RINGU TULKU on EMPTINESS

RINGU TULKU RINPOCHE talkes on the relation between 3 understandings in Buddhist philosophy and how they go hand in hand: IMPERMANENCE, INTERDEPENDENCE and EMPTINESS
www.bodhicharya.org/

[@sifuyeshegyatso809]

A perfectly clear teaching by a perfect Master. A great blessing.

[@sugarfree1894]

That smile at the end, so much love in that. Thank you!

[@sureshbajaj6031]

Tashi dalek Rinpoche. Om mani padme hung. Long life prayers for HH

[@MikeGsaxman]

"Emptiness is Form; Form is emptiness. Emptiness is not other than Form; Form is not other than Emptiness." - Prajnaparamitasutra.

[@wannabe1419]

Karma Norbu “ likewise Feelings, Perceptions, Volition and consciousness are empty” five aggregates are all empty of self nature or essence. Homage to the Prajnaparamitahridayasutra🙏

[@1234carolynb]

Thank you for this talk. I thought (if I understand emptiness correctly), the wall behind Ringu Tulka Rinpoche is a good example of emptiness. The wall does not exist independently. It depends of each brick. The bricks themselves are empty of brick-ness, as they are dependant on clay. Even the clay is empty of clay-ness, as it is ultimately dependant on its constituents. All this is constantly changing. Tomorrow bricks in the wall may become a house or used for rubble in a road which over time, will disintegrate back into the earth to be processed by worms.

[@astralacuity]

Yes, that's a very good way to illustrate the connection to these three principles. Ultimately, it is rooted in emptiness, just as your direct experience depends upon the unconditioned space of your awareness. The interdependence and impermanence of phenomena springs from their being expressions of that awareness, which is called གཞི or ground in the Tibetan tradition. Now, all these metaphors do well for conceptual understanding, but what matters most is direct experience of that ground, which is called རིག་པ་ or Rigpa. This spontaneously arises as luminous clarity, and is the Buddha-nature.

[@ayurvedaiamj2645]

wow

[@tonymeltondj]

Good example. Also everything around us can be such example.

[@michaelbrown7561]

Well said

[@Dorye100]

Thank you for sharing. Also Tulku's english is very good and clear.

[@AarmOZ84]

Love this teaching. I felt like I could see how reality reflects this teaching.

[@jom.a.md.s.h.2206]

Anumodana, Ven. Ringu Tulku, 🙏🙏🙏

[@user-mc9ec4kx8t]

What a wonderful explanation.

[@yifuxero5408]

Brilliant. One of the 5 best presentations in any topic on the internet. Complete story of Emptiness at (Swami Sarvapriyananda - Emptiness), from Nargajuna to the Shentong School of Tibetan Buddhism.

[@juangaribello5701]

Yes!! Many thanks!!!

[@sfopera]

Very beautifully explained.

[@golgipogo]

Informative, thank you

[@AppleliciousStory]

Trying to apply this before i start vajrasattva practices.. hope i can do it correctly

[@AnnaIsokoski]

Thank you :)

[@mrsmith7741]

Such a sweet heart

[@GOODBOY-vt1cf]

thank you

[@fernandoorozco5968]

Thank you

[@mujaku]

Finite thing are non-eternal (anitya); they are dependent manifestations (pratitysamutpada), and empty of 'own essence'.

[@markbrad123]

Maybe it is the force of gravity on picking up objects that creates the illusion of separate fullness in objects ?

[@sadhuarts]

I think that the next step here is to give aid to this understanding buy means of compassionate action, for example, working on the fluidity of ones reactions to diverse emotional stimulation creates a ripple effect upon the universe through the mechanisms of karma. Working upon ones own liberation instantly gives aid to the liberation of others in good time.

[@TenzinDorjee]

Perfect understanding of the Shunyata paired with bodhichitta are the ultimate qualities one requires to tread the path of enlightenment.

[@joanmarietsultrimparkin1821]

Phet!

[@tonymeltondj]

True

[@djoniebie]

the terminology of "working upon ones own liberation" feels unfortunate and like re-igniting the craving attitude of an non-permanent interdependent entity. the right view is clearly mentioned in the heart sutra where Chenreziq answers Shariputra (after the shaking intro): bodhisattvas have nothing to attain, thus they rely on and abide in prajnaparamita. with unobscured mind, they have no fear. They go beyond all wrong views misconceptions to ultimate transcendence of misery. this doesn't sound like they are desperately working upon their own liberation :) have a good view

[@sadhuarts]

Using whatever notions of the self accumulate as a means to defend oneself from wrong view

[@vaureengallagher5046]

thankyou

[@tsewangsangmo9836]

Thanks

[@jitendraitankar9722]

We are all one..

[@KheglenAnn]

No.

[@morpety]

❤

[@nigga851]

u just help me type up my philosophy essay!!!!

[@aisabelsilva9815]

What statues of the Buddha depicture him with blue eyes?

[@quenar]

It complements Vedanta teachings :)

[@iachtulhu1420]

Actually, in a way it contradicts Vedanta, especially this Vajrayana approach. In Vedanta, only true existing essence is Atman/Brahman, everything else is illusion or considered as not sharing the same essence. In Buddhism, even in Vajrayana, there is nothing permanent and self-existing, not a soul, not even an atman, because that would contradict the anicca and sunyata teachings, the same one Tulku espouses here. I see how this subtle nuances can escape one's attention but from the standpoint of goals and practice, Vedantins have different goals then Vajrayana tantrikas and buddhas. Vedanta subsumes maya back into Atman, Buddhadharma destroyes even the idea of permanent and sufficient existence of any single thing. Even Rigpa consciousness, though not caused, still doesn't have the same place in Buddhism as Atman has in Vedanta.

[@philsokolof7235]

​@@iachtulhu1420 The transient nature of the material world proves the existence of the eternal absolute. How could one exist without the other. Vedanta acknowledges both as being part of the nondual reality where as Buddhism tends to accept the impermanent and disregards the immutable in an ambiguous non existent state of being. This is because there is no conception of that which is beyond the transient in Buddhism, like in Vedanta. Buddhist teaching concludes where Vedanta begins.

[@iachtulhu1420]

Buddhist philosophy came to be because of disagreement with Hindu teachings about essentialism. There is none in Buddhism. Even some Mahayana concepts like "Buddha nature" or Dzogchen "Rigpa" which suspiciously sounds like smuggled in atman-like essence are not what they seem to beyond the surface level essentialism. Even if we assume that those schools somehow smuggled in some crypto-Vedantic ideas, due to some cultural exchange, still, it remains true to the original Buddhadharma teachings about complete contingency of all phenomena which destroys every possibility of there being anything remotely similar to Atman, soul or creator god. Karma, reincarnation and essentialism/non-essentialism which are central themes of Buddhism are radically different from their conception and interpretation in Vedantic teachings (both dualist and non-dualist schools).

[@Sara5atAlra7el]

what about who created the emptiness? and who gave the creations this beautiful images and this beautiful creativity emptiness is the existent not the existence and our souls is not part of it, our souls is not matter 😑 when u sleep in ur dream u can feel and understand and all things but u cant feel the touch cuz u not matter in dream that means our soul is able to be alone next life will be like a barrier between this life and the infinite life (after day of judgment) when all existents got destroyed by god in that barrier we will be only souls but not able to go everywhere we want without god permission and we will be close to our dead body half the day and able to hear the ppl talking next to our grave but ppl will cant be able to hear the souls 😔

[@cyber5659]

There is no "who" that created anything, emptiness means the lack of any eternal unchanging essence in phenomena. There is no "God" since emptiness removes the need for a "God" likewise Karma eliminates the need for an eternal judge. If you do evil you become evil, if you do good you become good. Karma is action.

[@Sara5atAlra7el]

@@cyber5659 what i mean before this universe was only god and what u call emptiness because emptiness can't create us specially beyond matter stuff like soul or mind

[@tonymeltondj]

@@cyber5659 I should add that karma (kamma in pali) also means intention. What about the origin of these words, karma is from Sanskrit and means action and kamma from pali means intention. And as Buddha said (some sutta from Digha Nikaya, can't remember which one is) intention is more important than action. Because a good action can be lead by bad or egoistic intentions, so you will not accumulate good kamma. And intention always comes first which confirm that it is more important than action.

[@yoya4766]

To be fair this is just repeating the terms without truly explaining them or their significance.

[@sfcard]

Damn - you smart.

[@mojomania101]

A man's gotta eat.. 🤗

[@ewkeenan]

You didn’t listen.

[@yoya4766]

@@ewkeenan Nor do you.

[@Formlessform108]

That is still not what emptiness is about. Emptiness is the source, or source-less source from which everything is born. From the Non-existence, Existence is born. Look out into space... in between the stars there is empty space, and 99.99% of all matter is empty space, experiencing and being conscious of Non-existence is what it's called "Dharmakaya", and when you have Dharmakaya, you are a Buddha. Now, to talk about the true wisdom of Shunyata or Emptiness, it cannot really be described, because it is not this or that, not here and not there. One can only help bridge a glimpse through words, but in the end it is something that can only be fully understood once experienced and it has nothing to do with understanding "Everything is empty of it's own essence", that is just wisdom of the impermanence of Maya. WHERE is Maya located? where does it grow? where does the universe grow infinitely? THAT is the real question here.

[@ivandelrio9947]

+Formlessform Yes talking about emtpiness has very little to do with emptiness itself, its like talking about reality and actually being reality. Anyway, i like Shinzens Young explenation on emptiness tu bad most of us will never expirience that, most will just talk shit about emptiness and what it is, like me right now. Knowing the truth and being the truth i the same. Talking about emptiness does not give u any understanding of what that realy is. So dont fight over who is write , coze u and i r all wrong!!!!! meditate hardcore for 35 years and if u are lucky u will become emtiness, namaste my dear frinds

[@Formlessform108]

Ivan Delrio Indeed hahaha it is like talking about what the apple taste like instead of tasting the apple itself, but once you taste it MMMMmmmmm yummy! hahaha you dont need any words, unless you are trying to teach those who dont know like all Buddhas have and are still doing today :) and you dont have to meditate for years to to taste the apple. What matters most is how deep you meditate. You can meditate very deeply for 5 min. and it equals what others have meditated for 50 years hahahahaha it has nothing to with time and effort, but about letting go, effortlessness, and depth.

[@ivandelrio9947]

Formlessform for sure my brother, for sure

[@Formlessform108]

Wanna cup of Tea? ;)

[@kwabenaakuamoa9897]

+Formlessform The Buddhist use of the term Emptiness should not be confused with the Vedantic understanding of ultimate reality (Pure Consciousness or Awareness or Brahman etc).. Emptiness (according to Buddhist Madhyamika philosophy) is NOT a source. It is not a thing or a no-thing. It is just a concept created to describe the ultimate reality of things - which is ultimately essenceless... lacking inherent/independent/separate/exclusive existence. Sound is soundless. Wind is windless. Tree is treeless. Motion is motionless. Why? NOT because they emanate from some absolute/ultimate thing called Emptiness, but because they do not originate from themselves - out of some inherent essence. Rather, they depend upon apparent things that cannot be said to be it. Therefore they lack own-being.. They are empty.. Cultivating this analysis leads to the realisation of the selfless of phenomena, and the freedom from deception/confusion/delusion (the root of suffering as it leads to attachment and clinging etc)... Emptiness is also empty, as it does not truly exist from it's own side. So.. Nothing substantial. Nothing to hold/grasp. Nothing to do the holding and grasping. Things exist the way they appear to us only conventional i.e by social agreement. There is no absolute entity/non-entity, according to this view anyway. Btw I am not bashing the other view. I think it is also a valid path/understanding. Just wanted to present this view also in case you werent familiar with it..

[@generalu.gooshe]

It is impolite to not eat this huge whale-like tuna. Plus, I'm hungry. My plate completely cleaned-up. Kindergarten rules, no talking while dinner going on.

[@ellisgarvin]

Impermanence was made clear. Interdependence also. But I failed to see the connection between these and emptiness. Perhaps he meant, "empty of independent reality?"

[@hiranath1699]

Ellis Garvin I hope this will help you understand kzbin.info/www/bejne/eYrUkoqjmJmCfaM

[@iachtulhu1420]

Yes, emptiness as in "not having a true center, essence, self-nature". Because everything is derived interdependently, the self in living things or essence of non-living thing is not singular stuff or thing. We can talk only in relative terms about those things. It's like Einstein theory or relativity only in Buddhist metaphysics and psychology.

[@AarmOZ84]

Love this teaching. I felt like I could see how reality reflects this teaching.

[@rickfette6419]

Thank you