Jump to content
Dharmaling Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Simona

Laktong

Recommended Posts

Tashi Delek.

 

Is the special insight, which the Tibetan name is Laktong, the same insight which is manifested when reaching Enlightenment? Is it about the merging with a material or mental object and the Enlightenment would be about merging with the consciousness itself? Is the only difference in the object?

 

Best regards,

Simona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Dharmaling's glossary, under "Special insight" :)

(skt.: vipashyana; tib: lag thong) The principal meditation taught in the Theravada tradition. It is sometimes called mindfulness meditation. In the Mahayana, vipashyana has a different meaning: investigation of and familiarization with the actual way in which things exist and is used to develop the wisdom of emptiness.

 

If a state of mind is one of vipashyana, it is combined with shamatha. Therefore, although we may work on vipashyana before attaining shamatha, we cannot actually attain vipashyana without having first attained shamatha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tashi Delek, Khyenrab.

investigation of and familiarization with the actual way in which things exist and is used to develop the wisdom of emptiness.
Could you...I mean...do you know about what things it is about? I would like very much to define the object whom the mind would merge with. Is it a candle (material), is it a thought or some specific fear for example (mental), or is it consciousness itself? Or do you think it is not important? It was said on the teachings that there are ten different types of the concentration concerning the realms (realm of desires, realm of forms, formless realm) in which sentient beings abide. So, I think that might not just the type of the realm is kind of important and determining, yet also the type of the object whom the mind is in the contact with. Cause certain types of the objects do appear also regarding to the type of the realm. And, if there are ten different types of the concentration, I would might conclude there are also more types of the insights and nevertheless wisdoms. So, I wonder what is the difference between Laktong and Enlightenment, is it about the objects or is it about the level?

 

Best regards,

Simona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tashi Delek,

Could you...I mean...do you know about what things it is about? I would like very much to define the object whom the mind would merge with. Is it a candle (material), is it a thought or some specific fear for example (mental), or is it consciousness itself?
I would say any phenomenon. Or, to go one by one, here is an excerpt from the Heart Sutra:

"Therefore, Shariputra, in emptiness there is no form, no feeling, no discrimination, no compositional factors, no consciousness. There is no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind; no visible form, no sound, no smell, no taste, no object of touch, no mental phenomenon. There is no eye element and so forth up to no mind element, up to no element of mental consciousness. There is no ignorance and no cessation of ignorance and so forth up to no aging and death and no cessation of aging and death. Likewise, there is no suffering, no origin, no cessation, and no path; no exalted wisdom, no attainment, and also no nonattainment."

And, if there are ten different types of the concentration, I would might conclude there are also more types of the insights and nevertheless wisdoms.
There might be different types of Wisdom, but i know only about two: conventional wisdom (mastery of particular crafts) and Ultimate Wisdom (Wisdom of Emptiness). Lag thong refers to meditation on Emptiness, eventually.
So, I wonder what is the difference between Laktong and Enlightenment, is it about the objects or is it about the level?
Special insight is a particular kind of meditation. Enlightenment is the highest spiritual attainment. The realization of Emptiness (Liberation from samsaric existence, which is already an astronomical realization) is not possible without special insight meditation on the subject of Emptiness. And even then, without Tantric practices, Enlightenment is very far away. If i remember correctly, the Buddha needed two countless eons from the time he attained Nirvana to the time he attained full and complete Enlightenment. Anyways - a long time. Please correct me, anybody, if i am wrong about these numbers.

 

Best regards,

Khyenrab

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know:

do you know about what things it is about?
It could depend on what laktong is taking as its object: if it takes impermanence as its object, then "things" would refer to all impermanent phenomena; if it takes emptiness of self as its object, then "things" would refer to self; it it takes (subtle) emptiness of phenomena as its object, then "things" would refer to all existing things; and so on.

Laktong is not necessarily focused on emptiness (or on the four noble truths), although most commonly it is.

object whom the mind would merge with.
When talking about merging, then the object of laktong is usually emptiness and then it is said that emptiness (as object) and mind seeing this emptiness (as subject, though there is no (or not so strong) perception of object/subject) merge or become of one taste. However, there are different levels of laktong (corresponding to different levels of Path of Preparation), so there are different levels of "how much" will object and subject merge.
if there are ten different types of the concentration, I would might conclude there are also more types of the insights and nevertheless wisdoms.
For realization of emptiness it is enough to achieve "only" calm abiding (shine), not having to proceed to generate other concentrations, although eventually on the path to Enlightenment these states are reached.
what is the difference between Laktong and Enlightenment,
Enlightenment is the result, whereas Laktong is method how to get wisdom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tashi Delek, goodie.

First, many thanks to you and to Khyenrab also for the answers.

emptiness (as object) and mind seeing this emptiness (as subject, though there is no (or not so strong) perception of object/subject) merge or become of one taste.
Would this mean that a consciousness projects itself?

 

There is no ignorance and no cessation of ignorance and so forth up to no aging and death and no cessation of aging and death. Likewise, there is no suffering, no origin, no cessation, and no path; no exalted wisdom, no attainment, and also no nonattainment.
But, consciousness it IS, isn`t it? Otherwise, how is possible that we are talking right now right here?

 

Best regards,

Simona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ani.Chödrön

Tashi Delek,

 

emptiness (as object) and mind seeing this emptiness (as subject, though there is no (or not so strong) perception of object/subject) merge or become of one taste.
Would this mean that a consciousness projects itself?
To my understanding it means that the minds realises that the object is of the same nature as itself – like water in water.

Told in another way (from Berzin): “duality” means that the way we perceive is discordant to reality, and »nonduality« means that our perception is in accordance to reality.

 

But, consciousness it IS, isn`t it? Otherwise, how is possible that we are talking right now right here?
Not in the way we usually think it is. :wink:

All the best,

chödrön

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To my understanding it means that the minds realises that the object is of the same nature as itself – like water in water.
In the case that the object is the mind itself, it realises that it is empty. Empty of what? Of material and/or mental phenomena? Or is it empty of something else? Itself? How something can be empty of itself and also exists? So, a consciousness, it IS or there is no consciousness?

Best regards,

Simona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But, consciousness it IS, isn`t it? Otherwise, how is possible that we are talking right now right here?
No phenomenon does not not-exist (they do exist :))). The question is: "what is the mode of that existence?" All phenomena have dependent arising, which in the final analysis means that they do not have any "self-existence". Which is another term for "lacking any intrinsic existence".

 

And this is relatively easy to understand. For example, Nagarjuna states:

"If there were something slighty not empty, there would be something slightly empty; as there is nothing not empty, where is there something to be empty?" :-p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ani.Chödrön

Tashi Delek,

In the case that the object is the mind itself, it realises that it is empty. Empty of what? Of material and/or mental phenomena? Or is it empty of something else? Itself? How something can be empty of itself and also exists? So, a consciousness, it IS or there is no consciousness?
you can observe all phenomena, mind included, from the point of view of conventional and ultimate reality (and both at the same time, when Buddhahood is reached).

 

All the best,

chödrön

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"If there were something slighty not empty, there would be something slightly empty; as there is nothing not empty, where is there something to be empty?" :-p
Fullness or suchness and emptiness on the other side... it is basically the same. Yet, fullness sounds better. It is about the purity of the space, i. e. mind.

That`s how I think.

 

Best regards,

Simona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another point, there are some Sakyapas that beleive that the great Lama Je Tsongkhapa's teachings on emptiness are nihilistic, that they imply non-existence in the ultimate ("non-existence of any intrinsic existence"). Which is interesting. :)

 

They go back to Nagarjuna and explanations such as in the Samputa Tantra, which states (not that i know anything about this):

"Not empty, not not-empty, and nothing in between."

 

Which kind of "makes sense", because emptiness implies non-duality, or non-conceptuality... and not just non-existence of not-empty ;)

 

Fullness or suchness and emptiness on the other side... it is basically the same. Yet, fullness sounds better.
I think you are right. His Holiness has explained that eventhough we speak about emptiness, the experience of it is actually one of fullness and oneness. ;-F

But i feel that we should check our meditation with someone who has perfected it, a qualified Teacher :) We can imagine many things in our everyday life, let alone on our meditation cushion...

 

Which reminds me about the 11th Bodhisattva vow: Teaching emptiness to the untrained. („Minister vow"). I am not sure if this information is too much, and since this forum is open to anyone, i kindly ask the Moderators to delete my posts, if they feel that this would expose the topic on emptiness to much and that i might break my vow. :oops:

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tashi Delek.

I am putting too much energy in the appearances of the stability. The aim of the meditation (Shine and Laktong) is to stabilize the mind, but I guess I mixed these two stabilities between. Well, if I am honest, I don`t understand what does it mean to stabilize the mind. Stabilize it by what to rely upon? I cling too much on the consciousness as I know about how the world and everything unstable can be...including the consciousness, unfortunately. In this sense, in an important sense, the changes remaind unreal.

 

Best regards,

Simona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We take a picture of a Buddha we feel more connected to (Tara, Chenrezig or Manjushri), or a picture of a Lama !:! and put it in front of us. Sitting in the meditation posture, we focus on the picture, then make a "live-size" mental picture of it in front of us, above our head, at the lenght of one full prostration, and, with eyes closed, we gently focus our mind one-pointedly on this image and stay with it without movement. With steady practice the image should become more clear and our concentration on it better. We should always use the same picture/image, otherwise our practice will no go far. This is Shine meditation, as i understand it. But, for more instruction, please ask a member of Sangha. And as you know Dharmaling will have a two-day retreat on Shine at the end of this month. :)

 

There is also a very good teaching on Developing single-pointed concentration by Gehlek Rinpoche at lamayeshe.com. And there is an explanation of Nine stages to Shine in the Glossary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
we gently focus our mind one-pointedly on this image and stay with it without movement. With steady practice the image should become more clear and our concentration on it better.
"To cut through the mind’s clinging, it is important to understand that all appearances are void, like the appearance of water in a mirage. Beautiful forms are of no benefit to the mind, nor can ugly forms harm it in any way. Sever the ties of hope and fear, attraction and repulsion, and remain in equanimity in the understanding that all phenomena are nothing more than projections of your own mind. Once you have realized absolute truth, then you will see the whole, infinite display of relative phenomena that appears within it as no more than an illusion or a dream. To realize that appearance and voidness are one is what is called simplicity, or freedom from conceptual limitations." H. H. Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche

I can`t connect the idea of the stability with the idea of the emptiness, I guess. I will work on that. :wink:

Best regards,

Simona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can`t connect the idea of the stability with the idea of the emptiness, I guess. I will work on that.
Until our mind is more steady, which is the result of Shine practice, we cannot integrate our intellectual understanding of emptiness (which requires study) into an actual meditation on emptiness. Shine practice is essential for all Dharma practice, for all Lamrim meditations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
we cannot integrate our intellectual understanding of emptiness (which requires study) into an actual meditation on emptiness. Shine practice is essential for all Dharma practice, for all Lamrim meditations.
Here I would add two comments:

- I doubt that one can get the taste of the emptiness abiding in an usual intellectual state of mind, even if succeeded preliminary to integrate intellectual understanding with practical experience. I think it is possible to taste it only in one special state of mind and even that for just a short time.

- It is a kind of mystery to me about what precede what. Does one first get a practical experience and then follow the intellectual search after the understanding (I mean sometimes just some book find itself in my hands and get opened on the exactely those pages that I want to know something about, what happened before) or opposite.

 

Best regards,

Simona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ani.Chödrön

Tashi Delek

I can’t connect the idea of the stability with the idea of the emptiness, I guess. I will work on that. :wink:
Maybe two practical tools might be helpful. You can visualise a Buddha as made of light, which is not as gross as a usual form; you can be aware that the Buddha is omnipresent, you can feel His/Her presence all around you, rest in it. At the end of the mantras/practice you can pay attention to the process of dissolution, aware of the Buddha’s presence remaining here, feeling His/Her blessing in your heart and all around. This might be a step towards a more subtle reality. I hope this is helpful and doesn’t interrupt your own process of cutting through this topic. :)

 

I doubt that one can get the taste of the emptiness abiding in an usual intellectual state of mind, even if succeeded preliminary to integrate intellectual understanding with practical experience. I think it is possible to taste it only in one special state of mind and even that for just a short time.
It is said that due to the blessings of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas one can get a glimpse of Emptiness in almost any kind of moment. Different anecdotes tell how different situations can lead to such experience. Often it looks like the mind is caught in surprise, unprepared, when a Master shows a disciple a glimpse of reality. You know the koan stories. But on the other hand, intellectual gnawing the problem of reality helps us to loosen our rusty mind so that it becomes softer, more supple, easier for us and the Master to work on.

Yes, just for a short time first. But then, it is said, the periods of such glimpses become longer and clearer.

 

It is a kind of mystery to me about what precede what. Does one first get a practical experience and then follow the intellectual search after the understanding (I mean sometimes just some book find itself in my hands and get opened on the exactely those pages that I want to know something about, what happened before) or opposite.
Practice and reasoning go together hand in hand. There’s nothing wrong with knowledge (if it is not on account of practice). The Kadampa geshes have a saying:

"Meditating without having listened to teachings

is like someone without hands trying to climb a snow mountain." :wink:

 

All the very best,

chödrön

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is a kind of mystery to me about what precede what. Does one first get a practical experience and then follow the intellectual search after the understanding (I mean sometimes just some book find itself in my hands and get opened on the exactely those pages that I want to know something about, what happened before) or opposite.
I know that feeling. But in the long run, we need the best understanding of Dharma possible in order to make the best experiencial progress. So, we need to study Dharma. Most kind Rinpoche said once that we can realize only what we know (which is a great teaching). Of course, some, i happen to know at least one :oops: have a preference for knowledge of Dharma. Knowledge doesn't mean experience, let alone realization of those terms we toy around with :-v here. But, still, we need to know the Path, so that we can correctly follow it. :) We need both, study and practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much Ven. Ani Chödrön and Khyenrab for the answers. :)

There might be different types of Wisdom, but i know only about two: conventional wisdom (mastery of particular crafts) and Ultimate Wisdom (Wisdom of Emptiness).
As I was telling you before about how some texts just find in front of my eyes, in that way I found out next about the wisdoms refering to different mental objects. I don`t know from where did I get this :oops:

Wisdoms:

1. Pride as the wisdom of equanimity

2. Jealousy as the wisdom of all-acomplishing wisdom

3. Attachment and desire as discriminating wisdom

4. Anger and aversion as mirror-like wisdom

5. Ignorance as the wisdom of the true nature of reality

I`ve copied this from one book long time ago.

 

Bye, bye

Simona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ani.Chödrön

Tashi Delek,

Pride as the wisdom of equanimity...
I would prefer to turn it the other way round: these five wisdoms, when mixed with confusion about how everything actually exist, distort into the five disturbing emotions that you have mentioned. And vice versa: when the five disturbing emotions are purified, the five wisdoms dawn. :)

 

All the very best,

chödrön

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...