There was a thread that Thusness asked me to post a few years
ago, and the name of the thread was called How did Buddha got
lost in Samsara?
Thusness asked in that thread, Now, can luminosity arise
without conditions? Is there a time where there is a bright, true,
essential, magnificent mind without conditions?
The problem we (and even those with transcendental experience)
continue to be confused over the question of "why original
ignorance when buddha-nature is perfect and complete" is that we
visualize that buddha-nature is something pure and original from
the beginning untainted and untouched by conditions. Then we
separate the luminosity with conditions, and we think that
conditions are 'impure'. In actuality conditions and luminosity are
inseparable.
If we understand dependent origination then we understand
everything, we understand that all things that arise in dependence
are empty, and there is no first cause, only dependently originated
phenomena. Including ignorance and suffering. When condition is,
they manifest, we don't have a permanently pure original state --
because everything is equally empty, everything equally pure, but
manifest according to conditions. When we become so caught up and
enticed by our luminosity and don't understand its empty nature,
that forms a factor/condition for further perpetuation of grasping
and samsara. There is no pure vs impure states, that is only for
conventional understanding, ultimately all states are empty, none
purer than another. We just don't realise that and until we do we
continue perpetuating samsara.
I was just answering this question on E-Sangha a few days ago...
my post:
Answered by Thrangu Rinpoche: * If the nature of mind is this
all-pervading, brilliant union of luminosity and emptiness,
ungraspable, how is it that it could be obscured, even for a
moment, let alone lifetime after lifetime?
----------------------------------------
My own replies:
Actually we don't have an original nature, we have an empty
nature, that has no beginning nor ending. To visualise a purest
state from the start is a dualistic view. Emptiness is not a void,
not absence of suffering, emptiness is the nature of suffering and
all phenomena. Getting 'lost' and becoming dualistic is natural
when we develop those conditions that make us 'lost', for example
being attached to our luminosity is one of the factor. When
condition is there, samsara (dualistic vision) simply
manifests...
The assumption that there is a purest state and we will not
becoming dualistic is itself a dualistic view. There is no purest
state, when condition is there, delusion manifests, every states
are dependently originated and are empty, and being empty all
states are equally pure. Suffering too is empty and pure. Even the
state of delusion is empty and pure but we just don't recognize it
due to our karmic obscurations (or deep conditionings, karmic
propensities of falsely projecting 'self' and 'inherency') that
blinds us from seeing.
And no, realising the luminosity aspect alone can't lead to
liberation. As I said... other religions talk about that aspect as
well and not just Buddhism, but when its empty nature is not known,
it becomes a metaphysical essence, and all phenomena becomes like
dust on the mirror. And then there is a mirror reflecting external
conditions. That becomes dualistic and 'inherent'. The cause of
samsara is still not uprooted, and one of the fundamental causes as
Thrangu Rinpoche stated is the attachment to luminosity due to not
perceiving its empty nature. If you read my friend's experience you
see that there must be further insights into the anatta and sunyata
nature of awareness.
But emptiness is also not just empty, so you must realise the union
and inseparability of luminosity and emptiness. Having conviction
in our luminous nature as everpresent, never lost, is important,
but having glimpses of that pure luminosity is just the beginning
and we are still far from perceiving its nature.
----------------------------------------
My comments on Thrangu Rinpoche's statement that ignorance comes
from 'luminosity being too vivid':
The luminosity is the 'knowingness', the vivid clarity. Our mind
have that quality, all our experiences have that quality --
everything we see, hear, touch, is a luminous display... but not
knowing the empty nature of that vivid luminosity, we get confused
by that luminosity and start to grasp.
The 'emptiness' I am speaking about here should not be
misunderstood as formlessness. It should not be misunderstood as a
void background of all phenomena (which is an illusion). Rather
Emptiness is talking about dependent origination, that whatever you
are experience is dependently originated, and being so all
consciousness is in fact empty of inherent/substantial
existence.
The vision of lets say, a red flower, is a vivid luminous
manifestation but quickly becomes distorted by our deeply rooted
delusion into falsely perceiving a Subject perceiving an external
Object. But actually there is no perceiver, and no flower truly
'out there' being perceived -- there is only the act of
consciousness (e.g. vision, sound, taste, etc) due to the
aggregation of the sense organs and sense objects, so what is
experienced is utterly empty. Consciousness being empty is not a
perceiver 'in here', and there is no red flower as an object 'out
there' -- not every being can perceive redness/colours (e.g. dogs),
and if you can perceive the atomic structures you'll see almost
complete void. So the way we think that there are inherently
existing objects out there with inherently existing characteristics
is an illusion. When understood that consciousness is dependently
originated, and hence empty, it can't even be seen as a mirror
reflecting external conditions -- because the act of consciousness
is a manifestation, there is no subject perceiving object,
consciousness is not a mirror reflecting (though sometimes used as
analogy) but is actually manifestation. Whatever we see/hear, thats
empty, an empty-luminous manifesting vision that is dependently
originated. 'Redness' and 'flowerness' is actually empty, the act
of consciousness is merely an aggregation of causes and conditions,
hence empty.
Awareness is inseparable from conditions, and hence is empty of
anything graspable that stays even a moment. And that is the nature
of pure awareness (empty), and pure awareness should not be
mistaken as a metaphysical essence. It easily becomes mistaken as
the Hindu Brahman.
Lots of religions have spoken about the luminous aspect of our
nature... not just Buddhism but in fact all religions, hinduism,
the mystical traditions of christianity, islam, judaism, taoism,
etc. etc.
As my friend said many years back, "A “True experience” is better
than a thousand words but it is also the very “true experience” of
the Brilliance Bright that has blinded Mystics of all ages. The
Brilliance Bright is more vivid then we can imagine. In All IT is
seen and In All IT is experienced. Being vividly bright it also
serves as the “condition” that obscures its very own Emptiness
nature."
"...of late i have been seeing songs and poems relating to the
luminosity aspect of Pure Awareness. Uncreated, original, mirror
bright, not lost in nirvana and samsara..etc. What use is there? We
have from the very beginning so and yet lost for countless aeons of
lifes. Buddha did not come to tell only about the luminosity aspect
of pure awareness. This has already been expressed in vedas. But it
becomes Self. The ultimate controller. The deathless. The
supreme..etc. This is the problem. This is not the ultimate nature
of Pure Awareness. For full enlightenment to take place, experience
the clarity and emptiness. That's all."
(you can read more on my friend's experience at
http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/200...experience.html
)