Freedom from Elaborations

John Tan: "Michael Hernandez that is another problem.  Let's take all 3 major representatives -- Mipham of Nyingma, Tsongkhapa of Gelug and Dharmakirti of Yogacara. Each has his own definition. To Dharmakirti, linguistic and inference cognition is conceptual, perception is non-conceptual.  Mipham has 3 categories of conceptualities if u studied them, I shall not elaborate here.  To Tsongkhapa, all cognitions both conception and perception are conceptual.  That is y Tsongkhapa sees everything as dependently originated and conventional and negation of intrinsic as ultimate as nothing isn't conceptual and dependen

 

Yet the so called "conceptuality" they all agreed that when dissolved that will give rise to non-conceptual gnosis is actually "the very subtle tendency to dualify" which imo is no different from "inherent existence".

 

As for me, after all these years of sorting out I prefer to retrict "conceptual" definition to mental activities that relate to linguistic, mental inference and labelling which is closer to our daily usage.  I do not consider deep karmic tendencies as "conceptual".

 

For the ineffable beyond speech, there is nothing that can be said as it is the termination of all words and the way of leaping to that can be by koan or by way of negation and deconstruction.  We can also do somatic or energy practices.

[7:43 am, 06/11/2021] John Tan: Gilles Therrien Why isn't Heart Sutra points directly to the Heart but instead points to freedom from all elaborations?

[7:43 am, 06/11/2021] John Tan: Do you know why?

 

Soh: oic... malcolm just said basically inexpressibility is like pointing to the lack of inherent existence.

 

malcolm:

 

Dharma is not a via negativa. Dependent origination = emptiness.

 

Inexpressibility simply means that we cannot point to anything and declare “this is how this appearance is.” It means there is nothing behind the relative to describe, and it means that descriptions of appearances fail to capture the reality of those appearances. But there is certainly nothing behind nor beyond them, just as there is nothing behind a mirage, illusion, etc., but causes and conditions that lack inherent existence themselves.

 

 

....

 

 

There is no source, no pure love, or anything like it. The highest manifestation of consciousness is a person who has realized how things are 100%, in other words, a buddha.

 

Now, to the extent that Buddhas are motivated by love, the wish that sentient beings be happy, we can say they are embodiments of love. But there is nothing at all mysterious about that, just as there is nothing mysterious about a mother’s love for an only child.

 

Soh: no inherent existence is the key to experience the heart as all appearance. so emptiness is form

John Tan: Yes

John Tan: Here, "ineffable" is in the same vein as our inability to communicate the "sweetness" of sugar or the "sourness" of lemon, not about any transcendental ground that is beyond. ” – November 2021