Appearance is exactly where non-duality is found. Appearance arisen from the union of emptiness and clarity; this is the freedom place.

If you look for the ground of all phenomena you will not find anything at all. Precisely this looking and not finding is the ground of all phenomena. Train the mind to be like space. Then forget space.

Mind’s activity is a phenomena. Mind’s deep, a groundlessness. Phenomena and mind’s activity share in common the baseless groundlessness. Again and again rest mind’s hurried activity in the expanse of its ownmost non-doing.

Mind’s deep, a groundlessness, is Original Innocence. Phenomena, also groundless, are Bright Virtue.

If you understand these two you will swiftly master the Buddha’s twofold path of Shamatha and Vipassana.


~  Traktung Rinpoche, Original Innocence
Reality is entirely mute.
Silent.
On its own, it's totally ineffable.
Intangible.
Nothing is conveying
From "its own side"
Anything
- any data, any information.
It's all construed
Fabricated
Set up
From the side of the mind
Through conceptuality.
Mind too
As well as these supposed mute objects
Are fabricated conceptually.
Conceptuality too is conceptually woven.
Outside conceptuality
Nothing is truly established.
Nothing is truly actualized.
However, neither are things
Outside of conceptuality
Non-existent.
"Outside of conceptuality"
However,
Too is established through language.
It's not all in the mind.
Despite the fact that
It is the mind
That is the great housebuilder.
The weaver of universes.
Of Samsara.
Of Nirvana.
The point of all this
Is to drop into a silence
That is beyond words.
And beyond the absence of words.
When the mind falls silent
Reality falls freely
Into an unfathomable abyss.
Into groundlessness.
Into voidness.
As voidness.
Comments
John Tan

John Tan André,

"When the mind falls silent
Reality falls freely
Into an unfathomable abyss.
Into groundlessness.
Into voidness.
As voidness."

Is that what u see when the mind falls silent? What abt the luminous phenominality u used to speak abt?
Manage

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · 18h
André A. Pais

André A. Pais John Tan the abyss and voidness here is not a blank. It is, as you say, luminosity. Undifferentiated - and thus without a ground - radiance.
Manage

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · 18h
John Tan

John Tan André, why the mind needs to b silent then? The luminous phenominality only manifests when mind is silent?
Manage

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · 18h
André A. Pais

André A. Pais John Tan
The point of all this
Is to drop into a silence
That is beyond words.
And beyond the absence of words.

Words are luminosity too, yes. But their meanings have to be seen through, otherwise luminosity will seem and feel solid. Solidity, duality, substantially, suffering, etc., are all established through deludedly applied language.
Manage

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · 18h
John Tan

John Tan André, u mentioned about the 3 tests of Chandrakirti in the other post, I supposed u r referring to the 3 definitions of conventionality? Any idea how is this luminosity related to the 3 definitions?
Manage

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · 18h
John Tan

John Tan I would say regardless of whether the mind is silent, conceptual or non-conceptual, things still appear solid, dual and substantial. The wisdom that sees through essence and characteristics penetrates far deeper than non-conceptuality. Ignorance is equally deep, non-conceptuality is not sufficient to put ignorance to rest.

Manage

· Reply · 18h
André A. Pais

André A. Pais John Tan, again:

The point of all this
Is to drop into a silence
That is beyond words.
And beyond the absence of words. ;)

I totally agree with you. Mere non-conceptuality is not enough. Newborn babies and animals are not Buddhas. We are not Buddhas in deep sleep.

By "all this" I mean thorough analysis, which results, I believe, in a silence that is not mere non-conceptuality and which can include, in fact, thoughts and concepts.
Manage

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · 17h
John Tan

John Tan André, imo ultimate analysis that conventional things are empty is the antedote for the conceptual mind to understand. The "taste" and recognition of "essence and characteristics" and emptiness must b brought to all levels, conceptual or non-conceptual, like how we recognized our childhood friends even after not seeing them for decades.

Manage

· Reply · 17h · Edited
Geovani Geo

Geovani Geo Andre. "The abyss and voidness here is not a blank. It is, as you say, luminosity. Undifferentiated - and thus without a ground - radiance."

When you say, "without a ground", what is it that is w/o the ground?

There is a subtlety here. Of course the ultimate Silence is groundless for there is nothing upstream of it. Otoh, "the mind that is the great housebuilder, the weaver of universes, of Samsara, of Nirvana" is grounded in that Silence. So when we say that "its all conceptually attributed" this "all" does have a ground, the Ultimate Silence.
Manage

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · 13h
John Tan

John Tan There never is/was any "ground" and if anything needs to be dropped to reach a point of silence, then it is a state that has entry and exit.

Silence or movement, both r appearances. The mind oscillates between the two poles as a result of non-recognition. The nature of mind and phenomena is empty and non-arisen, they have never deviated from their nirvanic quiescence.

Manage

· Reply · 8h
Geovani Geo

Geovani Geo John Tan, when you say, "silence or movement, both r appearances" you have attributed a significance to such silence that made it differ from nirvanic quiescencent silence that has no points of entry and exit. You are now speaking of the apparent manifested silence opposite to manifested movement.

Of course there is no ground when all there is is the ground, just as there is no silence that is not an appearance when all there is is such silence, which is the silence the OP seems to be referring too.

So, you have changed the nomenclature.
Manage

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · 4h · Edited
André A. Pais

André A. Pais Geovani Geo

>> When you say, "without a ground", what is it that is w/o the ground?

Reality is without a ground. What else could be without a ground?

>> Of course the ultimate Silence is groundless for there is nothing upstream of it.

That's the definition of ground (as source): that nothing is upstream of it. I don't agree with that. If nothing is upstream, no condition supports it. If the source is causeless, it is independent of everything else. It is useless then.

>> this "all" does have a ground, the Ultimate Silence.

I don't see any ultimate anywhere. In advaita, awareness (the Self) is ultimate. For me, that suffers from the same problem as the causeless source. Ultimate means independent. Independence destroys the functionality of interdependence. Thus it is said that independent or inherent existence is "an impossible mode / type of existence".

Manage

· Reply · 2h · Edited
In 2007, Thusness wrote, "David Loy has a strong clarity in the meaning of non-dual, no-self.  He would be a good candidate to put it in philosophy terms and discussions. I think not many can, in terms of academia, though I prefer not to discuss too much about it. Non-dual is about the intuitive experience and the immediate quality free of all descriptions.   After the initial experience, we will still have the temptation to try make it clear to conventional thoughts but this will eventually prove futile.  It will come a time where one stops all sorts of arbitrary thoughts and discussion and just this experience, that is free of background and right directly into the crystal clear manifestation. Just the experience alone, but it is still a good book though in terms of academic.  I would think the understanding is better than ken wilber. :) ... file them up and try to get David Loy's book. It is difficult to get good and clear writer about non-duality and emptiness. Many explained wrongly. And those that truly experienced, do not want to talk about it, so treasure these articles. :) ...he is quite good from the stand point of an academician....and as a non dual experiencer..."


Thusness also commented in 2008:

(2:37 PM) Thusness:    david loy wrote pretty well about non-dual but missed it.  He under-estimated the teaching of Bahiya Sutta.
(2:38 PM) Thusness:    And remarked that it is not clear that buddha spoke of non-dual experiences.
(2:38 PM) Thusness:    That is a wrong concept.
(2:38 PM) Thusness:    in fact it is most clear that Bahiya Sutta taught the peak of non-dual experience.
(2:38 PM) Thusness:    That is the correct view.
(2:39 PM) Thusness:    But David Loy present a very good foundation for one to understand non-dual experience.
(2:39 PM) Thusness:    It is difficult to find such explanation in words.


Recently found out that David Loy is putting up his book Nonduality in PDF format for free reading.


http://www.davidloy.org/writing.html

Nonduality: A Study in Comparative Philosophy (New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press, 1988). A softcover edition was published by Humanities Press in 1997. A German language edition was published as Nondualitat by Kruger Verlag in 1998. A Spanish language edition was published as No-dualidad by Kairos Press in 2000.
Focuses on the nonduality of subject and object in Buddhism, Vedanta, and Taoism, with reference to Western thinkers including Wittgenstein, Heidegger and William Blake. The main argument is that these three Asian systems may be understood as different attempts to describe the same experience. The categories of Buddhism (no self, impermanence, causality, eightfold path) and Advaita Vedanta (all-Self, time and causality as maya, no path) are “mirror images” of each other. Ultimately it becomes difficult to distinguish a formless Being (Brahman) from a formless nonbeing (shunyata). Buddhism seems to be a more phenomenological description of nonduality, Vedanta a more metaphysical account.
Note from author: I am pleased to announce that Wisdom Publications will be publishing a second edition of this book in 2019.

Excerpts

Thusness:

Whether it is expressed as “exist conventionally but ultimately empty” or “appear but are empty” is simply a matter of flavour.

What is important is the taste of seeing conventional things as empty till one’s entire body-mind is pervaded with emptiness - like space, free and unobstructed.
John Tan Geo, I think it is not just about putting mind to a rest as certain specific insights regarding the ultimate nature of mind and phenomena need to arise. Putting the reasoning mind to a standstill can have several outcomes:

1. A dull state of non-conc
eptuality.

2. A taste of Presence but not necessarily free from duality.

3. Perceiver seen as perceived. Subsuming all as Mind.

4. Both perceiver and perceived are liberated by realising they r empty; what appears is free from elaboration. Boundless and spontaneous, naturally perfected.

Seeing the emptiness and dependent arising of “this” and “that” relates to 4 imo.