[19/5/20, 1:08:25 AM] John Tan: The purpose is actually to trigger about bahiya sutta

[19/5/20, 1:08:57 AM] John Tan: Unfortunately the Chinese sutta may not be able to translate the bahiya sutta properly

[19/5/20, 1:09:38 AM] John Tan: Many translate in the seen just the seen as a form of total concentration into a state of no mind.

[19/5/20, 1:09:55 AM] John Tan: Like vipassana into no mind

[19/5/20, 1:12:52 AM] John Tan: Therefore bahiya sutta can be seen from the perspective of 修 (practice) or can be understood from the perspective of 悟 (realization)。all these depends on the calibre of the person.

[19/5/20, 1:13:51 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Bahiya Sutta in the new Chinese translation of the ‘Small Boat Great Mountain’ by Ajahn Amaro https://cd1.amaravati.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/13/%E5%B0%8F%E8%88%B9%E8%88%87%E5%A4%A7%E5%B1%B1_20161111.pdf 



佛說:在所見中,只有所見。在所聞中,只有所聞。在所感中,只有所感。在所知中,只有所知。如此會看到,的確無物在此1;婆醯迦,該如此修習。婆醯迦,你應該依此:在所見中,只有所見。在所聞中,只有所聞。在所感中,只有所感。在所知中,只有所知。如此你會看到,的確無物在這裡;如此,的確無物。什麼都沒有時,您將看到,你不在此處,不在彼處,也不在兩者之間。此即苦的止息2。(自說經1.10)

....


(In the seen, there is only the seen,

in the heard, there is only the heard,

in the sensed, there is only the sensed,

in the cognized, there is only the cognized.

Thus you should see that

indeed there is no thing here;

this, Bahiya, is how you should train yourself.

Since, Bahiya, there is for you

in the seen, only the seen,

in the heard, only the heard,

in the sensed, only the sensed,

in the cognized, only the cognized,

and you see that there is no thing here,

you will therefore see that

indeed there is no thing there.

As you see that there is no thing there,

you will see that

you are therefore located neither in the world of this,

nor in the world of that,

nor in any place

betwixt the two.

This alone is the end of suffering.” (ud. 1.10)


- http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2008/01/ajahn-amaro-on-non-duality-and.html )

[19/5/20, 1:14:01 AM] Soh Wei Yu: oic..

[19/5/20, 1:15:14 AM] John Tan: But it should be understood from the perspective of 悟  (realization)。y?

[19/5/20, 1:18:52 AM] Soh Wei Yu: realization of anatta as dharma seal is different from a state of no mind

[19/5/20, 1:19:36 AM] John Tan: No from the text, y should it be viewed from the perspective of 悟  (realization)?

[19/5/20, 1:20:32 AM] Soh Wei Yu: In seeing, always only the seen, or seeing is none other than seen. No you. This is truth, not training into a state of only the seen

[19/5/20, 1:20:39 AM] John Tan: 如此你會看到,的確無物在這裡;如此,的確無物。什麼都沒有時,您將看到,你不在此處,不在彼處,也不在兩者之間。此即苦的止息2。(自說經1.10)

....

(As you see that there is no thing there,

you will see that

you are therefore located neither in the world of this,

nor in the world of that,

nor in any place

betwixt the two.

This alone is the end of suffering.” (ud. 1.10)


- http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2008/01/ajahn-amaro-on-non-duality-and.html )

[19/5/20, 1:21:11 AM] John Tan: It says therefore u should see this truth.

[19/5/20, 1:21:22 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic..

[19/5/20, 1:21:57 AM] John Tan: Therefore it is for 悟 (realization)

[19/5/20, 1:23:01 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..

[19/5/20, 1:23:55 AM] John Tan: This is the purpose of the second and third line

[19/5/20, 1:24:15 AM] John Tan: 深入观行, 婆酰迦经。 

了悟经旨, 直指无心。 

无执能所, 忘却身心。


(Deeply contemplating, Bahiya Sutta.

Realizing the essence of the sutta, directly pointing to No Mind.

No grasping at subject and object, forgotten mind and body.)

[19/5/20, 1:24:48 AM] John Tan: 如此你會看到,的確無物在這裡;如此,的確無物。什麼都沒有時,您將看到,你不在此處,不在彼處,也不在兩者之間。此即苦的止息2。(自說經1.10)

....

(As you see that there is no thing there,

you will see that

you are therefore located neither in the world of this,

nor in the world of that,

nor in any place


betwixt the two.

This alone is the end of suffering.” (ud. 1.10)


- http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2008/01/ajahn-amaro-on-non-duality-and.html )

[19/5/20, 1:25:23 AM] John Tan: If without the above that, then it can be interpreted as just a state of no mind samadhi.

[19/5/20, 1:25:32 AM] John Tan: There is no insight involved.

[19/5/20, 1:27:42 AM] Soh Wei Yu: ic..

[19/5/20, 1:28:09 AM] John Tan: But it is stated, therefore u will see from in seeing, just the seen, u will realize there is no object here, there is no subject here, no subject there either, nor any in between.

[19/5/20, 1:34:02 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..

[19/5/20, 1:34:33 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Im glad they recently released that translation and ajahn amaro’s book in chinese. Otherwise cant find a good one that distinguishes that

[19/5/20, 1:34:49 AM] Soh Wei Yu: I see other chinese explanations of bahiya also more on no mind

[19/5/20, 1:34:59 AM] John Tan: Oh just recently released?

[19/5/20, 1:35:11 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Ajahn amaro’s old book but recently translated to chinese

[19/5/20, 1:35:16 AM] Soh Wei Yu: He also has a new book but in english

[19/5/20, 1:35:28 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Called the breakthrough. He also reiterated bahiya sutta in that

[19/5/20, 1:35:46 AM] John Tan: I heard he went into dzogchen?

[19/5/20, 1:36:23 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Nope but he was discussing dzogchen with his friend tsoknyi rinpoche and found it similar to his thai forest practice. Tsoknyi rinpoche is the one i went to his retreat last year lol

[19/5/20, 1:37:31 AM] John Tan: Most important breakthrough post that is not go into subsuming but into dependent origination and emptiness.  Many can still turn into non-dual awareness teaching.

[19/5/20, 1:37:59 AM] John Tan: Or one can move into [total] exertion and emptiness like dogen...

[19/5/20, 1:38:11 AM] John Tan: Like 洪文亮 (Zen Master Hong Wen Liang)



....



John Tan: "What is important to know in bahiya, Buddha actually included the path, experience and the realization in such a short teaching."


Labels: , | edit post
3 Responses
  1. Anonymous Says:

    The bahiya's 'in the seen just seen ' is just some form of disidentification and 'blended ' into scenery ....it is just an intermediate state ....instead , we should reach a state of 'descend of the Supermind ( Aurobindo )' ....


  2. Soh Says:

    “According to Sri Aurobindo, full yogic development consists of two parts: the standard yogic goal of ascent into a formless and timeless self, and the descent and establishment of the supramental consciousness into Earthly life. Through integral yoga, one actualises the Supermind. The supramental consciousness transforms the entire being and leads to the divinisation of the material world.
    This supramental transformation gives rise to a new individual, the Gnostic being,[1] which is fully formed by the supramental power. Division and ignorance are overcome, and replaced with a unity of consciousness. The physical body will be transformed and divinised. The gnostic being sees the spirit everywhere in the world, and in every other person. This awareness eliminates the usual separation between man and life, and between people. One sees that all existences are various forms of the divine reality. Every individual existence in life plays a role in the unfolding of existence. The Gnostic beings can work together to create a new common life. This new life is superior to the present way of being. A critical mass of such "gnostic individuals" can create the foundation of a new social life and order. This will lead to a greater unity, mutuality, and harmony.”


    This means Aurobindo’s journey is from I AM to substantialist nondual (one mind), aka Thusness Stage 1 to 4.

    Anatta is a unique realization, Thusness Stage 5.

    https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html


  3. Soh Says:

    Also, you misunderstood the anatman realisation. It is not “merging” subject and object. It is realising both poles never existed in and of itself, consciousness is empty.

    As I shares before:

    “To someone transitioning from I AM to nondual (only begun talking with him yesterday), I pointed out anatta to him a few moments ago, I have a feeling he will breakthrough to anatta soon:

    Mr. C:
    “The transience itself rolls and knows”…that is awesome. It pulled me into a more clear state when I first read it and again just now. This was the right thing to resend:)

    Soh:

    yes and its always already so! like when we say.. fire is burning... its totally an illusion if you imagine fire is something 'behind' burning, or fire is the 'agent' or 'watcher' of burning. thats ridiculous isnt it?
    and yet we imagine 'awareness' was something behind 'transience'
    its the same

    fire is just the burning, fire is not 'doing' the burning

    lightning flash -- lightning is the flasher? no. lightning is just another word for flash. lightning is flashing is just another way of saying 'flashing is happening'.

    thunder roars -- thunder is the agent of roaring? no. thunder is just roar. wind blows? wind is just blowing. seeing sees scenery? seeing is just colors, no seer. hearing hears sounds? actually, hearing is only ever sound, never been a hearer. always already so.

    thats why realisation is so important, you must see through the delusion that it never was like that
     
    its not that you merge fire and burning, its not that you are trying to merge lightning with the flash, its not that you are trying to merge wind with the blowing. it is not that we are trying to merge knower and known. its to realise both are never valid in themselves in the first place, both poles are non-arisen.
    as i sent someone a few moments ago:

    "like how krodha/kyle dixon described:

    "'Self luminous' and 'self knowing' are concepts which are used to convey the absence of a subjective reference point which is mediating the manifestation of appearance. Instead of a subjective cognition or knower which is 'illuminating' objective appearances, it is realized that the sheer exertion of our cognition has always and only been the sheer exertion of appearance itself. Or rather that cognition and appearance are not valid as anything in themselves. Since both are merely fabricated qualities neither can be validated or found when sought. This is not a union of subject and object, but is the recognition that the subject and object never arose in the first place [advaya]. ", "The cognition is empty. That is what it means to recognize the nature of mind [sems nyid]. The clarity [cognition] of mind is recognized to be empty, which is sometimes parsed as the inseparability of clarity and emptiness, or nondual clarity and emptiness.""”