Posts
Robert Dominik Tkanka since André A. Pais mentioned about fire, let's take "fire" as an example,
When we look at "fire", there is a vision of a yellow, orange color image --> vision consciousness;
When we touch the "fire", there is a hot sensation --> sensation consciousness;
From these 2 different streams of consciousness, an imputing-consciousness abstracts and reifies a "fire" entity where there is none. Out of nowhere, an objective, independent "fire" is being created.
We then characterized this "heat sensation" by ascribing it to "fire" and made "fire" a bearer of characteristic and "heat" becomes it's essential nature where it has an inherent power to cause something to burn (essential causality).
But there is "no fire" as an entity that has the essential power to cause anything to burn; there is no self existing "heat" either; "fire" is a dependent arising; "heat" is a "dependent arising"; so:
1. What is dependent arising and
2. What is dependently originating?
Now in this example, what is involved in "ignorance" in relation to seeing self-nature:
1. an extra reified entity is created;
2. consciousness is being forgotten and excluded from the equation of understanding "reality" which is most crucial.
3. dependent arising is not seen, instead it is replaced by essential causality;
Anatta insight sees through 1, authenticated 2 but 3 is not seen (imo) but we jumped straight into freedom from all elaborations.
End
It is not simply about freeing from elaborations and we r left with with the world also. Nor is it simply about experiencing presence and non-dual, they aren't the main concern.
Look at the scenery, so lurid and vivid;
Is the "scenery" out there?
Feel the "hardness" of the floor;
Is this undeniable "hardness" out there?
If "hardness of the floor" aren't out there, are is "inside" the brain? There is no "hardness" in the brain u can locate in the parts that make up the experience of "hardness".
It is not even in the "mind" for u can't even find "mind" then how can "in" the mind be valid?
If "hardness" isn't external nor internal, then where is it?
So, to me, buddhism is not about helping one taste presence or into an effortless state of non-dual or into a state free of conceptualities but also points out this fundamental cognitive flaw that confuses the mind. This is more crucial. If the cognitive fault isn't uprooted and seen through, then all experiences regardless of how mystical and profound will be distorted.
It is not simply about freeing from elaborations and we r left with with "the world" also. Nor is it simply about experiencing presence and non-dual, they aren't the main concern.
Look at the scenery, so lurid and vivid;
Is the "scenery" out there?
Feel the "hardness" of the floor;
Is this undeniable "hardness" out there?
If "hardness of the floor" aren't out there, is it "inside" the brain? There is no "hardness" in the brain u can locate in the parts that make up the experience of "hardness".
Then we say "no", it is in the "mind". So now what that is believed to be "external" in the past is being "internalized" in a "mind".
But WAIT,
How can "hardness" which is no where to be found be in "mind"?
Furthermore, we can't even find "mind" then how can "in" the mind be valid?
If "hardness" isn't external nor internal, then where is it?
So, to me, buddhism is not only about helping one taste presence or into an effortless state of non-dual or into a state free of conceptualities but more importantly points out this fundamental cognitive flaw that confuses the mind. This is more crucial. If the cognitive fault isn't uprooted and seen through, then all experiences regardless of how mystical and profound will be distorted.
End
Daniel's Post on Anatta/Emptiness
Taken from a facebook group dharma connection.
Thusness:
In ignorance, there is hearer hearing sound.
In anatta, in hearing, only sound.
Yet sound has no true inherent nature (empty),
It is an activity and is that very activity called “hearing”.
Both “hearing and sound” are pointing to the same activity.
Only when seen to have true existence on either side does confusion arise.
In Madhyamaka Emptiness, reification is seen through.
Yet the experiential state of freedom from reification is not expounded.
However one can have a taste of that freedom from arising insight of anatta since anatta is precisely the freedom from reification of Self/self (First fold Emptiness).
In anatta, seeing is simply the full scenery, in hearing only sound…
thus, always only lights, shape, colors, sounds, scents… in clean purity.
Emptying the object further (second fold) is merely dissolving subtle bond of “externality” that creates the appearance of true existence of objects outside. When “externality” is deconstructed, it is effectively a double confirmation of anatta…
…innerly coreless and outwardly empty, all appearances are still simply sound, lights, colors and rays
In thorough deconstruction, as there is no layer that reifies, there is no conceptuality. Therefore no complication, no confusion, no stains, no boundaries, no center, no sense of dual..
no sense of activity…just self arising.
All collapse into a single sphere of natural presence and spontaneous simplicity.
Whatever appears is
neither here nor now,
Neither in nor out,
Neither arises nor ceases,
In the same space…
non-local, timeless and dimensionless
Simply present…
To Jax:
The place where there is no earth, fire, wind, space, water…
is the place where the earth, fire, wind, space and water kills “You” and fully shines as its own radiance, a complete taste of itself and fully itself.
Lastly, it is interesting to get know something about Dzogchen however the jargons and tenets are far beyond me.
Just wrote due to a sudden spurt of interest, nothing intense.
Thanks for all the sharing and exchanges.
Gone!
Daniel M. Ingram wrote in http://dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message_boards/message/4179363
It is interesting that in another thread the was the assertion that MCTB whatever was about the first meaning of emptiness, rather than what your quote defines as both.
Just to be clear:
When I mean empty, I also mean without boundary, without inside and outside
I also mean the direct immediate experience in its unprocessed or raw form. I also mean the total dissolution of the sense of a perceiver.
I also mean no active agent.
I also mean that nothing is stable, including space and time.
I also mean that all is bare, shifting, empty sensate experience, causal, happening according to the basic laws of the universe, naturally, on its own.
I also would say that there is no boundary or differentiation between the sense doors at they occur, nor between body and mind, nor between manifestation and awareness, nor between this and that, beyond those ordinarily used for communication and discriminating function, but these are not the essential nature of experience, just part of it as sensations when they occur.
Nor can one find any here that is stable, nor a now that is stable, nor a knower, nor an investigator, nor any practitioner, nor any attainer.
When I talk of an integrated transient, natural, causal, luminous experience field, this sounds to me exactly like your "All collapse into a single sphere of natural presence and spontaneous simplicity."
I see no obvious difference either in theory or in actual practice.
Thoughts?
Thusness's comments to AEN:
Hi AEN,
Those were just some very casual sharing written on the spur of a moment, they were not well thought. Emptiness to me has another dimension if you wish to look into it.
When there is not even a single trace of Self/self nor is there any sense of inner/outer division, experiencer and what experienced collapsed...
At this moment there is just this vivid beautiful scenery, this bright brilliant world…all self arises
At this point…
Close your eyes....
Voidness....
Relax and rest in this all-consuming awaring void, this clear non-dual Awareness standing alone as itself and of itself…
Then shift the focus to the breath…
Just the sensations of the breath…
Then the transparent dancing sensations…absolutely no mind, no body, no experiencer/experienced, no inner/outer division… borderless and boundless
Every moment is great and miraculous…
This must become natural to you first.
Then at this moment of appreciating maha suchness of the breath, the sensations, the entire scenery, the entire world…
Understand that they are Empty!
Experience the magnificence then deeply understand that they are empty but this Emptiness has nothing to do with deconstruction nor reification nor do I mean they are simply impermanent. So what is this Emptiness I am referring to?
..............
On another occasion Thusness wrote:
Intelligent Knowingness as permanent… continuous… so many projections into time… so involved in mind conceptualities… Deconstruct seer, what happens is just this spontaneously manifested scenery
Deconstruct body further, you have mind-body drop
Deconstruct time, there will only be this clear vivid presence of immediacy
After arising insight of anatta, there is only “directness” and simplicity... go beyond conventions and conceptuality and recognize this immediate radiance is exactly what is appearing in this instantaneous moment...
If you are in need of a view for practice, then embrace the general principle of Dependent Origination that doesn’t entertain who-when-where construct, it will help sever dualistic and inherent propensities. Otherwise you will have to go back to the koan I asked you when I first met you in IRC… this moment ceases as it arises, is this moment arising or ceasing? If you are clear, then further penetrate this total exertion of immediacy and realize that though there is vivid appearances, there is nothing here… nothing now… you will never find it!
Labels: Anatta, Daniel Ingram, Emptiness, John Tan, Theravada |
.....
The weight of thoughts -- Part 1
When contemplating, do not just let our contemplation remain as a mental reasoning exercise. For example:
What appears is neither "internal" nor "external". For the notion of "internality" is dependent on the notion of "externality", without either, the sense of neither can arise. Therefore both notions r merely conventional, they originates dependently.
Do not just let our contemplation remain at this level. If we do that, at most the freedom will simply remain at the mental level -- merely a pellucid, pure and clean state. It is no different from practicing raw attention although insight on how conceptualities proliferate the mind may arise.
But go further to relate directly to our sensations, thoughts, smells, colors, tastes, sounds and ask:
"What do we mean by thoughts are neither inside nor outside our head?"
Seeing through this will be much more penetrating. It will bring a deep sense of illusoriness and mystical awe as a real-time lived-experience.
.....
The weight of thoughts -- Part 2
How heavy are thoughts?
Where are their roots?
It is not uncommon to hear in the spiritual circle phrases like "the 'I' is just a thought" or "thought is empty and spacious, there is no weight or root to it".
While the rootlessness and the space-like nature of "thoughts" should be pointed out, one must not be misled into thinking they have seen through "anything" much less up-rooted the deeply seated conceptual notions of "I/mine", "body/mind", "space/time"...etc.
So emphasis must also be placed on the other side of the coin. "Thoughts" are astonishingly heavy like a black-hole (size of a pinhole, weight of a star); the roots of conceptual notions" they carry permeate our entire being and everywhere.
The "roots" of thoughts are no where to be found also means they can be found anywhere and everywhere, spreaded across the 3 times and 10 directions -- in modern context, over different time-lines across the multiverse. In other words, "this arises, that arises".
.....
In anatta, we see through self as a mental construct and one is set on a de-constructive journey to free oneself from all mental constructs, from self to all phenomena and the relationships among them.
However when we see dependent arising, nothing is eliminated.
Conceptualization remains, parts remain, cause-effect remains, self remains, others remains...Everything remains, only the mistaken view of "essence" is relinquished.
Instead of seeing them to exist essentially, it is now understood that they originates dependently and whatever originates in dependence is free from the four pairs of extremes (aka 8 negations of Nagarjuna).
Without understanding dependent arising and emptiness, spontaneous perfection free from all elaborations will be distorted.
Showing posts with label Emptiness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Emptiness. Show all posts
Emptiness of Self-Sufficient Substantially Existent Person vs Emptiness of Inherent Existence of Persons, Bhumis
- Sharing these teachings, probably the most important teaching I have come across to further clear my cognitive obscurations after no-self insight. Here is the words of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, similarly John Tan has repeatedly asked me to contemplate and penetrate similar insights.Hhdl opines that negating self-sufficient existent person alone will not lead to liberation, which imo is the level of “self”negated in the Pali tradition. we need more than that. We need the help of Nargajuna and his MMK to help us understand what is inherent existence and then refute that.Imo the insights are different as night and day.He also goes on to say pure ground bodhisattvas and arhats still have view of inherent existence in their consciousnesses, unlike Arya’s meditative equipoise.Shocking? Yes
but he is pushing us to realise a very deep level of insight in his modern book meant for public. I don’t know about you, but I have not come across anymore clearer teaching than this. Homage to hhdl who thinks we are capable enough to attain such deep insights needed for liberation.27 comments
John TanAlso Yin LingIn anatta, we see through self as a mental construct and one is set on a de-constructive journey to free oneself from all mental constructs, from self to all phenomena and the relationships among them.Conceptualization remains, parts remain, cause-effect remains, self remains, others remains...Everything remains, only the mistaken view of "essence" is relinquished.Instead of seeing them to exist essentially, it is now understood that they originate dependently and whatever originates in dependence is free from the four pairs of extremes (aka 8 negations of Nagarjuna).Without understanding dependent arising and emptiness, spontaneous perfection free from all elaborations will be distorted.- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
Yin LingThank you. Yes if the essence is left un-refuted, it is almost impossible to see Nagarjuna 8 negations. How it is possible I do not know.HHDL pushes this liberating view across very strongly.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 13h
- Reply
- 8h
- Reply
- 13h
- Reply
- 12h
- Reply
- 12h
- Edited
- Reply
- 12h
- Reply
- 12h
- Reply
- 12h
- Reply
- 12h
- Reply
- 12h
- Reply
- 11h
- Reply
- 11h
- Reply
- 8h
- Reply
- 6h
- Edited
- Reply
- 6h
- Edited
- Reply
- 6h
- Edited
- Reply
- 5h
- Reply
- 4h
- Edited
- Reply
- See translation
- 1h
- Reply
- 38m
- Reply
- 38m
- Reply
- 32m
Jo Ann
Which book is this?
Anna Mukherjee
Ling Yin Thank you for sharing. What book are those ecerpts from? The below has been pivotal in my daily practice:
"As long as one grasps the aggregates, one will also grasp the I with regard to them."
André A. Pais
According
to Gelug, insight into emptiness is required to attain liberation, even
the liberation of an Arhat. Curiously, they seem to say that insight to
emptiness requires the Prasangika view. That would seemingly mean that,
in the same breath, one would claim shravakas to
have the Prasangika view but svatantrikas don't - and thus the
shravakayana being more profound than Svatantrika Madhyamaka.
Yin Ling
André A. Pais
from this book, hhdl doesn’t think that shravakas share the same view
as prasangika because for them dependent arising is used to proof true
existence rather than emptiness, hence they r unable to sync dependent
origination and emptiness. They still have Inherency in their views.
That
is why I’m sometimes confused. Because if one map arhat to 8th ground
bodhisattva- I remember hhdl did some where, if they don’t share the
same insight ..
R we saying different insight of “no Inherency” or “no self” can also liberate?
Or r we saying once or non returners learn from sambhogokaya like sariputra learn from Avalokitesvara or .. lol.
Need to ask HHDL himself LOL
André A. Pais
I
would say that bodhisattvas on the pure levels have the appearance of
inherent existence, but not the view. They don't believe in inherent
existence anymore (not since they've seen the nature of reality on the
1st bhumi), but due to karmic imprints things still appear as inherently existing, although immediately understood as otherwise.
John Tan
André A. Pais
"bodhisattvas on the pure levels" means? I m not sure about
bodhisattvas but as a practitioner, I do think and believe it is
possible "things" do not appear inherently existing anymore in normal
waking state or at least boundaries and substantiality r relinquished to a great extend but may not be deep enough into the dream or bardo states.
André A. Pais
I
mean what I think Yin Ling means when she talks about pure ground
bodhisattvas - beings on the 8th to 10th bhumis. I think it means there
are no more emotional obscurations, but there are still cognitive
obscurations.
André A. Pais
Concerning
belief in true existence vs. appearance of true existence, I'm posting a
couple of screenshots from Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche's commentary to
Chandrakirti's Madhyamakavatara.
John Tan
André A. Pais what is the title of this book?
André A. Pais
Free download here 
SIDDHARTHASINTENT.ORG
Introduction to the Middle Way – Siddhartha’s Intent
André A. Pais
Free download here
SIDDHARTHASINTENT.ORG
Introduction to the Middle Way – Siddhartha’s Intent
Yin Ling
André A. Pais thanks for sharing this, very interesting.
Piotr Ludwiński
John Tan
It seems to me that what you guys usually miss and have trouble
relating your maps and experiences to the traditional depiction of bhumi
and so on is that from the point of view of the five paths of mahayana,
your experience might be still just a conceptual
imitation of the direct realization of emptiness from the path of
seeing. If we read the model honestly, it usually describes several
stages of conceptual approximation, which can be classified as samadhi
anyway. For example, our mutual Western lama friend and Dzogchen teacher
between the lines also blurted out from his own experience of decades
of practice that the samadhi that comes from penetrating the non-arising
of everything, once it actually manifests, never leaves the
practitioner again, though you can just get distracted from it. It does
not, however, equate what appears to be "realization" in your maps with
realization in the sense of the first bhumi. If an honest man sits down
to these distinctions and gives them a chance, it is easy to understand
that the realization of both the non-arising of persons and things is
not a Mahayana binary. For example, depending on the subtlety of the
mind available to a given practitioner (i.e. the purity of his nervous
system / subtle body), the imitation of direct realization of voidness
is described with examples that first it is like a painting of the moon,
then its reflection on the surface of the lake, and only then the
actual moon . In each of these stages, this 'realisation' or imitation
of it may seem quite stable and is more than a mere anemic intellectual
sequence of affirming or denying things.
John Tan
Piotr Ludwiński
yes and well said. I don't map phases of insights to bhumi at all and I
never answer any questions with regards to bhumi stages nor the
traditional 4 stages of enlightenment Sotapanna, Sakadagami, Anagami,
and Arahant. I don't even know how a narration and
casual sharing to a friend 2 decades ago can unfold and end up in such a
silly dogmatic and rigid way tbh.
To me sincerity in practice is all that is needed and rest is really irrelevant.
Piotr Ludwiński
Being
also someone largely inspired by the content from the blog etc. and
someone who de facto started his adventure with Buddhism from "7
stages", I would advise people from this environment to give a chance
and consider the above aspect. It is possible that
this will solve the constant problem of people relying on the map from
the blog why in terms of behavior, quality of mind, siddhis, etc., their
experiences, however authentic they may be, never seem to match the
maps used by teachers like Garchen Rinpoche, HH Dalai Lama, etc.
Moreover,
an honest study of these maps shows that persons like HH Dalai Lama,
when they claim that they are not on the path of seeing, i.e. do not
have completely pure and direct realization of voidness, are not showing
off false modesty in front of the crowd, but simply in the original
context of Vajrayana. practitioners on the first bhumi and above are
commonly referred to as mahasiddhas.
A
simple example to convince yourself of the non-binary nature of
advancing insight into emptiness. For example, let's take a Soh for whom
things seem to be stably quite unreal interdependent origination.
If,
for the purposes of this argument, we hypothetically send him on a
months or even years of retreat where they focused on subtle body
practice, with him refreshing his vipassana and shamatha, and without
any psychological distraction from entering into family, work and any
other roles in responding to the necessities of the lay person's daily
life, it is quite likely that a new article would be posted on the blog
emerging from such seclusion. And who would have expected that it turns
out that things may be more unreal than they are now, and that dependent
origination may nevertheless be more synonymous with this unreality
than it is now. And the next months devoted to cultivating samadhi with
mettă and bodhichitta in society could make the total exertion even more
complete than it is now.
It
is likely that this would be the case with every person who came up in
this discussion. We do not question the authenticity of someone's
experiences, insights and their stability here, we only honestly give
the possibility that it is as it was reported by probably more
knowledgeable Mahayana and Vajrayana masters than us - this is not a
binary issue and approximations of this realization are subject to
progress.
Yin Ling
well said Piotr.
However
it’s good to understand the maps too and what insights are the
requirements for liberations. They are very precise insight. If not we
will just be blindly meditating for years like many.
So
it really depends what one wants to focus on. I myself just focus on
insights and deepening the maturity of insight. I don’t really care much
for the bhumis map.. they are too beyond and above me lol.
John Tan
That said Ling Yin
, I do read ur lil practice notes everyday, very encouraging and
insightful, keep it up! Imagine after a few decades it will be like
40000-50000 pages. If one day u summarize and refine them into just a
couple of key insights, I think it will be
extremely valuable especially coming from a medical doctor, but just ur
own unfoldings, no need anything extra...
.
.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Ive got a real challenge for You guys. Map the Dzogchen Ekabhumi onto these models
Yin Ling
Robert Dominik Tkanka I’m not familiar with Dzogchen so I’m running away too.
