I wrote:

Blue sky. Green trees fluttering. Just that, nothing else. Vivid, alive, and illusory. Enjoy your weekends.

31Angelo Gerangelo, Alejandro Serrano and 29 others
Comments
André A. Pais
André A. Pais We could even say, "blue expanse, swaying green"... 😊
Manage
· Reply · 2w · Edited
Soh Wei Yu
Soh Wei Yu Yes... been thinking my expression doesn’t sound right as it seems to imply object and characteristics. Your expression is more accurate 🙂
Manage
· Reply · 2w
Tan Jui Horng
Tan Jui Horng But why not further reduce blue and green?
Manage
· Reply · 2w
Soh Wei Yu
Soh Wei Yu Tan Jui Horng there is nothing further to deconstruct in the actualization of empty non-arisen suchness or emptiness as form
Manage
· Reply · 2w · Edited
André A. Pais
André A. Pais Tan, we can reduce it by saying that "blue expanse" is actually beyond the concept or label "blue" or "expansive". Other than that, "blueness" is a mere occurrence, non-conceptual perception, beyond labels, separation, reification, etc.
Manage
· Reply · 2w · Edited
Tan Jui Horng
Tan Jui Horng Soh Wei Yu Does that mean blue and green cannot be deconstructed?

I am asking only because I am wondering that while Andre's expression is more correct, it is still not completely correct, and requires further explanation like his answer to me.


But I suppose that is the problem of expressing something in language. At a certain point we either become unintelligible or end up with a 1000 word explanation of what blue sky and green trees really mean.
Manage
· Reply · 2w · Edited
Tan Jui Horng
Tan Jui Horng André A. Pais Thanks. Although I guess that would be a mouthful. Perhaps the only appropriate reaction to seeing blue sky and green trees is to smile and enjoy.
Manage
· Reply · 2w
Jackson Peterson
Jackson Peterson Oy, why bicker over words, yet words still appearing, thoughts arising, blue skies, green leaves... all movements like wind...
Manage
· Reply · 2w
John Tan
John Tan Jui Horng, why do we de-construct and how do we know we r on the right direction using deconstruction and when will it end?
Manage
· Reply · 2w
John Tan
John Tan Wei Yu, y do u say no further decosntruction is needed?
Manage
· Reply · 2w · Edited
Soh Wei Yu
Soh Wei Yu John Tan self (background) and phenomena (foreground) to which characteristics belong are constructs, when they dissolve then illusory appearance are tasted as empty suchness without reference points or sense that things exist somewhere and belong to something, illusory like mirage
Manage
· Reply · 2w · Edited
Soh Wei Yu
Soh Wei Yu If you look at the sun and then look away from it, certain colours from the “sun” still overlay the rest of the visual field. Colours do not belong to subject Nor object but arise in dependence on conditionality. They do not arise nor exist anywhere but appears as mere appearances and illusions (but vividly clear)
Manage
· Reply · 2w · Edited
John Tan
John Tan Yes Wei Yu, u described ur experiences but you did not answer y no further de-construction is needed.
Manage
· Reply · 2w
Soh Wei Yu
Soh Wei Yu Direct taste of empty suchness transcends mental constructs and is the termination of linguistic description or the serene coming to rest of the manifold of named things as described by Nagarjuna.

“Professor Ram Chandra Pandey and Mañju translates it
thus : “I pay respect to the best among speakers who, having attained Enlightenment, has taught relative origination (Pratītyasamutpāda) which is no-cessation, no-origination, no- annihilation, no-abiding, no-one-thing, no-many-thing, no-coming-in, no-going-out; being the termination of linguistic description (Prapañcopashamam), it is the good (Shivam) [Ram Candra Pandey & Mañju, 1999, pp.1]. Mervyn Sprung in collaboration with T.R.V. Murti and U.S. Vyas has translated it thus: “Neither perishing nor arising in time neither terminable nor eternal, neither self-identical nor variant in form, neither coming nor going, such is the true way of things (Pratītyasamutpāda), the serene coming to rest of the manifold of the named things (Prapañcopashamam), as taught by the perfectly Enlightened One whom I honor as the best of all teachers.” [Mervyn Sprung in collaboration with TRV Murti and U.S. Vyas, 1979, pp.32-33].”
Manage
· Reply · 2w · Edited
John Tan
John Tan "Direct taste of empty suchness transcends mental constructs and is the termination of linguistic description or the serene coming to rest of the manifold of named things as described by Nagarjuna."

If that is the case, y not just b raw in attention or simply cease conceptuality or naked in Awareness then there r also no named things or mental constructs.
Manage
· Reply · 2w
Soh Wei Yu
Soh Wei Yu Because mental construct is not mere gross conceptuality. For example gross conceptuality may dissolve but the background Witness still seem eternal and dualistic and very real
Manage
· Reply · 2w
Tan Jui Horng
Tan Jui Horng Hello John, as far as I know,

1. We deconstruct to know what the nature of our experience really is. If we don't then we are just like most people living in delusion which inevitably causes greed and hatred. At a certain point if we don't examine an
d deconstruct we may find ourself clinging to "bare" perception, which is not enough because the empty nature of perception is not realized.

2. We know we are on the right direction... if we check back with the Buddha's discourses? He already did the work so we don't end up with infinite deconstruction, which is what I remember seeing some people comment on the possible downsides of deconstructing experience. There should not be any gross/subtle clinging to the aggregates nor (Buddha forbid) objects that make up our experience. This one should need a strong moment to moment mindfulness and honesty.

3. I don't know actually. There seems to be a lot that can be deconstructed. Does the deconstruction end when we see the aggregates are also empty? As per the heart sutra. But there are still things like "presence", time, etc. I am confused about this.

For your critiques, admonishments, and answers please.
Manage
· Reply · 2w
André A. Pais
André A. Pais "self (background) and phenomena (foreground) to which characteristics [supposedly] belong are constructs"

That's a great way to put it. There is no possessor of characteristics (beyond the apparent characteristics), nor perceiver of perceptions. There is nothing behind appearances (our eyes), nor beyond them (as a conceptual possessor of said characteristics).
Manage
· Reply · 2w
Richard Cooper
Richard Cooper Why deconstruct if the blue sky and green trees are effortless ?
Manage
· Reply · 2w
John Tan
John Tan Hi Jui Horng,

Thks for the detailed reply, I din expect that 😝. My questions were triggered by the conversations between u, Soh and Andre.

Seeing reality through reified constructs r like attempting to understand wind by stopping moving air.

In the process the mind gets confused that "wind" has it own existent and can stand apart from "moving air".

Deconstruction is simply to fix this issue by realizing that "wind" standing apart is like "rabbit horns" and therefore needs to b seen through. It is empty and non-arisen (by using Buddhist terms).

Soh's expression of "blue sky and green trees fluttering" is to convey the experience free from reified constructs, that is "feeling the moving air" directly.

My question to Soh is he is talking abt the experience, not answering ur question of y no further deconstruction is needed, that is, only the reified construct "wind" needs to b deconstructed, not the "moving air" that is felt directly.

In summary, I m just being a busy body, nothing intense 🤣.
Manage
· Reply · 2w · Edited
Tan Jui Horng
Tan Jui Horng Thank you for your answer John, how about Andre's "blue expanse, swaying green"? On one hand I feel it is valid, just that the statement itself, if I don't know that Andre has valid and good insight and realizations, would also contain reified constructs (blue and green)?

...or are they actually not constructs?


Expressions of experience in words always perplex me...
Manage
· Reply · 2w
John Tan
John Tan Jui Horng, if looking beyond words into the experience directly, both r ok.

Only sense of attachment of wanting too much to express that freedom from the objects for Andre. Just my opinion, don't take it too seriously.😝
Manage
· Reply · 2w · Edited
Tan Jui Horng
Tan Jui Horng Thank you John :)
Manage
· Reply · 2w
Image may contain: 1 person, closeup








































Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche

“Meditation” this term has been abused. We should change this term to “Alive”. Because no matter it is three minutes or five minutes, during the time of meditation, you’re alive, you are consciously alive! At present, basically we are just like a walking corpses. When we drink tea, we are thinking of other things; when we looking at the beautiful trees, we cannot aware those green beauty. Alive is very important, but alive nakedly is even more important.


...

When we talk about meditation, we're not talking about the meditation nowadays like "sunset meditation" or beethoven's music with birds chirping.

Even if you are very good at not dwelling in the past, even if you are very good at not dwelling in the future, and even if you can really dwell in the present... if you do not know about emptiness and appearance (i.e. no wisdom), then your meditation is as worthless as "sunset meditation". Anyway, there is no real existing "presentness" anyway.

From the Buddhist point of view, only meditation based on wisdom is a means to accumulate merit, as it brings us closer to the truth. These truths are truths that will uproot your suffering.

We tend to get distracted by the ritual of meditation, thinking it's more important than the training of wisdom, because sitting straight etc is more perceivable.

Shamatha is a trick. Vipashyana is business. To perform business, you need the trick. Therefore, both are necessary.

(notes organised from DKR's teaching on How To Accumulate Merit, 25 Aug 2008, San Francisco)
 

...

http://www.vana.co.in/.../01/Vanavas-with-DJKR-E-Book.pdf

"We usually create boundaries, and some of them are ver y decorated!
Usually, this is not a good sign because people who put so much
emphasis on these things –
you know, I’m doing a retreat, setting a
boundary and so on
– actually, they end up doing less of practice
because they put so much emphasis on outer rituals. Anyway, the
point that I am tr ying to make is that in Buddhism, the real boundar y
is between the past thought and the future thought. That is your
boundar y. Now if you can do that, you can be in a nightclub, dancing
and crazy – all sorts of wheeling, dealing in business or whatever – but
still, there will be Yogis who will not go beyond the boundar y of the
past thought and the future thought – meaning, to be in the present.
Always in the present. Whatever you are thinking right now, being in
this present.
For instance, now. You hear rustling, air conditioner, maybe you’re
thinking of yesterday and tomorrow, whatever it is. Simply knowing
that, being aware of it – but not really thinking about the past
or future, and not judging – never judging! You may be thinking
something so hideous, or something so wholesome – but you must just
simply be aware. That is actually the king of retreats.

...

I think you can consciously get lost, isn’t it? Yes? I think so, and that’s
much better! If you’re not consciously lost, I don’t think you’re being
creative yet. You’re stuck. But I can understand it. If you have the
fear of stumbling and getting stuck, you can consciously be in the
present. You can be here in any way – there is no past thought and
future thought! You know we were talking about boundaries? How
not to go to the past, or to the future. I was bluffing, actually! Not me,
Buddhism. (Laughter) There’s no past, or future actually – it’s all here!
When we talk, we have to talk like that.
And anyway, you also believe in the past don’t you – as a human
being? That’s good news for you, because the future, the past, when
you’re writing – is all in the present. Then you have more opportunity
because you will not be stuck in any angle. For example, think about
this one from Basho:
In my new robe, this morning – someone else.
So good!
Year by year, the monkey’s mask reveals the monkey.
Really, this testifies that you can do both. Nowadays, it’s all about
means that lead back to the wisdom, and that’s a sad thing.

...

Yes, yes – that is what I mean. Anyway, there is no past and no future.
It’s always in the present. We are really talking in a ver y deep way of
the Buddhist idea of illusion. It’s amazing isn’t it? There is no past
and there is no future, and yet we’re so caught up by these concepts!
There’s also no present – but that we’ll talk about in another time. We
should first grind this one!
No present – whoa – well, just to give you the names – these teachings
are taught in the Mahamudra, or the Mahasandhi. Yes. Those are
beautiful teachings. Some of them are just so powerful. There’s one
called “Mahamudra by the Ganges” (Tilopa’s pith instructions on the
Mahamudra). It’s amazing. Then there’s the Mahasandhi. When the
Mahasandhi was taught, it was hard to take for many Buddhists, even
– because Buddhists love ‘sensible’ things. The Mahasandhi is beyond
sense, and senselessness! They think you’re crazy when you’re stuck
with being sensible! But that’s for another time.