Someone told me about mind not being an appearance.

I replied:

it is in this sense that mind is not an appearance: John Tan wrote before, “That light is just alaya, not the nature of mind (imo). There is no form whatsoever that can be grasped. Signlessness therefore appearances are possible.”

it does not mean that there is an objective appearance apart from mind

there is no mind apart from appearance and no appearance apart from mind

Likewise, Krodha also said in 2014, "'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." - Kyle..."

---

there is also no mind apart from appearance

"
The cognizer perceives the cognizable;
Without the cognizable there is no cognition;
Therefore why do you not admit
That neither object nor subject exists [at all]?

The mind is but a mere name;
Apart from it's name it exists as nothing;
So view consciousness as a mere name;
Name too has no intrinsic nature.

Either within or likewise without,
Or somewhere in between the two,
The conquerors have never found the mind;
So the mind has the nature of an illusion.

The distinctions of colors and shapes,
Or that of object and subject,
Of male, female and the neuter -
The mind has no such fixed forms.

In brief the Buddhas have never seen
Nor will they ever see [such a mind];
So how can they see it as intrinsic nature
That which is devoid of intrinsic nature?

"Entity" is a conceptualization;
Absence of conceptualization is emptiness;
Where conceptualization occurs,
How can there be emptiness?

The mind in terms of perceived and perceiver,
This the Tathagatas have never seen;
Where there is the perceived and perceiver,
There is no enlightenment.

Devoid of characteristics and origination,
Devoid of substantiative reality and transcending speech,
Space, awakening mind and enlightenment
Possess the characteristics of non-duality.

- Nagarjuna"

---

07
No Mind, No Appearances and No Apparent Objects

Soh: https://www.reddit.com/r/Dzogchen/comments/qo5hyj/the_refutation_of_maintaining_that_appearance_is/


[8:17 am, 07/11/2021] John Tan: Apparent objects are not mind, appearances are mind.
[8:26 am, 07/11/2021] John Tan: And then from that,
further exhaust mind, appearances, apparent objects.
No mind, no appearances and no apparent objects

Soh: no appearances as in not no appearances but presence is empty right


John Tan:
No appearances just mean the conceptual notions of mind, appearances and external objects are all deconstructed.
It doesn't mean a blank nothing.
Vivid Appearances will unfailingly manifest, that is what Mipham meant by coalescence of appearance and emptiness.

From the perspective of mind (alaya), negation is non-affirming and thorough.
From the non-conceptual gnosis standpoint, nothing is obstructed nor denied.
What appears is unconditioned, spontaneous, natural and beyond elaborations.
Labels: Emptiness |

https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/11/no-mind-no-appearances-and-no-apparent.html

----

All is Mind, No Mind, Dependent Origination
"All is mind must also be deconstructed by DO and emptiness.

Otherwise you end up subsuming.  When practitioners express all is mind, they are not to be taken literally, they are expressing a deep non-dual experiential taste.  Not as a view.

We go through all process of deconstructions and taste the luminous appearances then adopt the view of DO [dependent origination] and emptiness for the conventional world.

That is why DO and emptiness is the enlightened view."

"[9:09 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: I understand what dzogchen meant. Imo,  DO and emptiness is the spontaneous presence and natural perfection expression in the conventional world. (Soh: also related, Dzogchen, Rigpa and Dependent Origination )
[9:14 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: But I do not know dzogchen so no comment.

It is just how I see. The beauty of DO and emptiness in expressing the luminous appearance for the conventional world."

- John Tan, 2020

"[8:16 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: It is the direct taste that is important.
[8:18 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: In the direct taste freeing of the background, what is left is the obviousness.
[8:21 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: The luminous display is free from all elaborations.  Neither mind nor not mind, phenomena nor not phenomena.

So can one b free from all proliferations and see clearly this luminous display and how is this to b expressed comventionally?
[8:22 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: Post all these deconstructions, do u still need to talk about mind at all?  Do u still see object?"

"[8:25 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: That is not important imo
[8:26 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: It is how the mind is freed from all proliferated views or religions or any form of conditioning first.
[8:28 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: The freeing is most crucial but not discarding the validity of how they provide explanations for the functioning of the world.
[8:28 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: So first in anatta, the deconstruction of the background self. That perhaps is the most important deconstruction.
[8:31 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: Then we look at object, how do we even come to the idea that phenomena possess characteristics at all?  Why  redness seem to stick to a red flower?
[8:36 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: Then we look deeper into duality and look at how the dualistic structure is constructed...we see objectivity and subjectivity, do we clearly see and understand that the very feeling of objectivity can only arise because of an innate feeling of subjectivity?  Can we feel this understanding in our bone and marrow or just a knowledge?  The idea of self and other...this deep conditioning is often over look.
[8:37 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: Like no suffering, no no suffering...
[8:39 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: Then when we picks up all these conventions, views,  we have no issues with them for they provide a way of explaining and accounting how the world and universe functions.  How well they explain the world.
[8:41 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: U can see how the world is totally make up of energetic vibration also and practice accordingly as long the path can guide u and it works and functions, but ultimately empty."

"[10:32 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: The only truth is to see the emptiness of the conventional.  Equipoise strictly speaking is free from all elaborations.  That is exactly the experiential insight and taste of anatta, in the seen just the seen, therefore no seer, no seeing, nothing seen.

[10:38 AM, 7/25/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[10:42 AM, 7/25/2020] Soh Wei Yu: like kalaka sutta https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN4_24.html


Labels: All is Mind, Dependent Origination |

- https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/07/all-is-mind-no-mind-dependent.html

----

 https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2019/10/not-mind-or-other-than-mind.html

Not mind or other than mind
[27/10/19, 1:14:30 PM] Soh Wei Yu: All appearances are appearance of oneself in dzogchen but not cosmic consciousness
[27/10/19, 1:49:11 PM] John Tan: Quite good youtube. Who is he?
[27/10/19, 1:52:33 PM] John Tan: All appearances are one's radiance clarity. However since both object and subject are seen through, it cannot be said to be mind or other than mind.
[27/10/19, 1:53:56 PM] Soh Wei Yu: He is a quite famous dzogchen teacher i think
[27/10/19, 1:54:00 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[27/10/19, 1:54:07 PM] John Tan: What appears are neither in here nor out there.
[27/10/19, 1:54:53 PM] John Tan: The very idea of in or out, me and other are conceptually designated.
[27/10/19, 1:56:31 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic.. i think he is trying to point out non solipsism and non cosmic consciousness.. different mindstreams. In another video he said how his view is not solipsism
[27/10/19, 1:58:04 PM] John Tan: The "neither this nor that" of freedom from extremes is not the same as "neither this nor that" of non-conceptuality.
[27/10/19, 1:58:10 PM] Soh Wei Yu: _______
[27/10/19, 1:58:15 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[27/10/19, 1:58:22 PM] John Tan: Can provide the link.
[27/10/19, 1:58:47 PM] John Tan: He is ______?
[27/10/19, 1:59:01 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Yeah
[27/10/19, 1:59:26 PM] John Tan: His lecture seems to be better than his writings...lol
[27/10/19, 1:59:32 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Lol
[27/10/19, 1:59:37 PM] Soh Wei Yu: you read his writings before?
[27/10/19, 1:59:50 PM] John Tan: But still a subtle sense of awareness
[27/10/19, 1:59:55 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic..
[27/10/19, 2:02:47 PM] John Tan: He is using simple English...like mind is the creator which is no good
[27/10/19, 2:03:27 PM] Soh Wei Yu: you mean book or lecture
[27/10/19, 2:03:43 PM] John Tan: Both
[27/10/19, 2:04:31 PM] John Tan: His lectures link that you sent me but explanation is quite good.  However the taste of anatta is not there.
[27/10/19, 2:05:08 PM] John Tan: Means it can still be an explanation of non-dual.
[27/10/19, 2:09:03 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic.. ya i get the impression of one mind from his old writings
[27/10/19, 2:11:12 PM] John Tan: For anatta to be clear, that background is gone that is why experiences become direct. It has to because there is nothing there to dualify as simple as that...no need li li loh loh (be longwinded)...
[27/10/19, 2:11:36 PM] John Tan: Grasper and grasped disappeared.
[27/10/19, 2:16:10 PM] John Tan: Now when there is no self, you are left with those aggregates.  What are those aggregates?
[27/10/19, 2:54:57 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Empty radiance in total exertion
Labels: Anatta |

As John Tan said before,

“When we authenticate radiance clarity directly, we have a first hand experiential taste of what is called the "ultimate free from all conceptual elaborations" but mind is not "free from conceptual elaborations".”

Wrote some time back:

Seeing selfness or cognizance as a subject and phenomena as objects is the fundamental elaboration that prevents the taste of appearances as radiance clarity.. then even after anatta, there are still the subtle cognitive obscurations that reified phenomena, arising and ceasing, substantial cause and effect, inherent production and so on.

So elaboration is not just coarse thinking like labelling but to me is like a veil of reification projecting and distorting radiant appearances and its nature.

Another way to put it is that the fundamental conceptual elaboration that obscures reality/suchness is to reify self and phenomena in terms of the extremes of existence and non existence through not apprehending the nature of mind/appearance.

….

If you mean just authenticate radiance clarity like I AM, then it’s just nonconceptual taste and realisation of presence.

That moment is nondual and nonconceptual and unfabricated but it doesnt mean the view of inherency is seen through. Since fundamental ignorance is untouched the radiance will continue to be distorted into a subject and object.

.....

"The process of eradicating avidyā (ignorance) is conceived… not as a mere stopping of thought, but as the active realization of the opposite of what ignorance misconceives. Avidyā is not a mere absence of knowledge, but a specific misconception, and it must be removed by realization of its opposite. In this vein, Tsongkhapa says that one cannot get rid of the misconception of 'inherent existence' merely by stopping conceptuality any more than one can get rid of the idea that there is a demon in a darkened cave merely by trying not to think about it. Just as one must hold a lamp and see that there is no demon there, so the illumination of wisdom is needed to clear away the darkness of ignorance." - Napper, Elizabeth, 2003, p. 103"

It is important however to note that Gelug and non Gelug authors may have different definitions of conceptualities, as John Tan pointed out years ago: “Not exactly, both have some very profound points.  Mipham "conceptualities" is not only referring to symbolic layering but also self-view which is more crucial.  Mipham made it very clear and said the gelug mistake "conceptualities" as just symbolic and mental overlay, which is not what he is referring then he laid down 3 types of conceptualities.  Same for dharmakirti also...there is the gross definition and the more refine definitions.”

 John Tan:

To me, this separation of "existence" from "what appears" is unique and very skillful.  "Non-existence" appearance is essentially the same insight as anatta.  It involves the 2 authentications:

1.  Seeing through the reification of conventional construct and

2. Recognition of appearances as one's empty clarity.

What makes appearances appear "real, solid and external" are our mistaken perception of the inherent framework of subject-action-object.  But that is only part of the confusion.  The other is not realizing what appears is just radiance, that is y it is illusory and insubstantial.

However if we deconstruct entities and characteristics, then mind and phenomena, consciousness and conditions are all deconstructed, u can't treat mind as real due to point 1.  Otherwise one skewed towards yogacara (but then yogacara doesn't actually treat mind as real either).  It is sort of strawman stereotyping a group of practitioners attaching to mind as real.

—-

Therefore there r 2 parts:

1.  Understand and clearly see how the conceptual conventions confused the mind.

2.  Directly experiencing appearances as one's radiance

But some masters can see 1 yet the path they teach can't match with 2.

While other masters try to teach 2 but their view cannot doesn't match.

This is most problematic.

—-

Yes what x said is good.

What originates dependently does not originate, abide and cease. Neither internal nor external nor is there a here and now. This must be directly linked to what appears and not as a mental enterprise. 

So in anatta, 

there is no hearer, only sound.

there is no thinker, only thoughts.

Sound is neither internal in our head nor external in the world.

Thought is also not inside our head nor is it outside our head.

The spell from our faulty premise creates that impression,

Freedom of that is liberation.

If she stabilises this experience of essencelessness post anatta, the radiance will turn very soothing, very light and transparent; like space, free and liberating. Appearances turn illusory and magical, joy will keep surfacing in every authentication. Her clogged energy will surely be released.😁

——

Actually after authenticating appearances r radiances, I see the next most important step is to arise insight of DO and emptiness.  It is a sort of special insight that sees the "middle path" and we use this insight to re-orientate our conventional world view and understand  8 extremes do not apply.

——

I shared this with someone recently 

“Even when all is mind is taught, it was not asserted by the Buddha that such a mind is a universal mind or a truly existing mind. Mind is empty of mind, this too was clearly taught by the Buddha. 

Therefore as Mipham wrote and criticised self-styled followers who misinterpreted the Yogacara founder Asangha:

https://old.reddit.com/r/Buddhism/comments/iyepfk/madhyamaka_cittamātra_and_the_true_intent_of/ (highly recommend to read the whole text in full)

...Why, then, do the Mādhyamika masters refute the Cittamātra tenet system? Because self-styled proponents of the Cittamātra tenets, when speaking of mind-only, say that there are no external objects but that the mind exists substantially—like a rope that is devoid of snakeness, but not devoid of ropeness. Having failed to understand that such statements are asserted from the conventional point of view, they believe the nondual consciousness to be truly existent on the ultimate level. It is this tenet that the Mādhyamikas repudiate. But, they say, we do not refute the thinking of Ārya Asaṅga, who correctly realized the mind-only path taught by the Buddha...

...So, if this so-called “self-illuminating nondual consciousness” asserted by the Cittamātrins is understood to be a consciousness that is the ultimate of all dualistic consciousnesses, and it is merely that its subject and object are inexpressible, and if such a consciousness is understood to be truly existent and not intrinsically empty, then it is something that has to be refuted. If, on the other hand, that consciousness is understood to be unborn from the very beginning (i.e. empty), to be directly experienced by reflexive awareness, and to be self-illuminating gnosis without subject or object, it is something to be established. Both the Madhyamaka and Mantrayāna have to accept this...

John Tan shared a nice picture generated by ChatGPT. It reminded me that I had a dream of people being semi transparent that inspired me two weeks before my anatta insight and mind body drop over a decade ago. John tan replied, “This is good. Be light and insubstantial when you meditate.”

“Just remember it has to be light and insubstantial without essence”

ChatGPT: “A serene and spiritual image showing a person in deep meditation. The person is sitting cross-legged, their expression calm and peaceful. Around them, a radiant light is emanating outward, resembling the transformation of a concave lens turning convex. This radiant light gradually dissolves into a spectrum of rainbow colors, symbolizing insubstantiality, lightness, weightlessness, and a lack of dimensions. The background is tranquil, enhancing the sense of peace and spiritual depth of the scene.

Here are two images that combine elements from your previous requests, featuring the tranquil background of the first image with the transparent meditator from the last image, surrounded by radiant light transforming into a spectrum of rainbow colors.”

Trying the poetic capabilities of chatgpt.. still cant really get the poem right but lazy to tweak it further.

In the mind's light, where appearances play,

Unlocatable and radiant, in a vibrant array.

Essenceless, like reflections in a stream,

Non-arising, in this luminous dream.

Dependent origination, the dance of the seen,

Vivid yet essenceless, like a moonlit sheen.

No true arising, no solidified state,

Just a play of light, both simple and great.

In this realm, no seer stands alone,

Just the seen, in a spectrum shown.

Wondrously ordinary, yet profoundly free,

Where luminous meets the everyday, effortlessly.

Each vision, from sky to bird in flight,

Radiates in nonduality, both day and night.

Alive in each moment, yet inherently serene,

A display of emptiness, in a vibrant scene.

In seeing, just the seen, a revelation deep,

Where nothing truly exists, not even a leap.

No seer, no seeing, and crucially, nothing seen,

Like moon reflections, serene and keen.

A manifestation without essence, a dance so bright,

In the nature of mind, a radiant sight.

Not nihilism, but a truth so keen,

In the heart of appearance, nothing truly seen.

---

Soh Wei Yu
ChatGPT
光明慧影
Luminous Wisdom-Reflection

光明心海，即景无边，
Luminous heart ocean, is boundless scenes,
景中只见，无自性，
Within the view, only sights, essence-free.

无观者独，景自明，
No standalone observer, scene is self-knowing,
寻常奇观，无尽显，
Ordinary marvels, endlessly they span.

天树鸟语，非二韵，
Sky, tree, bird-song, in nondual rhyme,
生而无我，万物怀。
Alive without self, all embraced by the sky.

见中只有见，悟途开，
In seeing, just the seen, wisdom's way,
无心境二元，境界外。
No mind-object duality, beyond realm's gate.

月影水中，光明显，
Moon's reflection in water, luminously present,
心性空明，光映现。
Heart's nature is empty clarity, light's essence evident.
• 
  
  
  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

 Yin Ling shared:

I really like the progression of insight that Mipam Rinpoche alluded to below: 

.

When beginners properly investigate using the reasons that establish emptiness—such as [the reason of] being neither singular nor plural—through contemplating the meaning of the nonestablishment of a pot and so forth, they [mistakenly] think that the abiding reality is nonestablishment itself because, although existing when not analyzed, nothing is found upon investigation. Therefore, through alternating appearance and emptiness, the empty quality dawns.

  At that time, by contemplating that the nonexistence of phenomena also is just a mere imputation not actually established, or by contemplating the manner in which things appear while empty from the beginning, one generates the distinctive certainty that while empty, they appear and while appearing, are empty, like [a reflection of ] the moon in water. When the absence of intrinsic nature and dependent arising dawn without contradiction, one has “the understanding of unity.”

  At that time, certainty is generated in the manner that both—the lack of inherent nature and dependent arising—although different in being expressed by two phrases, are indivisible without the slightest difference in essence. Thereby, the thought that apprehends appearance as the basis of negation, which is affixed to an object of negation that is eliminated, naturally deconstructs. And then “dawn the qualities of a freedom from constructs, such as the ability to remain naturally free from negation and affirmation, adding and removing.

  Through becoming familiar with such a freedom of constructs again and again, all aspects of dualistic phenomena, in which one sets apart particular objects and their distinctive suchness, are purified. Through bringing forth an exceptional certainty in the nature of all phenomena as equality, one reaches completion.

.

“The corpus of the doctrines of Maitreya and the scriptures of the great chariot, Asaṅga, both teach with a single intent that a person on the ground of motivated conduct first understands all phenomena to be merely mind, and then experiences that the mind has nothing to perceive. Then, at the time of the supreme quality on the path of joining, one realizes that since the perceived does not exist, neither does the perceiver. Right after this, the truth of suchness, which is free from dualistic fixation, is directly realized. This is said to be the attainment of the first ground.”

Excerpt From

Jamgon Mipam: His Life and Teachings

Jamgon Mipam

This material may be protected by copyright