https://www.facebook.com/share/p/KZqhUCxdQYqEaViU/?

Jigme Dorje:

Which AtR stage would such a view fall under:

"If what appears to be apprehended does not exist by its very own essence  apart from that which apprehends it, then what appears to be the  apprehender does not exist either. The reason, here, is that the  apprehender exists in relation to the apprehended, not in isolation.  Therefore, awareness is devoid of both apprehender and apprehended, in  all their various forms. Free from subject and object, by its very own nature awareness is a mere indescribable luminosity."

From - Distinguishing  Phenomena from Their Intrinsic Nature: Maitreya's  Dharmadharmatavibhanga with Commentaries by Khenpo Shenga and Ju Mipham

Soh:

Mipham Rinpoche, one of the most influential masters of the Nyingma school wrote http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/09/madhyamaka-cittamatra-and-true-intent.html :

…In the cycle of teachings of Maitreya and the writings of the great charioteer Asaṅga, whose thinking is one and the same, it is taught that individuals on the level of earnest aspiration first understand that all phenomena are simply the mind. Subsequently they have the experience that there is no object to be apprehended in the mind. Then, at the stage of the supreme mundane level on the path of joining, they realize that because there is no object, neither is there a subject, and immediately after that, they attain the first level with the direct realization of the truth of ultimate reality devoid of the duality of subject and object. As for things being only the mind, the source of the dualistic perception of things appearing as environment, sense objects, and a body is the consciousness of the ground of all, which is accepted as existing substantially on the conventional level but is taught as being like a magical illusion and so on since it appears in a variety of ways while not existing dualistically. For this reason, because this tradition realizes, perfectly correctly, that the nondual consciousness is devoid of any truly existing entities and of characteristics, the ultimate intentions of the charioteers of Madhyamaka and Cittamātra should be considered as being in agreement.

Why, then, do the Mādhyamika masters refute the Cittamātra tenet system? Because self-styled proponents of the Cittamātra tenets, when speaking of mind-only, say that there are no external objects but that the mind exists substantially—like a rope that is devoid of snakeness, but not devoid of ropeness. Having failed to understand that such statements are asserted from the conventional point of view, they believe the nondual consciousness to be truly existent on the ultimate level. It is this tenet that the Mādhyamikas repudiate. But, they say, we do not refute the thinking of Ārya Asaṅga, who correctly realized the mind-only path taught by the Buddha...

...So, if this so-called “self-illuminating nondual consciousness” asserted by the Cittamātrins is understood to be a consciousness that is the ultimate of all dualistic consciousnesses, and it is merely that its subject and object are inexpressible, and if such a consciousness is understood to be truly existent and not intrinsically empty, then it is something that has to be refuted. If, on the other hand, that consciousness is understood to be unborn from the very beginning (i.e. empty), to be directly experienced by reflexive awareness, and to be self-illuminating gnosis without subject or object, it is something to be established. Both the Madhyamaka and Mantrayāna have to accept this...”

Comments by Soh: if this nondual self illuminating gnosis is mistaken as real (reification) and intrinsically existent, then it does not go beyond thusness stage 4.

If this is realised to be empty, it is at least stage 5, and if twofold empty then it is 6.

John Tan wrote more than a decade ago:

Haha Jackson, u never give up.

    This heart is the "space" of where, the "time" of when and the "I" of who.

    In hearing, it's that "sound".

    In seeing, it's that "scenery".

    In thinking, it is that "eureka"!

    In snapping a finger, it is seizing the whole entire moment of that instantaneous "snapping".

    Just marvelous such as it is on the fly.

    So no "it" but thoroughly empty.

    To u this "heart" is most real, to dzogchen it is illusory. Though illusory, it is fully vivid and brilliance. Since it is illusory, it nvr really truly arise. There is genuine "treasure" in the illusory.

    I think Kyle has a lot points to share. Do unblock him.

    Nice chat And happy journey jax!

    Gone!

    December 12, 2013 at 8:24am · Unlike · 10

Nafis:

I read the Maitreya book that he posted just now. The excerpt itself sounds like one-mind, but going through the whole text, Asanga/Maitreya was pointing to Stage 6.

But it's good to clarify in case people interpret the excerpt as dissolving subject/object into an underlying awareness.

The book has a commentary by Mipham as well.

Soh:

Yes i do think so. Its not possible that maitreya, a tenth stage bodhisattva, could have substantialist view.. even asangha (3rd stage?) or a first bhumi would not possibly have a substantialist view

I just wanted to clarify the subtleties.