Mr J holds the view of universal consciousness, Soh replies on how universal consciousness is also an abstraction.

Yes, there is only Consciousness appearing AS all mental, perceptual, sensory and physical phenomena. The Nature of Consciousness is its emptiness, it’s Knowingness and it’s self-manifestations. You ARE Consciousness.
FRI 3:13 PM
Refuge in what’s Knowing There is only a single, Universal Consciousness appearing AS all mental, perceptual, sensory and physical phenomena. The Nature of Consciousness is its emptiness, its Knowingness and its self-manifestations. You ARE this Universal Consciousness. This can be known by knowing and being what’s knowing, in and AS every experience. Any experience is your current mode of appearing AS that appearance. The most essential nature of Universal Consciousness is the “empty knowing”; the empty knowing which is appearing AS all mental, perceptual, sensory and physical experiences and all imaginary identities. When attentive awareness is relaxed “back” into its ultimate source as the “empty knowing”; an “awareness of awareness” arises as a flash of cognitive self-knowing. This gnostic flash is called rigpa in Dzogchen. Any troublesome mental, psychological or physical sensations vanish DURING this flash, because Consciousness is now appearing AS that flash of empty knowingness, instead of appearing as those energetic phenomena which define our many modes of “suffering”.
FRI 6:38 PM
25 December 2007: (11:54 AM) Thusness: if there is no universal consciousness, then what is the ultimate in buddhism? (11:55 AM) AEN____: emptiness, dependent arising (11:55 AM) Thusness: yes (11:56 AM) Thusness: so what is buddhist teaching about consciousness? (11:56 AM) AEN____: they're conditions? (11:56 AM) Thusness: what do u mean by conditions? (11:57 AM) Thusness: first u must understand AEN stream is AEN stream. (11:57 AM) Thusness: Thusness stream is Thusness stream of consciousness (11:57 AM) Thusness: consciousness is non-dual and empty (11:58 AM) Thusness: and after understanding, to live as what we truly are. (11:58 AM) Thusness: that is all. (11:58 AM) AEN____: oic.. (11:59 AM) Thusness: all experiences are non-dual and empty (11:59 AM) Thusness: this stream of Thusness consciousness is not AEN stream of consciousness (11:59 AM) AEN____: oic (12:00 PM) Thusness: and the purpose of practice is to live as what we originally are. (12:00 PM) Thusness: pure luminosity (12:00 PM) Thusness: and know that our nature is empty. (12:00 PM) AEN____: icic.. (12:00 PM) Thusness: therefore the entire experience is oriented into DO (Dependent Origination). (12:00 PM) Thusness: there is no universal consciousness (12:01 PM) AEN____: oic.. yea (12:01 PM) Thusness: the ultimate understanding is to know what consciousness is and know manifestion is what DO has expressed. (12:02 PM) Thusness: to correctly see consciousness as it is. (12:02 PM) Thusness: nothing else. (12:02 PM) AEN____: icic.. (12:02 PM) Thusness: to experience clarity of our luminosity and its emptiness nature. (12:02 PM) Thusness: the problem is we don't (12:02 PM) Thusness: we continue to speculate even after the glimpse (12:02 PM) Thusness: that is propensity (12:03 PM) Thusness: we don't tune ourselves into actual practice (12:04 PM) Thusness: into experiencing the fullest clarity of our luminous and empty nature. (12:04 PM) Thusness: we do live as pure awareness (12:04 PM) Thusness: don't (12:04 PM) Thusness: that is the problem. (12:04 PM) Thusness: we continue to engage in arbitrary thoughts because of propensities. (12:04 PM) Thusness: we give importance, meanings (12:05 PM) Thusness: when u hear sound free of symbols, is it important? (12:05 PM) AEN____: the experience is impt not the meaning (12:06 PM) AEN____: ya its not impt (12:06 PM) Thusness: have i told u that chanting is important in the chant, not the meaning? (12:07 PM) AEN____: yea u told me (12:07 PM) Thusness: why so? (12:08 PM) AEN____: cos the mind can never grasp the experience? (12:09 PM) Thusness: and what does that mean? (12:09 PM) AEN____: tat means the mind can never 'understand' or 'know' (12:10 PM) Thusness: knowing has not taken its proper place. (12:10 PM) Thusness: first u must know what is the conventional mind about. (12:10 PM) Thusness: it is about views and meanings are derived from these views. (12:10 PM) Thusness: it is about constructs. (12:11 PM) Thusness: the conventional mind is full of meanings and purposes. (12:11 PM) Thusness: that is what it is about. (12:11 PM) Thusness: therefore the mind cannot understand because understanding is not the way. (12:12 PM) Thusness: but to such dualistic mind, it immediately concludes that if there is no 'knowing' then we become a dumb dumb...a rock.. (12:12 PM) AEN____: lol (12:13 PM) Thusness: because our mind is full of abitrary thoughts and views, it is loaded with meanings and purposes. (12:13 PM) Thusness: when bare attention is taught, the mind cannot 'see'. (12:14 PM) Thusness: because it has no meaning, purpose, views, constructs whatsoever. (12:14 PM) AEN____: icic.. (12:14 PM) Thusness: the essence cannot be intuitively grasped. (12:14 PM) Thusness: however when the mind settles and is calm (12:15 PM) Thusness: it is not looking for meaning (12:15 PM) Thusness: is a person sitting still meaningful? (12:15 PM) Thusness: is absorption meaningful? (12:15 PM) Thusness: a practitioner when engaged in such activities experiences differently. (12:15 PM) AEN____: no (12:16 PM) Thusness: it touches the world of luminosity, presence and spontaneity. (12:16 PM) AEN____: icic (12:16 PM) Thusness: the unconditioned, the aliveness, spontaneity, oneness (12:16 PM) Thusness: the Presence (12:17 PM) AEN____: oic (12:17 PM) Thusness: is not about meaning. (12:17 PM) AEN____: ya.. (12:17 PM) Thusness: it is just that Presence that replaces all and the knowing is immediate and intuitive. (12:18 PM) Thusness: it is to see and understand our nature and experience in all circumstances, Presence is always there. (12:18 PM) Thusness: and know to be truly alive, presence must be experienced. (12:19 PM) Thusness: u can say this is the direct knowing in contrast to the dualistic knowing of a conventional mind. (12:20 PM) Thusness: so a practitioner's entire experience is oriented into experiencing its luminous empty nature and realises all as its manifestations. (12:21 PM) Thusness: but saying all as its manifestation is not to say i am u. (12:21 PM) AEN____: icic.. (12:21 PM) Thusness: that is a dualistic subject and object view. (12:22 PM) AEN____: oic (12:23 PM) Thusness: u must know the advaita sort of experience when they say all is consciousness (12:23 PM) Thusness: is different. (12:23 PM) Thusness: they are talking about the sensor, the knower (12:23 PM) Thusness: cannot be known and is ultimate (12:23 PM) Thusness: from the known. (12:24 PM) AEN____: icic.. (12:24 PM) AEN____: then how is that 'all' (12:24 PM) Thusness: but to a buddhist that is non dualist, the sensor is known through the known (12:25 PM) Thusness: the sensed/known is the instrument for sensing the sensor (12:25 PM) Thusness: the sensor is also the instrument for sensing the sensed (12:26 PM) Thusness: both the sensor and the sensed are equally unknowable and known (12:26 PM) AEN____: oic.. (12:26 PM) Thusness: both having one taste. (12:26 PM) Thusness: inseparable. (12:26 PM) AEN____: the 'sensor' is the citta rite (12:27 PM) Thusness: yeah (12:27 PM) Thusness: purity is not being free of anything (12:27 PM) Thusness: is to know our empty nature that is ever manifesting (12:27 PM) AEN____: icic.. (12:28 PM) Thusness: citta is consciousness of the conceptual mind (12:28 PM) Thusness: the knower (12:28 PM) Thusness: the knower can only exist in analysis and thinking (12:29 PM) Thusness: it does not exist in complete bare attention. (12:29 PM) Thusness: an observer exists when we try to reconfirm an experience (12:29 PM) Thusness: when we recall (12:29 PM) Thusness: and arises as a result of comparision (12:29 PM) AEN____: oic.. (12:29 PM) Thusness: seems to exist but does not. (12:30 PM) Thusness: a manifestation that is non-dual in nature is not a stage (12:30 PM) Thusness: it is not a stage that we eliminate our 'selfs' (12:30 PM) Thusness: the observer (12:30 PM) Thusness: it is to know that the 'observer' is an illusion. (12:31 PM) Thusness: so that the DO and luminosity emptiness nature is seen. (12:32 PM) Thusness: DO is the right perspective of non-dual experience for the conventional mind to 'see'. (12:33 PM) AEN____: icic.. (12:33 PM) Thusness: once this is seen, we must 'turn' and allow that 'dualistic propensity' to dissolve (12:33 PM) Thusness: there are many ways but bare attention and naked awareness to me is best. (12:34 PM) Thusness: once the nature is understood, the 6 paramitas is understood. (12:35 PM) Thusness: we do not engage ourselves into useless speculation further knowing that it is propensities that blind. (12:35 PM) Thusness: instead, we work at all levels to allow conditions to meet and allow propensities to manifest (12:36 PM) Thusness: practice the parimatas in all circumstances to all conditions to mirror the latent deep and dissolve that sense of self. (12:36 PM) Thusness: it is not to create useless construct and understand meanings (12:37 PM) Thusness: but experience that luminous empty nature in all activities by dissolving the sense of self. (12:38 PM) Thusness: so when one continues to make sense of after non-dual experience, he will confuse himself further. (12:38 PM) Thusness: he has no clarity of the unconditioned, the unborn, the aliveness yet (12:39 PM) Thusness: the 'bond' or the tendency to 'hold' will manifest when meeting conditions (12:39 PM) Thusness: that is where the practice is. (12:40 PM) Thusness: when such condition does not arise, one rest in naked awareness (12:40 PM) Thusness: absorption in pure luminosity in every authentication. (12:41 PM) Thusness: when hearing, just the sound. (12:41 PM) Thusness: the sound is the rigpa so to speak. (12:41 PM) Thusness: it is the depth of clarity of this experience. (12:41 PM) Thusness: dzogchen called it contemplation (12:41 PM) Thusness: i called it vipassanic (12:42 PM) Thusness: bare and naked of a manifestation (12:42 PM) Thusness: whatever we call it doesn't matter. (12:42 PM) Thusness: it is to have this clarity of luminosity (12:42 PM) Thusness: before split (12:43 PM) Thusness: that is the practice. (12:43 PM) Thusness: till one reaches permanent lucidity (12:43 PM) Thusness: a non-dualist that has stabilized this experience does not have a subject-object split. (12:44 PM) Thusness: he does not have a body, sensation, touching...etc mental construct (12:44 PM) Thusness: if we want to say, his world view is luminosity of manifestation according to DO. (12:44 PM) Thusness: that is his world view. (12:45 PM) AEN____: icic.. (12:45 PM) AEN____: wat u mean by "he does not have a body, sensation, touching...etc mental construct" (12:45 PM) Thusness: he becomes a whole manifestation of luminosity-emptiness (12:45 PM) Thusness: means he doesn't have an idea that a body, or hand, or sensation touches anything (12:46 PM) Thusness: just like what i told u about the vibration of someone opening the door. (12:46 PM) AEN____: oic.. (12:47 PM) Thusness: otherwise when u kept saying the universe eats an apple, what do u mean? (12:47 PM) Thusness: :P (12:47 PM) Thusness: just tok tok ah (12:47 PM) Thusness: then how can u know what is chanting (12:47 PM) Thusness: the world of maha (12:48 PM) Thusness: there is only the sense of self that limits (12:48 PM) Thusness: nothing else. (12:48 PM) Thusness: when we doubt, it is only when we think and divide. (12:48 PM) Thusness: not in the actual experience of practice. (12:48 PM) AEN____: icic.. (12:49 PM) AEN____: haha (12:49 PM) Thusness: but u must understand it before u post anything. Don't just cut and paste. (12:49 PM) AEN____: lol.. ok (12:50 PM) Thusness: a person cannot orientate himself totally into DO because he still react to his habitual dualistic way of understanding things. (12:51 PM) Thusness: he unknowingly continues to orientate himself his non-dual experience in a dualistic mode and gets confused. (12:52 PM) Thusness: so one must put in real effort and practice diligently till 'turning point' (12:53 PM) Thusness: that is all dualistic views are replaced with non-dual insight. (12:53 PM) Thusness: this comes from being bare in attention. (12:53 PM) AEN____: oic.. (12:53 PM) Thusness: dualistic way of apprehension can still continue after that. (12:54 PM) Thusness: but it is understood as a tool to get ourselves around. (12:54 PM) Thusness: no more than that. (12:54 PM) Thusness: one is not confused. (12:55 PM) AEN____: icic..
No Universal Mind Explanation by Krodha is good. Question: Do all minds ultimately merge and become one, or will there always be many minds? From page 118 of the book ‘Inborn Realization’ by Khenpo Tsewang Dongyal “There is not and will never be a single mind that is shared by everyone—there will always be limitless individual minds. Everyone, whether enlightened or not, has his or her own mind. Each individual mind can and does reflect everything and everybody. For these reasons, the teachings say that everyone is the sovereign ruler of his or her universe.” 29 comments View all comments User avatar level 1 krodha · 13h From page 118 of the book ‘Inborn Realization’ by Khenpo Tsewang Dongyal “There is not and will never be a single mind that is shared by everyone—there will always be limitless individual minds. Everyone, whether enlightened or not, has his or her own mind. Each individual mind can and does reflect everything and everybody. For these reasons, the teachings say that everyone is the sovereign ruler of his or her universe.” Very nice. This seems to bother some people, but if they understood that removing the two obscurations unbinds the mind and exhausts the bifurcation into an inner subjective experience versus an outer external world, and everything is then experienced as one’s own immaculate self-display, then perhaps they would not object to multiple conventional mindstreams. It seems this issue always boils down to people struggling with how convention is understood and applied. 12 User avatar level 2 neoalien · 13h Can you please throw some light on "removing the two obscurations unbinds the mind" . Also my conceptual mind is telling me that when you say "experienced as one’s own immaculate self-display" it means it will feel like watching a life film of my character(neoalien) 3 User avatar level 3 tyinsf · 11h two obscurations Two obscurations (Tib. སྒྲིབ་པ་གཉིས་, dribpa nyi; Wyl. sgrib pa gnyis) — emotional and cognitive obscurations. Emotional obscurations are defined according to their essence, cause and function. In essence, they are the opposite of the six paramitas, as described in the Gyü Lama: "Thoughts such as avarice and so on, These are the emotional obscurations." Their cause is grasping at a personal ego, or the “self of the individual”. They function to prevent liberation from samsara. Cognitive obscurations are also defined according to their essence, cause and function. In essence, they are thoughts that involve the three conceptual ‘spheres’ of subject, object and action. The Gyü Lama says: "Thoughts that involve the three spheres, These are the cognitive obscurations." Their cause is grasping at phenomena as truly existent, or, in other words, the “self of phenomena”. Their function is to prevent complete enlightenment. 8 User avatar level 4 moontara Op · 10h wow great! 2 User avatar level 3 krodha · 10h The two obscurations are at root, the afflictive obscuration which is the perception of an internal self, and the cognitive obscuration, which is the perception of external objects. 5
FRI 7:58 PM
Tsewang Dongyal’s view is difficult to accord with both regarding dependent origination as well as a “common shared ground” which all beings are observing through their own sensory systems. This is how we can both describe the same tree with almost exact same descriptions. It would also require a perfect solipsism for his view. I would say no “Soveriegn” is possible in Dogen’s view nor according to dependent origination. But I am saying there is only one universe which we are all experiencing differently. I am saying the universe itself is Consciousness. Each person has there own mind for sure, which never merges with any other mind or universal Mind. But each individual mind is only a dependent arising associated with and embedded within the total field of dependencies.
FRI 10:47 PM
This makes Dzogchen itself a questionable “view” indeed.
“Sovereign” over what? Emptiness Candrakırti’s "Entrance into the Knowledge of Madhyamaka" says: "In this natural state of primordial nonarising: There is nothing to be negated and nothing to be affirmed. Nirvana and non-Nirvana are without difference in the natural state of nonarising. This is not even nonarising as such. Because arising things do not exist. The seeming (conventional) does not exist, the ultimate does not exist, Buddhas do not exist, sentient beings do not exist, views do not exist, something to be meditated on does not exist. Conduct does not exist, and results do not exist: The actuality of this is what is to be cultivated. Let this mind free from thoughts rest in its own peace. Without identifying something, without being distracted, Without characteristics and luminous—thus meditated"
2:33 AM
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2011/03/realization-experience-and-right-view_13.html
Therefore to see that all dusts are primordially pure from before beginning is the whole purpose of maturing the insight of anatta. The following text succinctly expresses this insight: ...According to Dogen, this “oceanic-body” does not contain the myriad forms, nor is it made up of myriad forms – it is the myriad forms themselves. The same instruction is provided at the beginning of Shobogenzo, Gabyo (pictured rice-cakes) where, he asserts that, “as all Buddhas are enlightenment” (sho, or honsho), so too, “all dharmas are enlightenment” which he says does not mean they are simply “one” nature or mind. Anything falling short of this realization cannot be said to be Buddhist's enlightenment and it is also what your Taiwanese teacher Chen wanted you to be clear when he spoke of the "equality of dharma" as having an initial glimpse of anatta will not result in practitioners seeing that phenomena are themselves primordially pure. ..... ... In my opinion the quote is not about an expression of a perfectly transparent and clear state of mind where object and subject collapsed into an undifferentiated oneness reflecting myraid forms. This would just simply be a non-dual state; rather it is a perfection in insight of seeing what that is truly happening in this instantaneous moment of suchness. The myriad forms are presenting themselves in plain simplicity and the myriad forms have always been what we called ‘mind’. The texture, the fabric, the shape, the vivid colors, the myriad appearances in primordial purity has always been 'mind' itself! Yet do not mistake that 'mind' is the one substance that made up the myriad forms for this is a distorted inherent view. It is simply a label denoting this instantaneous moment of vivid arising that entails the total exertion of the universe. This 'total exertion' is not by way of 'effort' and no amount of 'effort' will lead to 'total exertion'; this 'total exertion' is by way of realizing the 2 fold empty nature of whatever arises. Therefore To study the mind is to study the myriad forms. To study the myriad forms is to study the dependently originated appearance at this instantaneous moment. To study this instantaneous moment is to understand the full exertion of the 'interconnected universe' and this full exertion is expressed without reservation as this vivid moment of arising sound...this breath...this passing thought...this obviously clear scenery... and Instantly Gone! 3. Do not anticipate, Do not oppose The previous section is essentially realizing that the "Ocean" is something extra, in actuality it does not exist. However the arising insight of "no agent" does not naturally lead to the realization that: “A preceding thought-moment and a succeeding thought-moment do not anticipate each other; a preceding dharma and a succeeding dharma do not oppose each other." You have written a post relating to this matter where you spoke of the difference between the first and second stanza. I think it is more relevant than seeing it as the total exertion in an instantaneous moment as presented by Ted. This arising moment of myriad appearance is the full embodiment of past, present and future 'total exertion', hence "existence-time" is an invaluable insight but relates more to the experience of maha. For the purpose of your practice, before going deeply into 'total exertion', it is advisable to first directly experience the 'releasing from the chain (of birth and death)' by realizing that thought moment "do not anticipate each other and dharma do not oppose each other". In my opinion, without this de-linking the chain of thought-moment and seeing that manifestation is continuously springing up non-dually, non-locally and unsupported, the 'Samadhi' of the Ocean-Seal will not be adequately understood. Also in between ”seeing the Ocean as extra” to directly experiencing the “total exertion in the ceaselessness of this ongoing activity”, a process of maturing the insight of anatta is necessary. By maturing I am referring to the ending of any reification of mind-objects be it "Self/self", "here/now", "mind", "body", "weather"... -- there is no "Self/self", only changing aggregates; no "body", only changing sensations; no “here and now” besides changing phenomena; no "weather" besides changing clouds, rain and sun shines. If this insight can be thoroughly extended to whatever arises then the interconnectedness and total exertion of this moment will become clear and obvious. So much so that when eating an apple, the universe tastes it! -- the full exertion of the apple, the hand, the taste, the throat, the stomach, the everything of everything is completely transcended into this simple action of suchness where nothing is excluded. Here again, do take note that this "total exertion" is not the result of being fully concentrated; it is the natural outcome when practitioners have adequately embraced the 'view' of 2 fold emptiness. In summary I think this is an excellent article written from deep experiential insight. However the article seems to emphasize more “A” than “not A”. Although there is the mentioning of the “casting off”, it is quickly overshadowed by the emphasis of “total exertion”, the grounding in the “here and now” and the affirming of the ‘Self’ in the arising and ceasing. “Here” and “Now” are simply impressions formed by the senses. Fundamentally there is nothing truly ”here”, nothing truly “now” and nothing truly “self”. Though the universe (with all causes and conditions) is fully exerting to make this moment possible, it is nothing real. In my opinion the recent post written by Pegembara in your forum provides a good balance to Ted’s insight of “total exertion”. Just my 2 cents. 🙂
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2011/03/is-is.html
Dogen explains that although Buddhas and ancestors actualize various kinds of enlightenment (e.g. original, acquired, initial, etc.), there is more to Buddhas and ancestors than that. The “body” that the Buddha spoke of as consisting of the “integrated form” of myriad dharmas should not be hastily regarded as a “single unified form” (of undifferentiated oneness). According to Dogen, this “oceanic-body” does not contain the myriad forms, nor is it made up of myriad forms – it is the myriad forms themselves. The same instruction is provided at the beginning of Shobogenzo, Gabyo (pictured rice-cakes) where, he asserts that, “as all Buddhas are enlightenment” (sho, or honsho), so too, “all dharmas are enlightenment” which he says does not mean they are simply “one” nature or mind. On that line from Gabyo, Hee-Jin Kim comments: All Buddhas and all things cannot be reduced to a static entity or principle symbolized as one mind, one nature, or the like. This guards against views that devaluate the unique, irreplaceable individuality of a single dharma. Hee-Jin Kim, Flowers of Emptiness, p.257 In Kaiin Zammai, the “arising” of dharmas, says Dogen, is the actualization of a specific moment of time. “Existence,” being coessential and coextensive with “experience,” the “arising of dharmas” is synonymous with our experience here and now. The arising of myriad dharmas is itself authentic practice-enlightenment.For Dogen, “zazen” is the archetypal symbol of this “practice-enlightenment.” Zazen is “mustering the whole body-mind (the whole of existence-time, inclusive of “A” and “not-A”) to look at forms and listen to sounds,” which is described by Dogen as “direct experience.” This “direct experience” is not only hearing, seeing, etc.; it is the arising of an ‘I’.” As in Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, “The myriad things advance and confirm the self.” Thus, the “arising of dharmas” (the myriad particular things of experience) is itself “the one” totality of existence-time which is itself the whole, real, ever advancing body-mind of Buddha at each (and every) particular moment of existence-time. In other words, the totality of “myriad” dharmas right now are - as they are - the “one” body-mind of Buddha right now. This “body-mind” is immediately “cast off” and the new totality of myriad dharmas is fully exerted as the one body-mind of Buddha, which is immediately cast off as the “body-mind of Buddha” ceaselessly advances into novelty – This! Now this! Now this! Now this! The “body-mind” of the Buddha (or Universe) that is manifested or actualized with each now total exertion “contains” or is “inclusive of” all previous total exertions (body-minds of Buddha) which, being “real dharmas” occupy dharma-positions (specific coordinates of space-and-time; uji, existence time), and therefore are “one of the myriad dharmas” that constitute the body-mind of Buddha here and now (i.e. their particular instance of existence forms part of the “fabric” of this particular instance of existence). Also, the “body-mind” of the Buddha here and now “contains” or is “inclusive of” all future total exertions (body-minds of Buddha) which, being “real potentials” are, and must be “real dharmas,” hence, actually present here and now. Thus, Dogen’s teaching, “Nothing in the whole universe has ever been concealed.”
"I am saying the universe itself is Consciousness. Each person has there own mind for sure, which never merges with any other mind or universal Mind. But each individual mind is only a dependent arising associated with and embedded within the total field of dependencies." ok " But I am saying there is only one universe which we are all experiencing differently. " 'One' and 'many' are both reifications that Nagarjuna negated in the MMK. Also universals are rejected by Dharmakirti. Loppon Namdrol/Malcolm: "Buddhism is all its forms is strictly nominalist, and rejects all universals (samanya-artha) as being unreal abstractions." Dogen likewise taught, Ted Biringer says: While it may be contrary to the suggestions of many that claim to represent Zen or Dogen, true nature, according to the classic Zen records (including Shobogenzo) is ever and always immediately present, particular, and precise. Notions or assertions suggesting that Zen is somehow mysterious, ineffable, or inexpressible are simply off the mark. The only place such terms can be accurately applied in Zen is to definite mysteries, particular unknowns, and specific inexpressible experiences. Indeed, in Zen, the terms definite, particular, and specific accurately characterize all dharmas. Dogen’s refrain, ‘Nothing in the whole universe is concealed’ means exactly what it says; no reality is the least bit obscure or vague. To emphasize this truth, the assertion that ‘real form is all dharmas’ runs like a mantra throughout Shobogenzo, for example: “The realization of the Buddhist patriarchs is perfectly realized real form. Real form is all dharmas. All dharmas are forms as they are, natures as they are, body as it is, the mind as it is, the world as it is, clouds and rain as they are, walking, standing, sitting, and lying down, as they are; sorrow and joy, movement and stillness, as they are; a staff and a whisk, as they are; a twirling flower and a smiling face, as they are; succession of the Dharma and affirmation, as they are; learning in practice and pursuing the truth, as they are; the constancy of pines and the integrity of bamboos, as they are. Shobogenzo, Shoho-Jisso[199]” In light of Shobogenzo’s (hence Zen’s) vision of existence-time (uji), existence (ontology; being) and time are not-two (nondual); dharmas are not simply existents in time, they are existents of time, and (all) time is in and of existents (i.e. dharmas). In short, dharmas do not exist independent of time, and time does not exist independent of dharmas. On a corollary note, since (all) existence demonstrates the quality of ‘impermanence,’ time too is impermanent. In Zen the nonduality of impermanence and time is treated in terms of ‘ceaseless advance’ or ‘ever passing’ – ‘ceaseless’ and ‘ever’ connoting ‘permanence’ or ‘eternity,’ ‘advance’ and ‘passing’ indicating ‘impermanence’ or ‘temporal’ (temporary). Accordingly, ‘impermanence’ is ‘permanent’ and ‘change’ is ‘changeless’ – existence-time ever-always (eternally) advances (changes).[92] Dogen’s vision of reality exploits the significance of this to the utmost, unfolding its most profound implications with his notion of ‘the self-obstruction of a single dharma’ or ‘the total exertion of a single dharma’ (ippo gujin). This notion reveals a number of important implications concerning the nature of existence-time; two of which are: Each and all dharmas reveal, disclose, or present the whole universe (the totality of existence-time). Each and all dharmas are inherently infinite and eternal. Biringer, Ted. Zen Cosmology: Dogen's Contribution to the Search for a New Worldview (p. 34). ZazensatioN. Kindle Edition. .... “In Dogen’s view, the only reality is reality that is actually experienced as particular things at specific times. There is no “tile nature” apart from actual “tile forms,” there is no “essential Baso” apart from actual instances of “Baso experience.” When Baso sits in zazen, “zazen” becomes zazen, and “Baso” becomes Baso. Real instances of Baso sitting in zazen is real instances of Baso and real instances of zazen – when Baso eats rice, Baso is really Baso and eating rice is really eating rice.” - Ted Biringer,
https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2017/11/zazen-polishing-tile-to-make-mirror.html
-
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2019/03/the-magical-fairytale-like-wonderland.html?m=1
same goes for those that assert 'One Global Consciousness', not realising that it too is an abstraction, as this person who realised anatta wrote
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2019/01/no-awareness-does-not-mean-non.html
There is no denial of consciousness (vijñāna) in Buddhism. In fact, its actual translation in some texts is 'dualistic consciousness'. It is not a denial of consciousness, because without consciousness, how can you see, hear, taste, smell, touch and think? In SN25.3, however, Buddha says: Monks, eye-consciousness is inconstant, changeable, alterable. Ear-consciousness... Nose-consciousness... Tongue-consciousness... Body-consciousness... Intellect-consciousness is inconstant, changeable, alterable. The error is not in seeing the results of the function of what you call awareness, but taking awareness to be a singular real thing. For example, it is undeniable that there are sights, sounds, tastes, smells, touch and thoughts. We are not denying that. In fact, Buddha says that for every sense-object, there is a corresponding consciousness. So actually, there are six different sense-consciousnesses: The eye-consciousness in dependence with sight and the eye-faculty The ear-consciousness, sounds, ear-faculty... ... The thinking-consciousness, thoughts, thinking-faculty The error comes when we start to group all these six together within one singular boundary - we reify the sense of a global consciousness that extends throughout these six. In the Mahayana teachings, this is explained as the seventh consciousness grasping at what is seen, heard, smelt, tasted, touched or thought of as Objects, and at the seeing/hearing/smelling/tasting/touching/thinking faculties as the Subject. Here is an analogy: When we say the word 'Shapes' what comes to mind? We can say rectangles, squares, stars, circles, lines, polygons, parallelograms, and more. However, if we simply said the word "shape", this word by itself would not mean anything without the rectangles, squares, stars [...]. This is what we call in language, an abstract noun. In the dictionary, it says this as the definition: "a noun denoting an idea, quality, or state rather than a concrete object". In the same way, we have a tendency to abstract-ize things and form very concrete ideas of them existing. Does it mean that rectangles, squares [...] are not shapes? It does not mean that. However, the word "shape" by itself is very meaningless - we conventionally call it a shape for the sake of convenience. In fact, we just assume that it exists just for the sake of convenience. In the same way, when sights, sounds, tastes, smells, sensations, and thoughts arise, we group them all together as "sense objects" or "experience". These are just names, just conceptual designations, that are abstract ideas pointing to what is directly there in experience. The problem when taken to extreme is that it is solidified as "Objects". In the converse way, when the seeing-consciousness [...] are grouped in an abstract way, we take it as a singular consciousness. Even more erroneously, we can even go as far as to extend this abstraction to every being on the planet. Again, this is just a name, an abstract idea, pointing to the six consciousnesses. When taken to the extreme, it is solidified as a "Subject". In fact, this subject-object duality is the root of a lot of problems. We love abstract-ifying things and then solidifying that abstracted idea into something that seems very real. For example, we can take a bunch of common bodily sensations and think that we are "right here". If you examine carefully, these sensations have already disappeared, and are replaced with another bunch of rapidly arising-and-passing-away sensations in random locations. To end this reply, I would also like to quote this sutta (Ud 1.10) which points directly to the heart of no self: 'In the seen will be merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely what is cognized.' In this way you should train yourself, Bahiya. "When, Bahiya, for you in the seen is merely what is seen... in the cognized is merely what is cognized, then, Bahiya, you will not be 'with that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'with that,' then, Bahiya, you will not be 'in that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'in that,' then, Bahiya, you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two. Just this is the end of suffering."
this is also the point john tan made about 'awareness' and 'weather'
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/10/differentiating-i-am-one-mind-no-mind.html
14/4/13 7:35:01 PM: John Tan: When u say "weather", does weather exist? 14/4/13 7:35:20 PM: Soh Wei Yu: No 14/4/13 7:35:42 PM: Soh Wei Yu: It's a convention imputed on a seamless activity 14/4/13 7:35:54 PM: Soh Wei Yu: Existence and non existence don't apply 14/4/13 7:36:02 PM: John Tan: What is the basis where this label rely on 14/4/13 7:36:16 PM: Soh Wei Yu: Rain clouds wind etc 14/4/13 7:36:25 PM: John Tan: Don't talk prasanga 14/4/13 7:36:36 PM: John Tan: Directly see 14/4/13 7:38:11 PM: John Tan: Rain too is a label 14/4/13 7:39:10 PM: John Tan: But in direct experience, there is no issue but when probed, u realized how one is confused abt the reification from language 14/4/13 7:39:52 PM: John Tan: And from there life/death/creation/cessation arise 14/4/13 7:40:06 PM: John Tan: And whole lots of attachment 14/4/13 7:40:25 PM: John Tan: But it does not mean there is no basis...get it? 14/4/13 7:40:45 PM: Soh Wei Yu: The basis is just the experience right 14/4/13 7:41:15 PM: John Tan: Yes which is plain and simple 14/4/13 7:41:50 PM: John Tan: When we say the weather is windy 14/4/13 7:42:04 PM: John Tan: Feel the wind, the blowing... 14/4/13 7:43:04 PM: John Tan: But when we look at language and mistaken verb for nouns there r big issues 14/4/13 7:43:22 PM: John Tan: So before we talk abt this and that 14/4/13 7:43:40 PM: John Tan: Understand what consciousness is and awareness is 14/4/13 7:43:45 PM: John Tan: Get it? 14/4/13 7:44:40 PM: John Tan: When we say weather, feel the sunshine, the wind, the rain 14/4/13 7:44:58 PM: John Tan: U do not search for weather 14/4/13 7:45:04 PM: John Tan: Get it? 14/4/13 7:45:57 PM: John Tan: Similarly, when we say awareness, look into scenery, sound, tactile sensations, scents and thoughts
3:25 AM
Your missing the point: there is one universe not several. Quantum physics as well as the Special Theory of Relativity makes this clear. Due to total interdependence, there are no separate parts possible. So then, what is this single universe? Energy? Matter? Mind? Karmic mental visions? If quantum field theory holds true, all that seems to manifest are vibrational frequencies; but frequencies of what? Notice how any experience of the five skandhas occurs only within consciousness. Looking more closely, we find no distance or separation between consciousness and the five skandhas. This would imply that the five skandhas are the same AS consciousness. When the Buddha says one needs to “let go” of the five skandhas… who or what “lets go” of the five skandhas? It can’t be part of the five skandhas, can it? No. We don’t need to use the term “mind”, because mind is personal to a brain or a single person. I am saying the “stuff” of the universe is “consciousness”, not energy, matter or mind. I say that because Prasangika states phenomena are merely thought constructions not matter or objects. Aren’t “thought constructions” merely waves of consciousness, dependently arisen phenomena inseparable from the entire universe? This universal consciousness is not a super Big Mind that has a central capacity to act, think or to know. The universe AS consciousness is a non-centralized cognitive Nature. All phenomena are consciousness because no phenomena can be experienced outside of consciousness.
11:01 AM
the universe or 'one consciousness' is also an abstraction. if we talk about net of indra, sure, one node reflects all nodes, all nodes is one node, total exertion. it is not however the case that one node is equivalent to another node, each node is conventionally still each node and does not merge into some universal mind. also, there is no 'universe' other than an abstraction for these nodes. in anatta, mind, body, world, universe, all deconstructed into the total exertion. John Tan wrote in 2012, "I do not see practice apart from realizing the essence and nature of awareness. The only difference is seeing Awareness as an ultimate essence or realizing awareness as this seamless activity that fills the entire Universe. When we say there is no scent of a flower, the scent is the flower.... that is because the mind, body, universe are all together deconstructed into this single flow, this scent and only this... Nothing else. That is the Mind that is no mind. There is not an Ultimate Mind that transcends anything in the Buddhist enlightenment. The mind Is this very manifestation of total exertion... wholly thus. Therefore there is always no mind, always only this vibration of moving train, this cooling air of the air-con, this breath... The question is after the 7 phases of insights can this be realized and experienced and becomes the ongoing activity of practice in enlightenment and enlightenment in practice -- practice-enlightenment."
if you insist that there is 'one universe' that truly exists, that is mistaking an abstraction to be some true reality, just like mistaking 'shape' as an entity existing of its own, or 'weather' as having some existence besides the rain, wind, sunshine, etc
Zen master Shohaku Okumura:
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/11/my-opinion-on-shurangama-sutra.html
As it is generally said, people don’t see this bright jewel. It is something hidden deeply within us. In this translation it says “the sixfold function miraculously performed by it…” Six-fold function refers to the function of the six sense organs when they encounter the six14 objects of sense organs. This refers to what we do every day, the things happening between subject and object such as seeing, hearing, sensing and knowing. All these things we do are done by this hidden bright jewel, Buddha Nature. This bright jewel is the subject of seeing, hearing, etc. ... ... Dogen’s Understanding of the Bright Jewel This poem is still considered as a classic of Zen Buddhism and no one thinks that this is a heretical teaching. This is considered an authentic Zen teaching. Probably Dogen is a rare Zen master who didn’t like this idea. The interactions of our six sense organs and the six objects of the sense organs are something we carry out day-to-day. Yet this poem says that there is something which is hidden and that that hidden thing called tathagata-garbha (buddha nature) is the subject that performs these day-to-day things. Here are two layers of reality; one is phenomena and another is probably, in Western philosophical world, called noumenon. Buddha Nature in this case is noumenon and things happening between subject and object are phenomena, and these phenomenal things are a function of the noumenon. That is the basic structure of this idea. I think this is what Dogen didn’t like, probably because viewing it from his practice of zazen, this theory is dualistic. There is the duality of phenomena and noumenon, or Buddha nature15and our day-to-day activities or one bright jewel and its conditioned black color. That is, I think, the basic problem for Dogen; thus he thinks this theory is not in accord with Buddhist teaching. Then, in the case of Dogen, what is this bright jewel? I think, the bright jewel in Dogen’s teaching is like a drop of water that is illuminated by moonlight. In the case of the structure of the theory of noumenon and phenomena, there’s no relation between phenomenal things. But as Dogen defines delusion and realization in his Genjokoan, delusion and realization are only within the relationship between self and myriad dharmas. In Genjokoan, Dogen used the word jiko(􀀂􀀁) and banpo(􀀄􀀃), and he said that conveying the self toward myriad things and carry out practice-enlightenment is delusion, and all myriad things coming toward the self and carrying out practice-enlightenment through the self is realization. In Shobogenzo Sokushinzebutsu (The Mind is itself Buddha), Dogen quotes Nanyan Huizong’s conversation with a monk from the south who criticizes the Zen teaching in the south, saying that the theory is the same as Senika’s, the non-Buddhist. Then the monk from the south asked Huizong, “Then what is the ancient Buddha mind?” Huizong replied, “Fences, walls, tiles and pebbles.” Dogen quotes this saying in Shobogenzo Kobutsushin (The Ancient Buddha Mind) and says at the end of Sokushinzebutsu, “The mind that has been authentically transmitted is one-mind is all things and all things are one-mind.” Here there is no duality between noumenon (the bright jewel) and phenomenal things (black color). I think Huizong and Dogen mention the interconnectedness of phenomenal things within the network of Indra’s Net. It’s not a matter of there being Buddha nature that is like a diamond inside the self and to find this diamond is realization. Dogen doesn’t like this idea. If this is the case, our practice is to find something inside ourselves, and we would be able to attain so-called realization or enlightenment when we’ve found this inner diamond. Then it would have nothing to do with our relationship with others. But in the case of Dogen, practice-enlightenment is to transform the way of our life. Transformation of our life can be only within the relationship between self and myriad things. In the same writing (Genjokoan), he says that the self is like a drop of water; it’s a tiny thing, and it is impermanent. The moonlight is the light of myriad dharmas. The self is a part of the network of interconnectedness of myriad things. This way of existing is the bright jewel. The bright jewel is not a permanent noumenon. We and all myriad things are born, stay for a while, and disappear; nothing is permanent. And yet this tiny drop of water is illuminated by all dharmas. There are numerous things and they are all interconnected with each other. Without this connection, this tiny drop of water cannot exist even for one moment. This bright jewel is like a knot of Indra’s net and each knot is a bright jewel. This bright jewel or drop of water is illuminated by everything, and this bright jewel or drop of water also illuminates everything. In this case,16this self is a part of the moonlight. This is like five fingers and one hand. One hand is simply a collection of five fingers. One hand is not a noumenon of five fingers. Practice-enlightenment or delusion and realization exist only within this relationship between self and all other beings. There is the difference of framework between the one bright jewel as noumenon and as a part of interdependent origination. I think this is the point Dogen wants to show us. When Dogen interprets Xuansha’s saying, “This entire ten-direction world is one bright jewel,” he is talking about the relationship between self and myriad things within the structure of the network of interdependent origination. Everything is reflected in one thing and, because this is a net, when we touch the one knot we touch the entire net. There is no separation between self and myriad things. It’s really one seamless reality. And yet within our views it seems subject and object are separate. Unless we understand this point and interpret the title “One Bright Jewel,” we don’t really understand what Dogen is talking about and why he had to say it in this way. Dogen’s interpretation might be different from what Xuansha expressed with this expression as I interpreted in the last issue based on Zongmi’s comparison of the four lineages.
You replied to yourself
the universe is also an abstraction. if we talk about net of indra, sure, one node reflects all nodes, all nodes is one node, total exertion. it is not however the case that one node is equivalent to another node, each node is conventionally still each node and does not merge into some universal mind. also, there is no 'universe' other than an abstraction for these nodes. in anatta, mind, body, world, universe, all deconstructed into the total exertion. John Tan wrote in 2012, "I do not see practice apart from realizing the essence and nature of awareness. The only difference is seeing Awareness as an ultimate essence or realizing awareness as this seamless activity that fills the entire Universe. When we say there is no scent of a flower, the scent is the flower.... that is because the mind, body, universe are all together deconstructed into this single flow, this scent and only this... Nothing else. That is the Mind that is no mind. There is not an Ultimate Mind that transcends anything in the Buddhist enlightenment. The mind Is this very manifestation of total exertion... wholly thus. Therefore there is always no mind, always only this vibration of moving train, this cooling air of the air-con, this breath... The question is after the 7 phases of insights can this be realized and experienced and becomes the ongoing activity of practice in enlightenment and enlightenment in practice -- practice-enlightenment."
correction: in initial anatta, mind/consciousness/awareness-as-subject or as noumenon is seen through and deconstructed into 'in the seen, just the seen, in the heard just sound', in mature anatta extending into twofold emptiness, then mind, body, world, universe, all deconstructed into the total exertion and empty clarity.
0 Responses