Showing posts with label Madhyamaka. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Madhyamaka. Show all posts
Finally, with the help of AI's automated transcription of videos, I have finished my transcription of this 3.5 hours long meeting! You can read it here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16QGwYIP_EPwDX4ZUMUQRA30lpFx40ICpVr7u9n0klkY/edit ChatGPT's Synopsis and Timeline of ATR Meeting on 28 October 2020

INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT (00:00 - 17:00)

  • Discussion about the pandemic's impact on businesses and related moral dilemmas in investments​​.

SPIRITUAL AWAKENING DISCUSSION (17:00 - 30:00)

  • Kenneth Bok asks about the start of John Tan's spiritual journey.
  • John Tan shares his journey began at age 15 with the "I Am" experience, describing it as a direct experience of self-awareness, linking it to Buddhism and Hinduism​​.

THE NATURE OF EXPERIENCE AND NON-DUALITY (30:00 - 1:00:00)

  • John Tan elaborates on the difference between experience and insight, emphasizing non-duality and the phases of realizing no-self​​.
  • Discussion on how the concept of self is a mental construct and the phases of realizing no-self, including insights on reification and Madhyamaka​​.

ANATTA AND TOTAL EXERTION (1:00:00 - 1:20:00)

  • Detailed discussion on the experience of anatta (no-self) and total exertion.
  • John Tan explains anatta involves experiencing things directly without the conceptual overlay of self, and how total exertion involves seamless integration with all experiences​​.
  • Practical methods mentioned include Vipashyana (insight meditation), mindfulness, and the importance of direct, non-dual experiences​​.

INTEGRATING INSIGHTS AND PRACTICAL APPLICATION (1:20:00 - 1:40:00)

  • Conversation shifts to practical applications of spiritual insights in daily life, including the continuous process of deconstructing concepts and the importance of sincerity in self-inquiry​​.

SOMATIC PRACTICES AND YOGA (1:40:00 - 2:00:00)

  • John Tan and William Lam discuss various somatic practices and yoga.
  • Mention of Qi Gong, Tai Chi, Yoga, and other somatic exercises as methods to facilitate spiritual insights and bodily awareness​​.
  • Discussion on how these practices help in managing stress, fear, and enhancing bodily awareness through exercises like deep breathing and rhythmic movements​​.

TAOISM AND OTHER SPIRITUAL TRADITIONS (2:00:00 - 2:20:00)

  • John Tan discusses his experiences and insights from Taoism, comparing it to Buddhism.
  • Explanation of key Taoist concepts like Wu Wei (Actionless Action) and the interconnectedness emphasized in the I Ching​​.
  • Discussion on Taoist practices focusing on the transformation of Qi (vital energy) and the cultivation of Shen (spirit)​​.

ADVANCED SOMATIC AND MEDITATIVE PRACTICES (2:20:00 - 2:40:00)

  • Discussion on advanced practices such as the microcosmic orbit in Taoist alchemy, involving the circulation of energy through the body.
  • Mention of Kundalini practices and their parallels in Taoism and Yoga​​.
  • John Tan explains how these practices aim to balance and enhance energy flow, contributing to spiritual development​​.

CONCLUDING REMARKS AND FINAL THOUGHTS (2:40:00 - END)

  • Reflections on the journey of spiritual practice, the importance of understanding and deconstructing concepts, and maintaining a connection with teachings and experiences across different spiritual traditions.
  • Emphasis on the continuous nature of spiritual practice and the integration of insights into daily life​​.

TOA PAYOH MEETING ENDING

OVERCOMING ATTACHMENT AND CONCEPTUAL DECONSTRUCTION

  • John Tan elaborates on overcoming attachment and the nature of attributes and objects.
  • He discusses how attributes like color are not inherent in objects but are dependent on consciousness and the whole exertion of consciousness​​.
  • Emphasizes the gradual process of deconstructing concepts such as cause and effect and attributes over years, leading to a deeper understanding of dependent origination​​.
This synopsis captures the flow of the conversation and key points discussed during the meetings, providing a structured timeline for easy reference. It includes mentions of various somatic practices and yoga, emphasizing their role in spiritual development, and incorporates the discussion from the Toa Payoh Meeting Ending.

John Tan wrote for someone on AtR group:


"Conditions" means those factors in the 12-links.  


"DO" (Soh: Dependent Origination) does not arise out of ignorance, "things" arise out of ignorance and are therefore non-arisen -- dependent origination is non-origination.


Therefore DO is an enlightened view, sentient beings do not see DO, they see truly existent things being produced and destroyed (essential causality). So DO is taught because sentient beings in confusion (ignorance) mistake reified conventions as "things" being produced and destroyed.  


Both prasangika and svatantrika do not deny conventionalities, because denial implies rejecting the functional validities of these conventionalities.  Like how "money" is created out of paper, failing to see the validities of the functional aspects of "money" is nihilistic.


Prasangika and svatantrika differ only in terms of the philosophical approaches in debates with opponents holding varying degrees of inherent views, not in terms of ultimate realizations.  According to both Mipham and Gorampa, the result of ultimate realization for both prasangika and svatantrika are the same and to Gorampa,  prasangika is not a higher view than the svatantrika.

 

Some quotes by Acarya Malcolm Smith from Dharmawheel on Conventional vs Ultimate Truth


Malcolm: 


"“Conventional” simply means “functional,” it does not mean arbitrary or subjective. For example, perceiving water as amṛta, pus, boiling metal, etc., is invalid in the human realm.


One can build many kinds of cars, but if they don’t function as cars, they are not cars, conventionally speaking."


"No, conventions are not subjective, they are conventions because one or more people have agreed to call a functional thing a given name. For example, a truck is called a lorry in England, but they both refer to a heavy vehicle that carries loads."


"Conventional truths are derived from observing functional appearances. Falsehoods are derived from observing nonfunctional appearances. Example, lake vs. mirage."


"No, it is not more correct to say consciousness arises or ceases than a labelled self, a since consciousness is also a conventional label, like the label "self." Prior to analysis there is both a self, akuppa, and a consciousness. After analysis one will find neither self nor consciousness, beyond the designations "akuppa" and "consciousness." For example, take a car as a metaphor for "self". A car cannot be found in any part, all of its parts, or separate from its parts. Likewise, as self cannot be found in any aggregates, all of the aggregates, or apart from the aggregates. Likewise, consciousness cannot be found in the sense organ nor the sense object, both, or separate from them. The mind is also made of parts, and cannot be found in one of them, all of them, or separate from them.


Functionally speaking, we can say there is a self, because when I say "akuppa go there!" You will respond to this directive by saying yes or no. This means that "self" is functional. It is efficient. Whatever is functional corresponds with relative truth. If I said to you, "Malcolm go there!" you would respond, "I am not Malcolm." So calling you "malcolm" is not functional and therefore cannot be considered to be relatively true. Consciousness is a relative truth, as long as it performs its functions, then we can say "there is a consciousness." But when we analyze consciousness, we cannot find it outside of the conventions we use for an appearance we label "mind.""


"Two truths are specified, seeing correctly and seeing falsely. That’s enough. No need to have the Buddha declare that aggregates and so on are ultimate, otherwise it would have been game over for Madhyamaka at the beginning."


"Which Sutra view did you have in mind, the one where in PP Sūtra it is stated that all phenomena are nonarising, pure from the beginning, and the state of dharmatā? The dependent origination of phenomena? Emptiness? In what way does Dzogchen refute these views? We do not reject conventional truth in Dzogchen. Longchenpa was utterly clear on this point.


ChNN understood what is stated in the Dzogchen tantras: we do not make a distinction between sharp and dull. If someone is sincerely interested in the teachings, they do not have to convert to Buddhism, but it is not because Buddhism contains any wrong views. It does not. There is no contradiction between Dzogchen and the four truths of nobles. There are serious contradictions however with Samkhya, etc."


"This is not correct. There is such as thing as mundane correct view. A correct view in this case is one that is functional. For example, believing in normative causes and effects. We have to distinguish wrong views about entities from wrong views about essences. Christians have wrong views about both essences and entities, since they believe salvation comes from believing in the divinity of a man executed by Romans somewhere between 30-33 CE.


Buddhists only hold wrong views about essences, i.e. that knowledge obscuration of the innate habit of I-making."

John Tan weeks ago:


"Clarity as I AM is only dualistic and must go into anatta which is just the beginning into emptiness free from all elaborations and DO which is just natural perfection.

Because we do not know what the primordial and natural perfection is all about, we can only talk about de-construction of conventional constructs from self to all phenomena otherwise all experiences at every phases of insight will be distorted.

We think we know what is natural and primordial but we don't.

Whether it is anatta or not is dependent on insights and view, not just experience.

Means there must be a see through, then one realizes and go further to realize that self is a mental construct, learnt and taught, was never there but thought to be there.

However how subtle and deep do these conventional constructs affect mind and experiences is a different matter.

Many do not understand what is and how freedom mental constructs are like. No clarity of view and experience as long as one do not see DO and emptiness from mental constructs level as well as empty radiance level.

The mind will always link back to the physical and material world of conventional understanding, unknowingly links analysis and interpretation excluding consciousness from the equation.

Or we will jump into conclusion of denying causal efficacy not knowing what exactly mmk is pointing to and what exactly is negated. What do we mean by no cause and effect and what sort of cause and effect r we talking about and what exactly is non-causal talking about...

These are all the mind cognitive obscurations, it is unable to clearly sort out.

This proves our mind is still oscillating between the extremes."

 

~ VERSES TO ESTABLISH THE PROFOUND VIEW ~
.
INTRODUCTORY VERSES
.
If those whose lord is Death himself,
Ruler of the three worlds, without a master,
Sleep like true vanquishers,
What could be more improper?
~ Aryadeva
Without sleep the night is long,
Without rest the journey is long,
Without knowledge of the best dharma,
For those children, existence is long.
~ Gendun Chopel
Meditate again and again
until you have turned your mind away
from the activities of this life,
which are like adorning yourself
while being led to the execution ground.
~ Tsongkhapa
To liberate myself alone
will bring no benefit,
For sentient beings of the three realms
are all my fathers and mothers.
How disgusting to leave my parents
in the thick of suffering,
While wishing and seeking
for just my happiness alone!
So may the suffering
of all the three realms ripen on me,
May my merits be taken
by sentient beings,
And through the blessings
of the merit of this,
May all beings attain buddhahood!
~ Jetsun Drakpa Gyaltsen
.
MAIN BODY OF THE TEXT
.
I prostrate to the perfect Buddha,
The supreme teacher, who taught
That dependent origination
Is without ceasing and without arising,
Without extinction and without permanence,
Without coming and without going,
Not different and not one.
It is the peace in which discursiveness
is completely still.
~ Nagarjuna
When there is an “I”, there is a perception of other,
And from the ideas of self and other
come attachment and aversion.
As a result of getting wrapped up in these,
All possible faults come into being.
~ Dharmakirti
All beings consist of causes and effects,
In which there is no ‘sentient being’ at all.
From phenomena
which are exclusively empty,
There arise only empty phenomena.
All things are devoid of any ‘I’ or ‘mine’.
Like a recitation, a candle,
a mirror, a seal,
A magnifying glass, a seed,
sourness, or a sound,
So also with the continuation
of the aggregates—
The wise should know
they are not transferred.
If the self were the aggregates,
It would have arising and ceasing
(as properties).
If it were different from the aggregates,
It would not have
the characteristics of the aggregates.
Neither the aggregates,
nor different from the aggregates,
The aggregates are not in him,
nor is he in the aggregates.
The Tathagata does not possess
the aggregates.
What is the Tathagata?
~ Nagarjuna
The entities that our and other schools affirm,
Since they exist inherently in neither singular nor plural,
In ultimate reality are without intrinsic being;
They are like reflections.
~ Shantarakshita
Not from itself, not from another,
not from both, nor without cause:
Never in any way is there any
existing thing that has arisen.
Like an illusion, like a dream,
like the city of the gandharvas,
so origination, duration, and cessation
are declared to be.
Since origination, duration,
and cessation are not established,
there is nothing that is conditioned.
And in the absence
of the establishment of the conditioned,
What unconditioned thing will be established?
Whatever is dependently co-arisen
That is explained to be emptiness.
That, being a dependent designation
Is itself the Middle Way.
Something that is not dependently arisen
Such a thing does not exist.
Therefore a non-empty thing
Does not exist.
~ Nagarjuna
The practice of all the bodhisattvas
is never to entertain concepts,
Which revolve around dualistic notions
of perceiver and perceived,
In the knowledge that all these
appearances are but the mind itself,
Whilst mind’s own nature is forever
beyond the limitations of ideas.
~ Gyalse Thogme Zangpo
Through the perception of mind-only
One achieves the nonperception of objects;
Through the nonperception of objects
There is also the nonperception of mind.
~ Vasubandhu
When scrutinized with insight,
Neither the imaginary, nor the dependent,
Nor the perfect [nature] exists.
So how could insight conceive of an entity?
~ The Sutra of the Arrival in Lanka
Consider all dharmas as dreamlike:
As this indicates,
the whole environment
and the beings within it,
which we perceive as objects,
are dreamlike.
They appear as they do
because our own minds are deluded
and not as a result
of even the slightest factor
aside from mind.
We must therefore put a stop
to our projections.
We might then wonder
whether the mind itself is real,
so the root text says:
Examine the nature
of unborn awareness:
Mind itself is empty of the three stages
of arising, remaining and ceasing.
It has no colour, no shape, and so on.
It does not abide outside
or within the body.
It has no fixed character at all
and cannot therefore
be apprehended in any way.
Rest in an experience beyond thought.
If any thought of an antidote
—such as considering that body
and mind are empty—
should arise, then as the root text says:
Let even the antidote
be freed in its own place:
We look into the essence
of the antidote itself,
and when we realize
that it has no true nature,
we rest with that experience.
As for how to rest, the root text says:
Rest in the ālaya,
the essence of the path:
Avoiding all the projection
and absorption associated
with the other seven types of consciousness,
we must settle with lucid clarity
in an experience that is beyond thought.
We must not mentally fixate in any way
on what has no fixed character at all.
~ Gyalse Thogme Zangpo
Physical phenomena
are assemblages of subtle particles.
When one analyzes these particles
by splitting them into their own sections,
not even the smallest part is left.
Not even the tiniest appearance remains.
The nonphysical refers to mind.
The mind of the past
has ceased and dissolved.
The mind of the future
has not arisen or come into being.
The mind of the present
is extremely difficult to identify:
it has no color or shape; it is like space.
Therefore it is not established.
Furthermore, it is beyond
being one or many things,
it has never arisen,
and it is luminous by nature.
We use these and other forms
of the sword of reasoning
to investigate and analyze phenomena.
Through this, we realize
that they do not inherently exist.
Since both physical
and nonphysical phenomena
are not established as any entity
and do not exist,
the prajñā of discriminating investigation
also does not exist.
Once all specifically
and generally characterized phenomena
have been established as nonexistent,
the prajñā no longer appears;
it is luminous,
not existing in any manner whatsoever.
~ Atisha
Without referring to an imputed entity,
One cannot apprehend the lack of this entity
Therefore, the lack of a delusive entity
Is clearly delusive [too].
Thus, when one’s son dies in a dream,
The conception “He does not exist”
Removes the thought that he does exist,
But it is also delusive.
Once neither entities nor nonentities
Remain before the mind,
There is no other mental flux.
Therefore, it is utter nonreferential peace.
~ Shantideva
The world would be unproduced,
unceased, and unchangeable,
it would be devoid of its manifold appearances,
if there were intrinsic nature.
If there is no entitihood,
What changes?
If there were entity,
How could it be correct
that something changes?
If there is no essence,
What could become other?
If there is essence,
What could become other?
~ Nagarjuna
Any thought such as miserliness and so on
Is held to be an afflictive obscuration.
Any thought of ‘subject’, ‘object’ and ‘action’
Is held to be a cognitive obscuration.
~ Maitreya
To say “existence” is the clinging to permanence.
To say “nonexistence” is the view of extinction.
Therefore, the learned should not dwell
In either existence or non-existence.
...
If you grasp at existence,
there is no liberation;
If you grasp at non-existence,
there are no higher rebirths;
If you grasp at both,
you are just ignorant,
So do the best you can,
to remain in non-duality!
The nature of appearances
is like a magical illusion,
And the way they arise
is through interdependence:
That’s the way things are,
which cannot be expressed in words,
So do the best you can, to dwell
in a state which is inexpressible!
~ Jetsun Drakpa Gyaltsen
In this, there is not a thing to be removed,
Nor the slightest thing to be added.
It is looking perfectly into reality itself,
And when reality is seen, complete liberation.
~ Nagarjuna / Maitreya
The true nature of things
is naturally free of conceptual projections.
It does not exist, since even
the victorious ones do not see it.
Yet neither is it non-existent,
as it is the ground of all samsara and nirvana.
There is no contradiction here,
for it lies beyond the realm of expression.
~ From the Longchen Nyingthig
All compounded phenomena,
as arising and ceasing things,
Are not bound and not released.
For this reason a sentient being
Is not bound, not released.
The nature of things is to be, like nirvāṇa,
without origination or cessation.
In terms of its imaginary aspect,
this very other-dependent nature is samsara.
In terms of its perfect aspect,
it is nirvāṇa
...
There is no distinction whatsoever
between saṃsāra and nirvāṇa.
There is no distinction whatsoever
between nirvāṇa and saṃsāra.
What is the limit of nirvāṇa,
that is the limit of saṃsāra.
There is not even the finest gap
to be found between the two.
What is the nature of the thus-gone one,
that is the nature of the world.
The thus-gone one is devoid of nature;
the world is devoid of nature.
Those who develop mental fabrications
with regard to the Buddha,
Who has gone beyond all fabrications,
As a consequence of those cognitive fabrications,
Fail to see the Tathagata.
By taking any standpoint whatsoever,
You will be snatched by
the cunning snakes of the afflictions.
Those whose minds have no standpoint
Will not be caught.
The victorious ones have said
That emptiness is the relinquishing of all views.
For whomever emptiness is a view,
That one has achieved nothing.
In order to relinquish all imagination,
You taught the nectar of emptiness.
However, those who cling to it
Are also blamed by you.
~ Nagarjuna
Therefore, there is no such thing
That ultimately can be proved to be.
And thus the Tathagatas all have taught
That all phenomena are unproduced.
Since with the ultimate this is attuned,
It is referred to as the ultimate.
And yet the actual ultimate is free
From constructs and elaborations.
Production and the rest have no reality,
Thus nonproduction and the rest
are equally impossible.
In and of themselves, both are disproved,
And therefore names cannot express them.
Where there are no objects,
There can be no arguments refuting them.
Even “nonproduction,” entertained conceptually,
Is relative and is not ultimate.
~ Shantarakshita
Since the negation of arising and so on
Concords with actuality, we accept it.
Since there is nothing to be negated,
It is clear that, actually, there is no negation.
How should the negation of an imputation’s
Own nature not be an imputation?
Hence, seemingly, this is
The meaning of actuality, but not actuality [itself].
In actuality, neither exists.
This is the lack of discursiveness:
Mañjuśrī asked about actuality,
And the son of the Victors [Vimalakirti] remained silent.
~ Jnanagarbha
The ultimate is freedom from discursiveness.
Being empty of all discursiveness
Is to be understood
As the nonnominal ultimate.
Its character is neither existent, nor nonexistent,
Nor [both] existent and nonexistent, nor neither.
Centrists should know true reality
That is free from these four possibilities
The purpose of emptiness
is its characteristic of all discursiveness
being at utter peace.
~ Bhavaviveka
Since this lack of arising
is concordant with realizing the ultimate,
it is called “the ultimate.”
Since there is no object of negation,
such as arising, that is established,
[its] lack [cannot really] be
related to this non-existent object.
Therefore, to apprehend
the lack of arising and such
is nothing but a reference point...
Ultimately, true reality
cannot be expressed
as the lack of arising and such.
Therefore, Noble Mañjuśrī
asked about true reality
and Noble Vimalakirti said nothing.
~ Kamalashila
Engagement with the idea
that form is empty,
or that it is not empty,
is still engagement with marks.
It is not engagement with transcendent insight.
When there is no engagement
with anything at all,
it is the engagement with transcendent insight.
~ The Mother of the Victorious Ones [Sutra]:
Kāśyapa, I say that
the one who observes emptiness,
and thus conceives of emptiness,
has failed, failed entirely,
with respect to these teachings.
Having a belief in personal existence
that is as solid as the King of Mountains
is a minor problem compared
to the arrogant view of emptiness.
Why is that? Because emptiness
is a deliverance from all views.
Hence, I say that if the view
is exclusively emptiness,
then there is no cure.
~ The Noble Jewel Mound [Sutra]
Perfectly discerned
by self-cognizing primordial wisdom alone,
this is an ineffable experience
beyond thought and word,
a state of equality like the very center of space.
This is what the ultimate nature is like,
and therefore it is said that
if the Bodhisattvas understand and proclaim
that “the aggregates are empty,”
they are still caught up in characteristics.
They have no faith in the unborn nature.
~ Mipham Rinpoche
The pacification of all objectification
And the pacification of illusion:
No Dharma was taught by the Buddha
At any time, in any place, to any person.
~ Nagarjuna
.
DEDICATORY VERSES
.
I salute Gautama, who,
based on compassion,
taught the true Dharma
for the abandonment of all views.
~ Nagarjuna
Through whatever merit
has here been gained,
may all beings generate sublime bodhicitta,
both relative and absolute,
and through this,
come to equal Lord Avalokiteśvara,
transcending the extremes
of existence and quiescence.
~ Gyaltse Thogme Zangpo
May the Dharma, suffering’s only cure,
And the source of all real happiness,
Always be valued and respected,
And remain long into the future!
~ Shantideva