Two truths: Difference between revisions

From Rigpa Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
No edit summary
 
(45 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Two truths'''. Everything has an absolute aspect (''döndam'' [Tib.], or [[absolute truth]], ''döndam denpa'' [Tib.]) and a relative aspect (''kunzob'' [Tib.], or [[relative truth]], ''kunzob denpa'' [Tib.]). The absolute or ultimate is the inherent nature of everything, how things really are. The conventional or relative is how things appear. In the teachings, these are known as ‘the two truths’, but they are not to be understood as two separate dimensions, rather as two aspects of a single reality.
'''Two truths''' (Skt. ''dvasatya''; Tib. [[བདེན་པ་གཉིས་]], ''denpa nyi'',  [[Wyl.]] ''bden pa gnyis'') — everything has an absolute aspect, or [[absolute truth]], and a relative aspect, or [[relative truth]]. The absolute or ultimate is the inherent nature of everything, how things really are. The conventional or relative is how things appear. In the teachings, these are known as ‘the two truths’, but they are not to be understood as two separate dimensions, rather as two aspects of a single reality.


== A Teaching by Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche ==
==From the Sutras==
{{:Quotations: Sutra of the Meeting of Father and Son}}


When we talk about truth, it is like a basic instinct that we have. Truth is something that we
==The Two Truths According to the [[Four tenet systems|Four Schools]]==
adopt, and what is not true, or fake, is something that we do not adopt. For example, we
distinguish between genuine Italian leather – truth – and fake leather made in Thailand. We do
this. You should also notice that without the imitation, there is no such thing as something
genuine. If it were not for imitations, advertisers could not brag about how genuine their
products are. But in the ordinary world distinctions such as fake and truth, genuine and
imitation, are completely taken for granted. There is not much reasoning behind them. The
decisions are mostly made by common or majority agreement, or by direct cognition, such as
when you touch the fire and it has heat, so you decide that from now on it is hot. That is as far as
it goes, and it does not go very far.<br>


I am telling you this because the ideas of true and not true are the basis upon which we develop
===The [[Vaibhashika]] View===
our philosophies, ethics, religions and everything else. For example, the Vedic religions have the
idea that God is truth. Again, you can see here that the definition of truth is something that is not
a fake. It is something that is unfabricated, something that has always been there whether you
fabricate it or not, something independent from all causes and conditions. It is like the difference
between magic and non-magic. For example, this tent is true; it is real, because it is not
dependent on a magician. If a magician were somehow to display a magical tent, then it would
be a fake. The magician would have created it, and it would be dependent on him. We would
say that it was his idea, his trick.<br>


So, many of these Vedic religions believe that God is truly existent. It is independent from
[[Khenpo Ngakchung]] says:
causes and conditions; human beings do not fabricate it. It is not a fake; it is there all the time.
And the rest is all ''maya'', or illusion. This is what they believe. <br>


I think that Christianity, Islam and Judaism must also talk about truth and non-truth, although
:The ''[[Abhidharmakosha]]'' says:
they may not use this language. We can debate this, but I think that there must be a right and
wrong way of doing things – ethics. Why is going to church every Sunday the right way? There
must be a view, and as we go on, they will say things like it is because God is the only merciful
one, and so on. If we ask why killing is bad, they will have another answer: because it is against
this and against that. The distinction between truth and non-truth is always there. In other
words, they are establishing a truly existent phenomenon.<br>


The [[Vaibhashika]] school in [[Buddhism]] has extensively defeated the idea or notion of God, and
::Things which, when destroyed or mentally dissected,<br>
shown that it is a fabrication of whatever the religion. For the Vaibhashikas, only two smallest things exist: a very small thing like an atom, and a very small particle of mind. This is why we
::Can no longer be identified by the mind,<br>
call them Vaibhashika, which means ‘proponent of discrete entities’ ([[wyl.]] ''bye brag smra ba''). The
::Such as pots or water, are relative;<br>
[[Sautrantika]] view is very similar, although there are some differences. The Cittamatra school has
::All else besides is ultimately existent.<br>
extensively defeated these ideas of the Vaibhashikas and Sautrantikas, and they conclude that
::''Treasury of Abhidharma'', VI, 4<br>
only mind is truly existent. Everything else is just an illusion, made in Thailand. Mind is the
only one that is genuine leather.<br>


But a [[Prasangika]] does not believe in genuine leather. Well, he believes in genuine leather, but
:As this says, any coarse thing which can be smashed to pieces with a hammer or dissected into parts by the mind, so that the mind which apprehended that coarse appearance no longer identifies it as such, belongs to the '''[[relative truth]]'''. Then concerning the absolute, any coarse material thing or state of consciousness can be broken down into its ultimate constituents, which are individual particles or moments. Therefore the [[partless particle]]s, which are the ultimate constituents of coarser things, and the [[indivisible moments of consciousness]], which are the ultimate constituents of mental phenomena, are said to be '''[[absolute truth]]'''.
not in truly existent genuine leather. He thinks that if it exists, then it has to have a birth. And if
it is truly existent, then it has to come from self, other, both or neither. Since he will refute all of
these possibilities when he examines them, he concludes that it cannot exist. So, if you ask him,
well in that case what would you accept, he would say, “[[dependent arising]]”. Without genuine
leather, there is no imitation leather. Without imitation leather, there is no genuine leather.
Genuine is dependent on imitation, and imitation is dependent on genuine. This is his
philosophy, so for him there is no such thing as a real cause.<br>


--From ''Introduction to the Middle Way,[[Chandrakirti]]’s [[Madhyamakavatara]] with commentary by [[Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche]]'', Khyentse Foundation, 2003, pp.88-89, for free download at [http://www.khyentsefoundation.org/publications.html www.khyentsefoundation.org]
===The [[Sautrantika]] View===
[[Khenpo Ngakchung]] says:
 
:Then, if we consider the Sautrantikas, it says in the ''[[Commentary on Valid Cognition]]''<ref>{{:Quotations: Dharmakirti, Commentary on Valid Cognition, That which performs a function is ultimately existent}}</ref>:
 
::"That which can perform a function<br>
::Is here said to be ultimately existent.<br>
::All that can not perform a function<br>
::Is said to be relatively existent.<br>
::These are specific and general characteristics."<br>
 
:So, here, in this context, anything with unique characteristics that can perform a function is said to be [[absolute truth]], and anything that is generally characterized and can not perform a function is said to belong merely to [[relative truth]]. Although things are explained this way when analyzing things so as to determine whether or not they have unique characteristics, this does not mean to say that there are not other classifications of the two truths.
 
===The [[Chittamatra]] View===
[[Khenpo Ngakchung]] says:
:All the dualistic phenomena of the [[imputed nature]] and the mind and mental phenomena of the [[dependent nature]] are the deceiving phenomena of [[delusion]], the '''[[relative truth]]'''. The essence of the dependent nature, which is the naturally luminous consciousness, and the [[fully established nature]], which is the fact that this [i.e., the dependent nature] is empty of the dualistic projections of the imputed nature—comprising the nature of reality and wisdom—are said to be the '''[[absolute truth]]'''.
 
==Canonical Literature==
*''[[Teaching the Relative and Ultimate Truths]]''
 
==References==
<small><References/></small>
 
==Oral Teachings Given to the [[About Rigpa|Rigpa]] Sangha==
*[[Ringu Tulku Rinpoche]], [[Lerab Ling]], 14-16 May 2010
*[[Khenpo Pema Sherab]], Lerab Ling, 26-28 May 2011
*[[Tsoknyi Rinpoche]], Lerab Ling, 1 August 2018 am
*[[Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche]], [[Dharma Mati]], online, 13 June 2020: ''Perfect [[Samsara]]—The Two Truths as the key to understanding, tolerance and humour''
 
==Further Reading==
*[[Kangyur Rinpoche]], ''Treasury of Precious Qualities'' (Boston & London: Shambhala, 2001), 'Appendix 7' on the two truths according to the [[Madhyamika]] view.
*[[Khenpo Palden Sherab]] Rinpoche, ''Ceasless Echoes of the Great Silence, a Commentary on the Heart Sutra''. Translated by Khenpo Tsewang Dongyal Rinpoche (Published by Sky Dancer Press), pages 59-64.
*[[Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche]], ''The Two Truths'' (Prajña Editions, 2003)
*Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche, ''Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness'' (Auckland: Zhyisil Chokyi Ghatsal Publications, 2001), pages 3-5.
*[[Thinley Norbu]], ''The Small Golden Key'' (Shambhala Publications, 1999), ‘8. The Two Truths'.


==External Links==
==External Links==
*[http://www.lotsawahouse.org/two_truths.html An Instruction on the View of the Mahayana Clarifying the Two Truths by Patrul Rinpoche]
*{{LH|tibetan-masters/patrul-rinpoche/two-truths-view-mahayana|''An Instruction on the View of the Mahayana—Clarifying the Two Truths'' by Patrul Rinpoche}}
 
*{{84000|http://read.84000.co/translation/UT22084-060-008.html|Saṃvṛtiparamārthasatyanirdeśa, ''The Noble Great Vehicle Sūtra, Teaching the Relative and Ultimate Truths '', ཀུན་རྫོབ་དང་དོན་དམ་པའི་བདེན་པ་བསྟན་པའི་མདོ།, Wyl. ''’kun rdzob dang don dam pa’i bden pa bstan pa'i mdo''}} 
*[https://youtu.be/2ZcCpTwkWsU Mingyur Rinpoche: 'What Are the Two Truths' on YouTube]
*[https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6-wArQbu9GAL42bDXSS4Urtzq_3hQ-cA Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche's teachings on the two truths from 2014]


[[Category:Key Terms]]
[[Category:Key Terms]]
[[Category:Philosophical Tenets]]
[[Category:Enumerations]]
[[Category:Enumerations]]
[[Category:02-Two]]

Latest revision as of 14:35, 4 September 2021

Two truths (Skt. dvasatya; Tib. བདེན་པ་གཉིས་, denpa nyi, Wyl. bden pa gnyis) — everything has an absolute aspect, or absolute truth, and a relative aspect, or relative truth. The absolute or ultimate is the inherent nature of everything, how things really are. The conventional or relative is how things appear. In the teachings, these are known as ‘the two truths’, but they are not to be understood as two separate dimensions, rather as two aspects of a single reality.

From the Sutras

འཇིག་རྟེན་མཁྱེན་པས་བདེན་པ་འདི་གཉིས་ཏེ། །

ཁྱེད་ཀྱིས་གཞན་ལས་མ་གསན་རང་གིས་རིག །
དེ་ནི་ཀུན་རྫོབ་བདེན་དང་དོན་དམ་སྟེ། །

བདེན་པ་གསུམ་པ་གང་ཡང་མ་མཆིས་སོ། །

You, the knower of the world,
Realized the two levels of reality,
By yourself, not studying them from others.
They are the relative and the ultimate.
There is not some third level of reality.

Buddha Shakyamuni, Sutra of the Meeting of Father and Son


The Two Truths According to the Four Schools

The Vaibhashika View

Khenpo Ngakchung says:

The Abhidharmakosha says:
Things which, when destroyed or mentally dissected,
Can no longer be identified by the mind,
Such as pots or water, are relative;
All else besides is ultimately existent.
Treasury of Abhidharma, VI, 4
As this says, any coarse thing which can be smashed to pieces with a hammer or dissected into parts by the mind, so that the mind which apprehended that coarse appearance no longer identifies it as such, belongs to the relative truth. Then concerning the absolute, any coarse material thing or state of consciousness can be broken down into its ultimate constituents, which are individual particles or moments. Therefore the partless particles, which are the ultimate constituents of coarser things, and the indivisible moments of consciousness, which are the ultimate constituents of mental phenomena, are said to be absolute truth.

The Sautrantika View

Khenpo Ngakchung says:

Then, if we consider the Sautrantikas, it says in the Commentary on Valid Cognition[1]:
"That which can perform a function
Is here said to be ultimately existent.
All that can not perform a function
Is said to be relatively existent.
These are specific and general characteristics."
So, here, in this context, anything with unique characteristics that can perform a function is said to be absolute truth, and anything that is generally characterized and can not perform a function is said to belong merely to relative truth. Although things are explained this way when analyzing things so as to determine whether or not they have unique characteristics, this does not mean to say that there are not other classifications of the two truths.

The Chittamatra View

Khenpo Ngakchung says:

All the dualistic phenomena of the imputed nature and the mind and mental phenomena of the dependent nature are the deceiving phenomena of delusion, the relative truth. The essence of the dependent nature, which is the naturally luminous consciousness, and the fully established nature, which is the fact that this [i.e., the dependent nature] is empty of the dualistic projections of the imputed nature—comprising the nature of reality and wisdom—are said to be the absolute truth.

Canonical Literature

References

  1. ↑
    དོན་དམ་དོན་བྱེད་ནུས་པ་གང༌། །

    དེ་འདིར་དོན་དམ་ཡོད་པ་ཡིན། །

    གཞན་ནི་ཀུན་རྫོབ་ཡོད་པ་སྟེ། །

    That which can ultimately perform a function
    Is here said to be ultimately existent.
    All else besides has relative existence.

    Dharmakīrti, Commentary on Valid Cognition, chapter III, 3

Oral Teachings Given to the Rigpa Sangha

Further Reading

  • Kangyur Rinpoche, Treasury of Precious Qualities (Boston & London: Shambhala, 2001), 'Appendix 7' on the two truths according to the Madhyamika view.
  • Khenpo Palden Sherab Rinpoche, Ceasless Echoes of the Great Silence, a Commentary on the Heart Sutra. Translated by Khenpo Tsewang Dongyal Rinpoche (Published by Sky Dancer Press), pages 59-64.
  • Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche, The Two Truths (Prajña Editions, 2003)
  • Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche, Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness (Auckland: Zhyisil Chokyi Ghatsal Publications, 2001), pages 3-5.
  • Thinley Norbu, The Small Golden Key (Shambhala Publications, 1999), ‘8. The Two Truths'.

External Links

Retrieved from "https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Two_truths&oldid=90791"