You know how radical the buddha is?
Let's try one scenario.
We often take ourselves as a separate entity and the world outside as another separate fixed entity and we move inside this world.
We fly from Singapore to New York,
We walk from the mall to the carpark.
right. of course.
The buddha says NOPE.
He taught "dependent origination".
What does that means?
It means... are you even ready for this... lol
You are not moving anywhere.
the whole scenery that "you" are looking at arises due to conditions changing.
You don't move from mall to carpark.
You are the mall, which morphs into the carpark, when conditions change.
which then morphs into sceneries on the road,
And this morphing happens moment to moment
And the whole scenery is your own appearances,
So "you" never move
There is no coming or going.
and then he says,
Because this is only dependently originating, so it doesn't really exist out there.
so you are literally a whole holographic scenic emanation which morphs moment to moment without an existence.
If you accept this doctrine
you literally live this way looking at the world this way.
now you see how radical the buddha is?
can you even accept this ?
This is not even that shocking.
Gratitude there was morphing from drinking coffee to reading these words and back again. So helpful. Look at all these conditions conspiring for understanding to clarify here deeper and deeper. . Thanks Co dependent arising of Yin. Very helpful
Ng Xin Zhao
Is it just like shifting frame of reference?
Like we can put reference frame of road, then chicken crosses the road.
Or reference frame with chicken, then the road crosses under the chicken.
Reference frame with the sun (non rotating), the earth goes around the sun. Or reference frame the earth, the sun goes around the earth. This is not the reason for day and night, but the reason for seasonal changes.
So instead of putting reference frame onto the external reality, there's just reference frame of this body and mind, since the 6 senses are carried by this body and mind. It's like putting on VR and haptic suit. Total immersion, where one is at the same place, but the sense data changes.
My hunch is that it's way more than this. But so far that's the interpretation that I got from your statement. It's also not the first time I heard this. Hor Tuck Loon from WISE said this too.
Yes , almost like that in a way.
Only I feel there is completely no frame of reference.
Well you can say everywhere is a Center too.
There’s completely no “I” to fixate upon.
So it feels as though the whole “world” is fluxing non stop.
When the chicken crosses the road, we will see as though a chicken as static crossing another thing that is static.
But once seen through both are fluxing. Bam bam bam every fraction of second it is just dependent arising , no movement .
It is like you scroll fb on your phone ,
You feel like some news feed coming out from below, but it is not. It is every fraction of a second the screen changes dependently on the data, eye consciousness etc etc. and every moment is a new moment .
Only now it is not just the phone and fb, it is every sensations in the whole world lol
It is crazy
Ng Xin Zhao
Yin Ling another concept from physics is Julien Barbour's end of time interpretation.
Basically, there's no flow of time, just each snapshot of nows. Like pictures frames in movie. It doesn't seem to gel well with eternal timeless now experience, as the timeless now seems to have change, but the nows in Barbour's interpretation is more like a static picture, no change. Change is illusion due to the past being embedded in the nows like fossils in the ground.
Cannot read dogen with logic but it can be experentially felt. Like the whole universe if fully exerted into the boating and there’s no person doing anything .. even the leaf is moving the boat, the whole universe past future is boating.
The Buddha is the most radical teacher ever
Hence why he doesn’t even want to teach when he became enlightened. Lol
Ng Xin Zhao yeah but in barbours writing he reify the “now” you see and a static picture and the past is like fossils - all these are cognitive obscuration in Buddhism terms
The Buddha is so radical that when he says -no self- even “here and now” is not a self, not something independently existing
The Buddha proposed something even crazier, - there is no now, no here- just this one whole arising. And this whole arising cannot be located and cannot be found.
What good fun
Ng Xin Zhao
Yin Ling am I right to say: cannot be located/found, means that to locate stuffs, one would need to grasp it, to reify it as truly existing, to make it into a concept. Thus something solid which can be grasped onto.
It just that the world is like bubbles from rain splashing onto the road, changes too fast, just rest in the impermanence, the suchness of things, without needing to make a base of even here and now to stand in?
Imo, “Cannot be located”
Can actually be experienced very vividly
We can locate sthg now because we have a frame of reference of “self” in the body. So things are there.
Once no-self. The whole contracted energy in the body is hollowed out and pacified.
The whole scenery/sounds/ touch, sensations all pop in and out and whenever it pops in “you” are there.
But this “you” is not an identification you. It’s just this sensation knowing itself.
So it is sort of like neutral sensation of “suchness” nature dancing it’s dependently arising dance. These sensations does not exist lol
One doesn’t feel like a “person” anymore.
Just this whole ping ping ping
Ephemeral sensations that are soo so empty playing out it’s splendour like a show boundlessly
The bodg doesn’t feel more than a cup,
The body sensation not more than a sound.
No self anywhere.
Just dependent arising everywhere going about it’s own business
All the sensations is one’s own appearances
Thanks for letting me talk crazily
But I’m reporting literally this is the most literal I can get. Reality cannot be understood
Ng Xin Zhao
Yin Ling sensation knowing itself... This should not be read as reifying the sensation as a mini sentient thing which can know itself like? Like the movie "inside out" where those 5 emotions are reified as mini humans living inside the head of humans.
Tree sees itself, is not that tree has a mind which sees itself. Cup sees itself is not like cup suddenly become sentient and got eyes to loop back to see itself. It's just lacking any suitable words that there's no more self, no more referent to say the subject sees object, but ordinary language has this object subject structure, so it's not easy to communicate what you're experiencing using normal language?
Welcome. Thanks for talking crazy. I think it's just crazy if we take it as really the cup is sentient and sees itself. But it's an inherent flaw in language. Am I right? Or maybe the panpsychism people are right, that everything has consciousness?
It’s not sentient.
But it’s the nature of every sensation that dependently arise.
If you look into the buddhas teaching- especially the 12 ayatanas (origin and base) and 18 dhatus teaching in theravada, it has been describe , just the Buddha don’t talk modern like me lol
Basically ear, ear consciousness and sohnd dependently arise and a sound is heard , it is ONE ARISING ,right??
But we normally perceive as - sound ther, then I hear from here, 2 moments of arising
But the Buddha say nope not like that, one arising, all depdenlt arising in one moment
the sound is heard
And something is aware of the sound
We can be sure of that
Something knows the sound
And the Buddha says one whole dependent arising
Where is the awareness?
This investigation needs to be done until conviction arise
And if we want to refer to a parallel Buddha steaching- the Bahiya sutta when Bahiya heard of the sutta and become an Arahant prior to dying. ..
The Buddha taught Bahiya to practise
In the heard only the heard
In the seen only the seen
Hence if you pair this with the dhatus and ayatanas teaching
In the heard,
It is a whole dependent Arising of ear sound ear consciousness bell air waves etc etc etc
But only the heard.
Only the sound
All package in one
All conditions being totally exerted into producing the sound
So where is the awareness ?
Hehe so I often say sound hears
But it’s not like sound become a human and hear , 2 moments
It is sound intrinsically have sound consciousness in it already
It is the nature of all sensation that it is only ONE arising. (Refer to dhatus and ayatanas and Bahiya)
One arising means - the knowing of the sound is intrinsic already to the sound
It is not like sound there, then I hear from here , 2 moments of consciousness
It is one arising
The sound consciousness and sound is one arising
In the heard only the heard
All sensations have similar nature
Radical Buddha continue to teaches radically if one cares to really understand him
Ng Xin Zhao
Yin Ling hard to gel with the physics common assumption of the physical world existing out there.
Say light from stars. It had been travelling for years to reach the earth. Before it lands into the eye, there's still light there, but there's no knowing of light from the stars. Indeed, once there's contact, there's naturally the eye consciousness there.
But yes, philosophically speaking, we can say, who can verify that there's light coming from stars without anyone to see the light? Is the moon there when no one is looking? Does the falling tree make a sound in the forest, if no one is there?
Perhaps one can say that the photon and sound wave of compressed air etc are ideals, concepts, which cannot be perceived. Once perceived, there's the light, sound, inherently there's consciousness there. Before perceived, it's more of imagined. The way photon appears to consciousness, it's presentation may not be the same as the underlying thing before it lands to the eye. But no one has access to the photon before it lands to the eye, so this is what Kant might call things in itself. And the Buddhist philosophy might say, it doesn't exist since it's outside the range of the 6 senses. Ok maybe not outside the range of imagination, the mind sense.
Sorry. I think so much, make it so complicated.
Ng Xin Zhao I understnd what you are saying
No we don’t have access to anything apart from our consciousness and we don’t have evidence for that
And we will never find out because without our cosciisunesd there is nothing
Hence physics always look outside , ignoring the observer which is also part of the deal.
Only when recently they found thjnfs change with observations, they realis sthg is very radical yet not budging from their cherished seat of observer hahaha so I am not v much interested in physics coz I can see how their looking is not gonna go any where
Yes dependent origination is super interesting.
also can see this in it bare and naked form in deep meditation, if you reach deep highly concentrated vipassana then switch to samatha these frames of thoughts, frames of images, are almost like a strobe light flickering. Images and phenomena coming out of nothingness from nothingness. The beginning of Thoughts bubbling up to the surface of consciousness then dissipating into nothingness again. Each frame is separate to itself. The same analogy as a 60hrz computer screen that is constantly flickering yet not visible to our common vision.