John Tan: Later then talk.

Even thinking of it as a modulation of awareness is an issue. That is the most difficult "obstacle" to relinquish.

Now we got to understand what exactly is conventional. And understand it is the same conventional framework that leads to the same conclusion about modulation of the same awareness.

Soh Wei Yu: I see.

Soh Wei Yu: Yes, I never understood it as modulation of awareness for a long time. In fact, I think the Pali Suttas was much clearer on this point or at least brought it out better than even many Dzogchen and Zen teachings... when Buddha taught Bhikkhu Sati on consciousness and dependent origination. Consciousness being a dependent designation.

John Tan: First one must stop the habit of thinking the extremes and concluding there must be some ultimate "stuff". If we think in such a mode, forever the mind will be trapped thinking some form of reality must exist. If not, then what is it? Here is the catch. Not "what is it," but "under what conditions does such phenomenon arise." And that is the best you can get within this conventional framework. For non-substantialists, there is no urge at all to seek explanations based on or going to lead to something, get it?

Soh Wei Yu: I see.

John Tan: What is needed is, just what appears is vividly luminous and empty. Do you understand this part? Then conventionally and conceptually, it is dependent arising.

Soh Wei Yu: Yes... no basis or ground, non-existent clear appearances. {snipped} Malcolm and Kyle said that's also Dzogchen view... {snipped}

John Tan: It means what appears has to be empty for it even to appear.

Soh Wei Yu: I see.

John Tan: In science, we can explain it as stable enough patterns. Stable enough patterns or relationships being observed and conventionally designated as "something". But those patterns or regularities are only conventional too, valid and functional, nothing ultimate. So in the non-substantialist's world, conventionalities to me are important; we cannot discard and say "because they are non-existent ultimately." Because such a thought and conclusion is precisely inherent thought, as only an inherent mode of thinking requires "existence" to be essential. Get it? From this, then you can understand total exertion works in the conventional world. No hierarchy, no sequence, no core.

Soh Wei Yu: I see.

John Tan: Do you get what I mean?

Soh Wei Yu: I think so.

John Tan: You must understand total exertion is not holistic or wholeness, but beyond whole and parts. Holistic thought is that wholeness is more important than parts. But dependent arising is not based on such a concept. It is emptiness, therefore phenomena appear in dependence. Therefore it is free from hierarchy, sequence, and core. Get it?

Soh Wei Yu: I see. Yes, there is no wholeness either, otherwise it's no different from Brahman, one without a second.

John Tan: Don't just think of "ultimate," as there never is/was such reality. So no wholeness apart from parts, without hierarchy."