchen Now! Books. Keith Dowman explains the choice of the title in his introduction. Some excerpts.

“The meaning of this book's title implies that everything we know directly is awareness in the now and, in that sense, awareness is 'light' - the very cognizant light that is conscious experience, and constitutes inseparable knowing and the knowable. All phenomena in sensory perception are 'light'. The entire pantheon of buddha being is composed of light. Dzogchen is the vehicle of light - light is both the source and the manifestation. Such is the Dzogchen view, which provides recognition of present awareness in the now and recognition of nondual initiatory experience at the beginning, and constitutes the final achievement of the rainbow body at the end. The existential realization of this truth is not immediately accessible in the first and second turnings of the wheel of the buddha-dharma; it is only in the final turning, and particularly in the Nyingma tantras, that it is overtly expressed.”

“The belief in Buddha and the Bodhisattvas taught by the lamas, like that in Jesus Christ and the Saints taught by the priests, belongs to the little ones, karmically deleted from the list of players in the cosmic lottery that has rainbow body as the prize.”

“With that understanding, the rudimentary spiritual practice of buddhist cultural training consisting of provisional views and practices that mimic human growth from infant to adult may be severed from the radically different full-bodied mystical insight of Dzogchen. With such insight, the definitive revelation of Dzogchen, a final holistic vision, becomes identical to the universal human experience of nonduality. Since all our experience is comprehended as light, light is the only reality and 'Everything is Light' is, therefore, the seminal message.”

Luminous monism

“This entire tantra can be effectively described as a series of visions, and visionary experience can only be composed of light. We understand, here, first and foremost, that 'light' is the light of awareness of both source and manifestation nondual - regardless of whether what is manifested is mundane or sublime, regardless of whether it appears 'inside' or 'outside', regardless of whether the experience is of this bardo of life or any other bardo. As such, all experience in the immediate now is and can only be an expression of this light of awareness. In that nondual sense is everything light. Consequently, all experience is 'nondual' insofar as the light of awareness has rendered experience conscious and knowledge knowable. It has always been nondual and cannot be anything else. No union of separate 'light of awareness' on the one hand and 'experience' on the other can occur.

Everything is light and everything is a sublime vision of Vairochana's buddha-mandala.”

Without the last reminder, one could think that “All you need is Light”. It is all we need and already allegedly have. Yet, in spite of lovely peak experiences and visionary experiences of “light seeds”, etc., gradually evolving into full-fledged buddha-mandalas and pure lands, one could still regress... And even after one’s Light, no longer a nucleus, irreversibly reached the “final holistic vision” of the Great Light, “knowing and the knowable” will still be required to communicate with the “players in the cosmic lottery” left out in the dark, still entrapped in their distorted appearances. How can we distinguish those with a “final holistic vision” from those who are still entrapped in “knowing and the knowable”? I am afraid we can not. Those with holistic vision sometimes treat dismissively those who don't have it. That could possibly be a clue.

Jean-Luc Achard also reminds overly enthusiastic Luminististas: 

“As Lopön Tenzin Namdak Rinpoche has said numerous times in his teachings: «The natural state is itself perfect but the practitioner is not.» This means that the practitioner has to improve his own condition in order to reach a threshold of authentic realization from which he will not regress.” (Jean-Luc Achard, The View of sPyi ti Yoga).