Bhavanga/Междудхармие

[Steppenwolf]

Может быть несуществование доступно только йогическому восприятию?



 

V abhidharme est' predstavlenie o bhavANge, t.e. promezhutke mezhdu posledovatelnym vospriyatiem dvuh dharm.  Bhavanga est' vsegda, no postigaetsa tolko yogicheski. Vidimo mozhno schitat', chto eto nevospriyatie kak chastnyj sluchai vospriyatiya, t.e. nedvoistvennost'. Paribok sravnival bhavangu s probleskom bytiya (Lichtung des Seins) u Haideggera.
(Proshu prosheniya za latinskuyu abrakadabru.)

[Nick]

V abhidharme est' predstavlenie o bhavANge, t.e. promezhutke mezhdu posledovatelnym vospriyatiem dvuh dharm. Bhavanga est' vsegda, no postigaetsa tolko yogicheski.

Очень точное добавление, спасибо.

[Zvuki]

V abhidharme est' predstavlenie o bhavANge, t.e. promezhutke mezhdu posledovatelnym vospriyatiem dvuh dharm. Bhavanga est' vsegda, no postigaetsa tolko yogicheski. Vidimo mozhno schitat', chto eto nevospriyatie kak chastnyj sluchai vospriyatiya, t.e. nedvoistvennost'. Paribok sravnival bhavangu s probleskom bytiya (Lichtung des Seins) u Haideggera.

Очень многосодержащее сообщение. Хотелось бы подробней узнать о бхаванге – это в каком разделе? (кстати, Ник, были разговоры о том, что вы разместите отсканенную абхидхарму – произошло ли это?). Несовсем понял, как это Вы бхавангу увязали с недвойственностью, можно подробней?

 

[Nick]

http://www.indology.ru/sutra19537.html

[Steppenwolf]

V kakoy glave ob etom govoritsa ia, k sozhaleniyu, skazat' ne mogu.
Po povodu nedvoistvennosti ia imeyu v vidu, chto  bhavanga - sostoyanie, v kotorom otsutsvuyet obyekt vospriyatiya, sootvetstvenno subyekt vydelit' tozhe vryad li poluchitsa (da i voobshe, v buddizme s subyektami dela obstoyat nevazhno ). Stalo byt' sostoyanie bhavangi vpolne mozhno oboznachit' kak nedvoistvennoye, rig pa nu i t.d.
Ponyatno, nedvoistvennost' - ne abhidharmistskiy termin, no vse zhe.

[Zvuki]

С другой стороны, когда моё внимание направлено на движущийся объект (внешний или внутреннее самоощущение), то тут тоже можно было бы говорить о восприятии несуществования (несуществования предыдущего момента).

Перечитал ещё раз пункт 75 раздела «Умозаключение для других», где как раз рассмотрен механизм становления на примере проникновения света во тьму. И там, насколько мне понялось, становление описано вполне корректно с точки зрения Гегеля. Тьма – это отрицание (небытие, несуществование) света, а свет – отрицание тьмы. Вот они и бодаются меж собой. А человек их воспринимает. Когда он воспринимает свет, то можно сказать, что при этом он воспринимает несуществование тьмы, а при восприятии тьмы он воспринимает несуществование света. Ну т.е. вывод мне видится такой: буддийские логики были вполне диалектики, и Гегель бы их похвалил.
 

[Zvuki]

2Steppenwolf:

Понятно. Мне казалось, что в абхидхарме есть дхармы, к примеру асанскрита (необусловленные) дхармы, которые избавлены от субъект-объектной дихотомии. Как по-вашему?

Как Вам показалось: сам Васубандху придавал особое значение-ценность этой бхаванге, типа как ригпе, Природе Будды или чему-то подобному?
 

[Пламен]

Этот трэд был в Ориенталии, но куда-то подевался, поэтому я его возпроизвожу по записям буддистского форума е-сангха:

Одним словом, есть все основания считать, что бхаванга-читта является тхеравадинским и абхидхармическим предвестником алаявиджняны.

boom_cat     Posted: Nov 15 2003, 11:25 PM

Some practitioners experience moments when there are no sense-impressions, when one does not think, when there are no akusala cittas or kusala cittas. After they leave that state, they recall that everything stops and they cannot see anything, including the 'I'. They come to believe that it is the experience of nonselfness/emptiness.

But actually there is still a citta (consciousness). Even when there are no sense-impressions and no thinking there must be citta; otherwise there would be no life. The type of citta which arises and falls away at those moments is called bhavanga-citta. Bhavanga literally means 'factor of life' and is usually translated into English as 'life-continuum'. The bhavanga-citta keeps the continuity in a lifespan, so that what we call a 'being' goes on to live from moment to moment. That is the function of the bhavanga-citta.

Bhavanga sometime occurs to Samatha meditation, even before the practitioner attains Samadhi. It is just because this citta is so subtle that without very powerful insight the practitioner is unable to realise it and believe that 'nothing' exists. Those who practise meditation with different religious beliefs may even interpret the experience as an evidence of the ultimate entity (God or something like that).

The Buddha introduced a different mode of practice which is called Vipassana, which has very different objective--to see things as they are. With the very powerful insights, the practitioner will be able to discern this citta and clearly know that it is still under Kammic influences, it is not nonselfness/emptiness and is therefore still not free from suffering...

Here is an article about the function of of Bhavanga (Life-Continuum), by Nina van Gorkom:
http://www.geocities.com/~madg/gangessangh...a/Bhavanga.html

-----

Here are just my personal thoughts:
When people compare various psychological systems of Buddhism, they find that these systems give different listings of dharmas and arrange them differently. I find it interesting to know why, not how, things are listed differently in different models.

Even if we follow the same model and train in the same way, we won't see the same things exactly as they are listed and grouped in the texts. How can we expect to see exactly the same things as the text books say? Anyway, all we are supposed to know is the body and mind phenomena, how it operates and what are the universal characteristics in all those 'things'. That's all. But we can see them closely and know what's going on realtime.

It's rather like looking at the spectrum, you can see all the colours being continous, and there isn't really a 'number' of colours. To identify a certain point as 'red' and a certain point as 'orange', and to decide how many colours we wanna identify, is, however a naming process, an afterthought really. We simply can't describe everything--so we have to choose. if we like we can come up with a new name to identify a certain point in between red and orange. But still, we have to be able to see this whole thing directly. That's where the first handed materials came from.
For those who haven't done the observation themselves and only rely on the words of others, it is sort of like reading book and maps of a place without actually being there. quite often, maps are even confusing rather than of any help when we are actually finding our way there (especially in Nepal).

Although different models list things differently, chances are, they actually talk about mostly the same things. Bear into mind that the actual process is much more organic, it is unlike there are such and such consciousnesses exactly as the texts describe. There are in between states. An instance i can think of is the Alaya consciousness mentioned in the later Buddhist philosophy. Although it is not mentioned in the earlier models, we can find within the Pali listing that there is a type of consciousness called bhavanga consciousness. It's functions are very similiar to that of the Alaya consciousness, and we will start to wonder are they actually the same thing, just that the later thinkers gave it a much more philosophical significance and named/arranged it differently?

But then, be they actually the same or not, we still need to be able to observe it directly for ourselves, otherwise we are simply playing word games or making speculative guesses...


=====


tealeaf   Posted: Nov 16 2003, 02:13 PM
   
There are all kinds of states of mind. None of them are selflessness. In fact, realization that no experience is trully a self, is to admit that enlightenment cannot be experienced as a state. It is something to be lived. It is freedom to enter any state of mind at will. It is freedom to enter into any concentration of mind instantly. It is not an attainment, per se. It is a result of non-commitment to any form of consciousness. No commitment to mundane consciousness and no commitment to a flat non-sense no-time no-thing conscousness and no commitment to everything is the same consciousness. No commitment to any of them. Yet you take on some kind of consciousness at all times. You can't avoid it, and there is no need to avoid it. But you are joyful, because you know this is not your home. Actually, no consciousness of any kind, no unconsciousness, no realm of any kind if your home. Actually your are homeless. Actually home is where you lay your head. Therefore nothing can pin down such one. Nothing can stain the mind of such one, even a sense of egoistic I-ness doesn't perturb. That's why it's called a mystical state. Because it cannot really be understood. Because it makes no sense that some people experience ego and are attached to it, and others experience the very same thing and are not attached. If it was really so easy to understand, everyone would be instantly enlightened already and we'd have a perfectly easy to follow step by step guide. But we don't. We have hints and guides and people spend lifetimes of following...but it's only simple for those who know it's simple and why so.


=====


Imago   Posted: Nov 16 2003, 04:05 PM
   
Hi, boom_cat,
Thank you for the interesting topic. From what I have read, there is a creeping suspition in my head that the Yogacarins might have transformed bhavanga-citta into alayavijnana. What do you think of the parallels between the two types of citta (alayavijnana is also translated as continuum-consciousness).  


=====


hari   Posted: Nov 16 2003, 05:03 PM

In the great flood of bliss,
waves are surging
and they too are nothing but bliss,
for bliss is the very nature of every particle of this body of bliss.
This is my state,
How can I describe this bliss in words?
Inner delight absorbs me so totally that I can never Imagine
searching for happiness in the external world,
through the senses.
Just as when a child is still in its mother's womb,
the child's cravings are reflected in the mother
and become her desires as well.
In the same way, says Tukaram,
this bliss is reflected throughout my being,
and whatever comes out of my mouth is
an expression of that experience of inner bliss.
In the great flood of bliss,
waves are surging
and they too are nothing but bliss,
for bliss is the very nature of every particle of this body of bliss.
Tukaram Maharaj...
We have built ourselves a house in empty space,
We reside in formless eternity,
We are one with a reality bereft of illusions,
We experience a wholeness that cannot be fragmented,
Says Tuka, we do not have ego any more,
We have become what is immutable and pure.
-Tukaram Maharaj--17th century, India
Now....what could every be immutable and pure?
Deffinitly nothing that could be concieved to exist or not exist....because one could not consider anything that exists to be immutable....and nothing that does not exist could be concieved to be pure....so it must be some......Goodness....it must well be a Mystery....eh?  

--------------------
Metta all...


=====


boom_cat     Posted: Nov 16 2003, 08:35 PM

Hi, boom_cat,
Thank you for the interesting topic. From what I have read, there is a creeping suspition in my head that the Yogacarins might have transformed bhavanga-citta into alayavijnana. What do you think of the parallels between the two types of citta (alayavijnana is also translated as continuum-consciousness).

Personally, yes I do share your 'suspition' (suspicion?). My guts feeling is that the Yogacarins were able to discern the same phenomenon (this also shows that their meditation and insights were very strong), but they gave it a different name and different positioning (by making it a class of its own). However, this is just a loose thought of mine, still have to verify.

There are some interesting descriptions about the bhavanga-citta in the meditation manual of a renowned meditation teacher, Ven. Pa Auk Sayadaw:

...At this stage you will reach either access (upacàra) or absorption (appanà)concentration.It is called access concentration because it is close to and precedes jhàna.
Absorption concentration is jhàna. Both types of concentration have the pañibhàga-nimitta as their object.The only difference between them is that in access concentration the jhàna factors are not fully developed.For this reason bhavaïga mind states still occur,and one can fall into bhavaïga (life-continuum consciousness).The meditator will say that everything stopped,and may even think it is Nibbàna. In reality the mind has not stopped,but the meditator is just not sufficiently skilled to discern this, because the bhavaïga mind states are very subtle.

When the pañibhàga-nimitta appears, concentration is powerful.But at this stage,which is
the stage of access concentration,the jhàna factors are not fully developed, and bhavaïga mind states (life-continuum consciousness)still occur;one falls into bhavaïga.The meditator will say that everything stopped, or may think it is Nibbàna,and say: 'I knew nothing then.' If he practises in this way, he can eventually stay in bhavaïga for a long time.

In any kind of practice, be it good or bad, one will achieve one's aim, if one tries again and again. 'Practice makes perfect.' In this case too, if he tries again and again,in the same way,he may fall into bhavaïga for a long time.Why does he say he knows nothing? Because the bhavaïga takes the object at the time near death in the past life. That object may be kamma, a kamma sign (kamma-nimitta)or a rebirth sign (gati-nimitta). But a meditator cannot see this, because he has not yet discerned dependent-origination. It is only once they have discerned dependent-origination that meditators see that the bhavaïga takes one of these objects.

If a meditator thinks it is Nibbàna, this idea is a very big 'rock' blocking the way to Nibbàna. If he does not remove this big 'rock',he cannot attain Nibbàna.

For the complete version of the book:
http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/know-see.pdf

I still need to observe this for myself, or at least I need scriptural references to verify: I kind of have the guts feeling that it is this consciousness that carries the root ignorance--the notion of 'I', and Kammas/Karmas from this life to the next...and if that's really the case, then Bhavanga and Alaya actually refer to the same phenomenon. Anyway, like I said, I still need to observe this for myself...


=====


Imago   Posted: Nov 16 2003, 10:08 PM
   
Sorry for the misprint and thanks for the quotes. Really revealing (or revelating?)! :-)
So, bhavanga is a subconscious state where the mind has stopped producing the mental images of reality and there are only karma-seeds present, which is in short, one of the functions of alayavijnana too. It is also responsible for the reincarnation.
1) Ch. sheng, dzai-sheng, 2) Skt. jati, 3) Pali jati, patisandhi, bhavanga-sota, bhavanga-citta, 4) Alternate Translations: reincarnation, transmigration.
more about
http://www.orientalia.org/term21650.html  


=====

Sorry for the misprint and thanks for the quotes. Really revealing (or revelating?)! :-)

So, bhavanga is a subconscious state where the mind has stopped producing the mental images of reality and there are only karma-seeds present, which is in short, one of the functions of alayavijnana too. It is also responsible for the reincarnation.

No worry. I make typo errors too.

Actually, you may even draw parallels to the unconsciousness of Western psychology (Jungian type). On the otherhand, I have at least read one Chinese scholar comparing the unconsciousness to Alaya consciousness (Rongge: Shenhuarenge [literally means Jung: Mythology and Personality] by Féng Chuan).

You can find more from the Pali Abhidhamma. I am sure that you have read Mahathera Narada's translation of The Abhidhammattha Sangaha of Acariya Anuruddha. Bhikkhu Bodhi and U Rewata Dhamma made a revised edition of Mahathera Narada's tradion, they added some commentaries, which also worth reading...

Thanks for your link.

-----

If anyone here likes cross reading different traditions, here are some interesting articles:

In early Buddhist literature this ground-state of consciousness is said to be primordially pure and radiant, regardless of whether it is obscured by adventitious defilements,6 and it is from this state that all active mental processes (javana), arise, including volition and, therefore, karma. Thus, since the manifold worlds experienced by sentient beings are asserted in Buddhism to be produced by the karma of sentient beings, it follows that the bhavanga must be the ground from which arise all karma, all the worlds formed by karma, and all states of consciousness by which these worlds are known. Moreover, the nature of this ground of becoming is said to be loving kindness, and it is the source of sentient beings; incentive to meditatively develop their minds in the pursuit of nirvana.7 When final liberation is achieved, one comes to experientially realize the nature of the bhavanga, which then retains its integrity and is no longer prone to obscuration by defilements.8

While the Theravada tradition largely marginalized the bhavanga in both theory and in practice, Mahayana Buddhism attributed central importance to the tathagalagarbha, which bears a close resemblance to the bhavaga. The Lankavatara Sutra (p. 77) says of tathagatagarbhathat it is the naturally radiant and primordially pure awareness within each sentient being, which is obscured by such adventitious defilements as attachment, aggression, delusion, and compulsive ideation. It adds that this radiant awareness is the ground from which both good and evil arise, and it produces all forms of existence, like an actor taking on a variety of appearances (p. 220).
The Srimala-devi Simhanada Sutra asserts that it is that which inspires sentient beings to seek nirvana, and the Ratnagotravibhaga (vv. 51, 84) makes the further claim that his awareness, which is naturally present since beginningless time, is implicitly replete with all the qualities of Buddhahood. But in order for those innate qualities to become manifest, the tathagatagarbha, or buddha-nature, must be separated from defilements, much as gold ore must be refined to bring out its intrinsic purity. Thus, even in these pre-Vajrayana writings, there were clear and elaborated theories concerning a beginningless ground-state of awareness, which was the source of all other states of consciousness, the phenomenal world, and all sentient beings within it.

For the full article:
http://www.snowlionpub.com/pages/N49_2.php

This offers a very interesting perspective, however, it is in Chinese. It mentions two points:
1. An ancient Indian translator, Paramaartha (499-569), treated Bhavanga consciousness the same as Alaya consciousness
2. Bhavanga consciousness cannot be found in the Seven Books of the Pali Abhidhamma, therefore the author of this article suspected that it wasn't originally a Theravadan teaching. However, as the author said, it is mentioned frequently in the commentaries of the Seven Books of the Abhidhamma as if it was at that time a widely accepted idea. And it is also mentioned in Buddhaghosa's Visuddhi-magga-saastra.
For the article (if you can read Chinese):
http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-BJ010/bj101_13.htm

The Sarvastivadin view of emergence from cessation is that it is directly produced by the last moment of mind before entering cessation. This is possible, in their view, because past, future and present dharmas all 'exist' in some sense. Thus A can directly affect B even if they are separated in time. The Sautrantikas, on the other hand, held that the body alone leads to emergence from cessation, as it has been 'seeded' by prior moments of mind. The Yogacarins (a Mahayana school) hold that a form of residual consciousness remains in cessation. This is the 'store-consciousness' (alaya-vijnana), a concept in some ways similar to the bhavanga citta of the Theravadins.

For the full article:
http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha205.htm

Alaya-vijnana
Usually rendered 'storehouse consciousness'. In Yogacara philosophy, this is the underlying stratum of existence that is 'perfumed' by volitional actions and thus 'stores' the moral effects of kamma. Note that it is regarded as a conditioned phenomenon, not as a 'soul' in the sense of Western religion. The theory is most fully elaborated by Vasubandhu in //Vij~napti-maatrataa-tri.msikaa// and by Dharmapala in //Vij~napti-maatrataa-siddhi-"saastra//. The doctrine of alaya-vijnana greatly influenced Chinese Buddhism and sects derived from it (e.g. Zen). See also bhavanga.

Bhavanga
Sometimes rendered 'life-stream'. In Theravada Buddhism, this is the underlying stratum of existence that is used to explain memory and other 'temporal' phenomena such as moral accountability. It is described by Buddhaghosa and others as the natural condition of mind, bright and shining and free from impurity. Note that it is regarded as a conditioned phenomenon, not as a 'soul' in the sense of Western religion. (The Sarvastivadin/Mahayana treatment of bhavanga is different.) See also alaya-vijnana.
See:
http://dharma.ncf.ca/faqs/glossary.html

That's it for now.


=====


Imago   Posted: Nov 17 2003, 01:22 AM
   
You've done excellent work, boom_cat. Thank you!

I know Paramartha very well. He is the author of Dasapadartha-sastra, or translated someone other's work under the same name into Chinese, and this work on the philosophy of Vaisesika has been largely commented upon by the Chinese Buddhists, say, Chi Tsung (549-623), to mention one of them. The work has been translated into English by the Japanese scholar Hakuju Ui (1917), and only in 1977 reconstructed in the original Sanskrit.


=====


hari   Posted: Nov 17 2003, 01:52 AM
 
Interesting stuff!

--------------------
Metta all...


=====


mindbird   Posted: Nov 17 2003, 07:40 AM

I am reading this with interest but i have as much to say as a 3rd grader in a high school class should say. I have studied Buddhism for many years, but i have read "Abhidharma in Daily Life" by van Gorken once, recently--just read, without studying. Studying it is taking longer. Accordingly i find these discussions illuminating, but barely within my comprehension. Thank you for talking, keep doing it.


=====


namdrol   Posted: Nov 17 2003, 08:42 AM

Hi, boom_cat,
Thank you for the interesting topic. From what I have read, there is a creeping suspition in my head that the Yogacarins might have transformed bhavanga-citta into alayavijnana. What do you think of the parallels between the two types of citta (alayavijnana is also translated as continuum-consciousness).

Asanga explictly cites bhavanga as a precedent for the validity of aalaya-vij~naana. I forget exactly where-- but I am quite certain of this. It is probably mentioned in Lamotte's Karmasiddhiprakarana translation.
N

[Zvuki]

Два предварительных вопроса (извините пожалуйста, если на самом деле ответы на них есть в самом тексте, потому что я с большим трудом смог пока ухватить только самый общий смысл самого начала данного текста, по причине своего крайне слабого владения английским языком):

1. Почему я в тексте Абхидхармы не могу найти термин bhavanga? Он там вообще есть?

2. Почему в данном тексте-общении речь идёт о бхаванге как о читте? Тогда получается, что бхаванга – это дхарма, поскольку читта – дхарма? А Степной Волк нам говорил, что это не дхарма, а типа междхармье, если я правильно понял.
 

[Nick]

"Abhidharma in Daily Life"  :roll: , занятно...
По признаку, где исчезает субъект-объект, - возможно, но вот по понятиям... :oops:

[Steppenwolf]

это не дхарма, а типа междхармье, если я правильно понял.
 

Da, ia imenno eto imeyu v vidu.
Kak mne predstsvlyartsa, v kontekste abhidharmy kak sistemy ischisleniya vsego sushego i - razumeetsa - sootvetstvuyushey yogicheskoi deyatelnosti bhavanga prinzipialnogo znacheniya ne imeet, ee prosto mozhno mehanicheski zafiksirovat'. Esli schitat' ee dharmoi, to vnutri abhidharmy vozniknet vopros (dlya drugih sistem nesushestvenniy): chto proishodit mezhdu postizheniem dharm? Krome togo, po otnosheniyu k kazhdoi dharme sushestvuyet osobaya model' deystviya, a chto mozhno delat' s bhavangoi v ramkah abhidharmy ia ne  predstavlyayu. Ved' esli ee kultivirovat' - to, vrode by, vsey ostalnoy abhidharmy uzhe i ne ponadobitsa, eto prosto budet yogacara.
Vprochem, moi znaniya ob abhidharme lisheny sistemy, m.b. ya chego-to ne ponimayu.

[Sadhak]

К понятию небытия. Вот что это? Только умственное представление, причем совершенно абстрактное (как и пустоста, это же "рога у зайца"), поскольку даже условно реальным (как мираж) быть абсолютно не может, требуя наличия того, кто бы это небытие зафиксировал, что противоречит самому понятию как таковому. Небытие относится к уму, это его концепция и рассуждать о ней как о чем-то вне этого самого ума существующего просто нельзя, поскольку это небытие-пустота никогда не может быть его опытом или переживанием, т.е. фиксация и восприятие такого феномена невозможна в принципе, ведь субъетно-объктное разделение будет в любом случае, какое же это "небытие", пуста ли эта "пустота", если есть ум, в котором есть это переживание, сам видящий? Никогда такого не было и не будет, чистая фикция, поскольку рога у злополучного зайца еще могут вырасти, но вот "мое небытие" даже вообразить как-то нелепо...

[Zvuki]

Совершенно согласен с Садхаком. И именно об этом же (вслед за Ёшкинкотом) говорил в треде «Беседы о Гегеле». Т.е. Гегель говорит о НИЧТО, о НЕБЫТИИ – именно о тех, которые не исключают мышления, которые суть модусы мышления. То же самое и буддийские логики – говорят именно о таких ничто и небытии.

[Steppenwolf]

A buddiyskie praktiki perezhivali nichto nekonzeptualno.
Znachit, kogda oni ob etom vposledstvii rassuzhdali - objektom ih rassuzhdeniya bylo predstavlenie / vospominanie "o tom, chto bylo da eshe i ne so mnoi, i chego po suti i ne bylo".
Stoit li posle etogo uprekat' Nagardzhunu?

[Zvuki]

Esli schitat' ee dharmoi, to vnutri abhidharmy vozniknet vopros (dlya drugih sistem nesushestvenniy): chto proishodit mezhdu postizheniem dharm?

А мне дак такой вопрос не кажется опасным. Я бы ответил: нет никакого «между постижением дхарм», всегда есть какая-то дхарма («постигаемая» ЗиС). И можно её назвать бхавангой.

Посмотрел список 75 дхарм саунтрантиков. Там есть дхарма, о котрой сказано следующее (это кажется Розенберг):

nikAja = sabhAgatA – сила, производящая общность или однородность бытий (существований), двойник реалистической общности вайшешиков.

Кажется, она весьма похожа на бхавангу?
 

[Nick]

Не всё что мы не можем представить - ложно. Существование и несуществование - суть представления (по ДД) и почему же те из них (которое можем представить), более "реально", чем другое (которое не можем представить), если оба "вычисляемы"? Это и есть вопрос субъект-объекта "я" (маленького), которое отождествляет себя с более "представляемым".

[Steppenwolf]

нет никакого «между постижением дхарм», всегда есть какая-то дхарма («постигаемая» ЗиС). И можно её назвать бхавангой.

Esli bhavanga - eto dharma, postigaemaya mezhdu drugimi dharmami, to mezhdu postizheniem dharmy "bhavanga" i sleduyushey dharmy neizbezhno dolzhna byt' eshe bhavanga, a raz ona tozhe yavlyaetsa dharmoi, to pered i posle postizheniya ee budut eshe bhavangi - regressus ad infinitum.
Mne kazhetsa, chto bhavanga, kotoraya v abhidharme sluzhit chem-to vrode tochki otscheta, no osobogo vnimaniya abhidharmistov ne privlekaet, igraet vazhnuyu rol v ramkah drugoi sistemy - yogacary, kotoraya, v otlichie ot abhidharmy ne razdelyaet soderzhaniya po kachestvam i poetomu mozhet protivopostavlyat' vse soderzhaniya nesoderzhaniyu / bessoderzhatelnomu, t.e. bhavange.

nikAja = sabhAgatA – сила, производящая общность или однородность бытий (существований), двойник реалистической общности вайшешиков.
 

Vy imeete v vidu sattA?
Eto bytie kak takovoe, vsya polnota bytiya.
Esli ponimat' bhavangu kak sinonim alaya-vijnany, to po shirote eto ponyatie s sattoi sopostavimo.
No uzh bolno vaisheshika i buddizm raznye sistemy, vryad li podobnoe sopostavlenie chto-nibud' dast

[Nick]

Esli bhavanga - eto dharma, postigaemaya mezhdu drugimi dharmami, to mezhdu postizheniem dharmy "bhavanga" i sleduyushey dharmy neizbezhno dolzhna byt' eshe bhavanga, a raz ona tozhe yavlyaetsa dharmoi, to pered i posle postizheniya ee budut eshe bhavangi - regressus ad infinitum.

То есть дхармы, как цветки лилии плавают в bhavanga? Тогда она будет очень напоминать "длящуюся субстанцию" и все вытекающие отсюда проблемы для любого вида буддизма.

igraet vazhnuyu rol v ramkah drugoi sistemy - yogacary, kotoraya, v otlichie ot abhidharmy ne razdelyaet soderzhaniya po kachestvam i poetomu mozhet protivopostavlyat' vse soderzhaniya nesoderzhaniyu / bessoderzhatelnomu, t.e. bhavange.

Вы имеете ввиду раннюю йогачарью? Тогда bhavanga наверное  есть алая виджняна, которую некоторые считают также дхармой, а некоторые - дхарматой. Конечно, в дхармате нет никакого различени, а значит и дхарм в их привычной роли "различающего знания". В этом смысле, АВ претендует на статус "несуществующая", продолжая оставаться действенной.

[Sadhak]

------A buddiyskie praktiki perezhivali nichto nekonzeptualno. -----

Неконцептуально это восприятие без мысли? Все равно есть носитель восприятия, это ничего не меняет, дихотомия все та же и "невосприятия", пустоты или небытия от этого реальности себе не прибавит. Чтобы пустота была, нужен тот кто ее засвидетельствует, а значит она уже не пуста от ее воспринимающего, будь это концептуально или нет... Представление появляется позже, но означает ли это, что в то момент не было того, кто бы его получил в результате восприятия? Может ли кто-то сказать, что его нет? Или воспринять свое небытие? Пустоту от себя?

[Zvuki]

Esli bhavanga - eto dharma, postigaemaya mezhdu drugimi dharmami, to

Предлагая рассматривать бхавангу не как междхармье, а как дхарму, я вовсе не имел в виду, что она непременно должна вставляться между любыми двумя дхармами, а имел в виду, что это дхарма, которая постигается практиками как «ничто». Регулярность же и количество её вставок между дхармами должно, по идее, определяться неким законом. Этим же законом, по идее, будет определяться и продолжительность единичной (между предшевствующей небхаванга-дхармой и последующей небхаванга-дхармой) бхаванги.

Mne kazhetsa, chto bhavanga, kotoraya v abhidharme sluzhit chem-to vrode tochki otscheta,

Дак всё-таки, кто-нибудь может подсказать, где именно в абхидхарме говорится о бхаванге?

nikAja = sabhAgatA – сила, производящая общность или однородность бытий (существований), двойник реалистической общности вайшешиков.

Vy imeete v vidu sattA?
Eto bytie kak takovoe, vsya polnota bytiya.
Esli ponimat' bhavangu kak sinonim alaya-vijnany, to po shirote eto ponyatie s sattoi sopostavimo.
No uzh bolno vaisheshika i buddizm raznye sistemy, vryad li podobnoe sopostavlenie chto-nibud' dast

Это была цитата из Щербатского (оранжевая книга, стр.196), в том числе и параллель с вайшешиками. Насколько я понимаю, он говорит не о «всей полноте бытия», а лишь о «силе, производящей общность бытия».