Showing posts with label Freedom from Elaborations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Freedom from Elaborations. Show all posts

Some random compilation of John Tan comments I thought of sharing. [18/6/23, 1:07:21 AM] John Tan: 👍 No seer, no seeing, nothing seen means freedom from all elaborations into the natural state -- spontaneously presents and naturally perfected. A state free from conceptual elaborations can be non-mentation like what Tsongkhapa said, there is no wisdom and insight involved. Insight of non-inherentness will result in direct taste non-existence clear appearances. .... 

 
“Ultimately, the basis is free from all elaborations, no mind, no consciousness, no conditions therefore no DO, no emptiness...no line of demarcation can be drawn.

For a practitioner that has anatta insight, there is no issue on freedom from all elaborations of the ultimate, It is how the conventional is understood that is difficult.” -
John Tan months ago

—-

“Yes, I think should add together as they represent the 2 different view of emptiness.

Freedom from all elaborations and freedom from self-nature.

Yeah I included the two. One is freedom from all elaboration, one is spacious dream-like nature, lack of self-nature as emptiness.” -
John Tan 2022

——

“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.” -
John Tan months ago

 

 ........

 [19/6/23, 4:59:42 PM] John Tan: But inexpressibility doesn't mean there is no valid means of presentation but whatever expressed always imply characterization. This is nothing new as it is also clearly expressed in Tao De Jing. [19/6/23, 5:09:56 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Tao te ching points to a similar insight as anatta and freedom from extremes? [19/6/23, 5:11:28 PM] John Tan: Not anatta but freedom from all conventional elaborations. [19/6/23, 5:11:38 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic.. [19/6/23, 5:12:39 PM] John Tan: U must discern the difference between nyingma and gelug understanding of emptiness. [19/6/23, 5:13:25 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Actually upanishads also i think. But then i think still based on atman “e organs, i.e., free from the dualistic mind (namshe). So the Upanishadic view is that the really existing, eternal / permanent, non-dual, non-referential cognition is the âtmà, and this is not dualistic mind. This Upanishadic view existed even before the Buddha, and this was what Sankaràcàrya expounded very clearly and most powerfully around the 6th century. This view, similar to this Sankara view, was refuted by Śāntarakṣita as a wrong view. The Vedàntic Sutras and Sàstra-s are full of statements like: This âtmà is truly existent beyond existence and non-existence. This is truly non-dual beyond dual and non-dual. This âtmà is the Great Thing (mahàvastu), which is permanent beyond permanent and impermanent, etc., etc. It is empty of all qualities (nirguna), which means empty of foreign qualities, but not empty (of itself), i.e., not empty of being a truly existing permanent entity (sat); not empty of being non-dual cognition (cit), and not empty of bliss (ànanda). Sat-cit-ànanda is the nature of this âtmà (or non-dual cognition). “ - https://www.byomakusuma.org/VedantaVisAVisShentong.html [19/6/23, 5:13:35 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Anurag also said advaita also stress its inexpressible [19/6/23, 5:13:45 PM] John Tan: Yes [19/6/23, 5:13:53 PM] John Tan: Even christian [19/6/23, 5:14:00 PM] John Tan: 🤣 [19/6/23, 5:14:05 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic [19/6/23, 5:15:00 PM] Soh Wei Yu: But i think longchenpa should be clear about the anatman and emptiness of inherent existence [19/6/23, 5:15:29 PM] John Tan: Definitely [19/6/23, 5:15:46 PM] John Tan: Din u read the illusory book? [19/6/23, 5:16:21 PM] John Tan: And don't anyhow comment stuff u r not sure 🤦 [19/6/23, 5:16:40 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Yeah This is also nice Longchenpa: https://www.shambhala.com/sno.../the-practice-of-dzogchen-2/ Exactly what I am searching" IDENTIFICATION (OF THE BASIS) THROUGH (UNDERSTANDING THE) VIEW The External Apprehended Objects Are Non-Existent Emptiness (i) The appearances are unreal reflections like the eight examples of illusion. Every aspect of the five objects, such as form, included in the phenomena of the world and beings, are mere appearances with no true existence. All the appearances which have appeared to both the pure perceptions of the Buddhas and the impure perceptions of deluded beings are the percepts of wisdom and the mind. While the appearances are appearing to both perceptions, they are appearing with no inherent existence (Rang-bZhin), like a reflection in a mirror and rainbow rays in the sky. To the pure perception of wisdom the (appearances) transcend the extremes of existing and non-existing as there are no stains of apprehender and apprehended. As there is no creating, ceasing, and changing, all are free from the characteristics of compounded phenomena, the appearances of uncompounded emptiness-form, and are totally free from conceptualizations. To the perception of the deluded mind, (the appearances) merely appear as the object of apprehension of self (bDag-'Dzin), which have fallen into the extreme (concepts) of existing or non-existing, are detached from the characteristics of uncompounded (nature), and have strengthened the habituations of adventitious and circumstantial self-perceptions. So, here, one will understand that the objects, the delusory appearances of the mind, are unreal. Various external appearances, such as white and red, are merely the percepts of rigid habits, like a dream created by the drunkenness of ignorant sleep. There is not the slightest existence (in them) as the object in the (true) meaning. Also, those appearances are not mind from the very point of their arising, because their substantial characteristics, such as color, size, and distinctions, negate the character of the mind. At the same time, they are not other than the mind, because, in addition to their being merely the delusory perceptions (of the mind), no other object has ever been established as such. The appearances to the mind are just types of experience of rigid habits continuing from beginningless time. It is like dreaming last night about a magic show one has seen yesterday. Therefore, one should think that whatever appears are appearances of non existence, and are without foundation, abiding place, natural existence, and recognizable (entity). They are merely a clear appearance of the empty nature like a dream, magical display, mirage, echo, shadowy view (Mig-Yor), water-moon (reflection), miracle, and the city of smell-eaters (a spirit world). Whatever appears, self or others, enemies or friends, countries or towns, places or houses, food or drink or wealth, and whatever one does, eating or sleeping, walking or sitting, one should train in seeing them as unreal. One should devote oneself to this training in all its aspects: the preliminary, actual, and concluding practices. (ii) The objects, if analyzed, are emptiness. If the appearances are examined from gross to subtle down to atoms, they are partless and non-existent. So form is emptiness. (Likewise,) by examining color and recognition of sound, it (will be found to be) emptiness. By examining the form and essence of smell, it (will be found to be) emptiness. By examining the aspects of taste, they (will be found to be) emptiness. Especially, by examining the sources (sense-objects), the emptiness of touch will be reached. Although they are different in appearance, they are the same in their nature in being emptiness, so the emptiness of various objects are not separate categories. Their nature, like pure space, transcends being either separate or the same. So the nature of objective appearances is emptiness in its essence. The Apprehender Has No Foundation and No Root (i) The consciousnesses are self-clarity without foundation. (There are eight consciousnesses.) The five sense-consciousnesses; arise as the five objects such as form, the mind-consciousness cognizes the general impression (of the appearing objects) and designates them as the objects, the defiled mind-consciousness is the sense of negating, accepting, hating and disliking (etc.), the mind-consciousness arises after the six consciousnesses (five senses and universal ground consciousness), ...and the consciousness of universal ground is self-clarity (Rang-gSal) and no thought and is unrelated to the objects: these are the eight or six consciousnesses. At the (very) time of (functioning of any of) those consciousnesses themselves, whatever consciousness it is, it is clear, vivid, and self-clarity with no foundations. Although they appear clear, there is no substantial entity. They are appearing without existence, like clear space and a breeze with no dust. Their clarity is present naturally like the sky without clouds. Their movements are like wind, not in distinguishable substances. From the (very) time of appearing, (the consciousnesses) as the apprehenders are self-clarity and unrecognizable. Watch them when they are arising and when they are abiding. Relax naturally and watch the manner of appearing of the apprehender. Thereby one will realize the apprehenders as having the nature of merely an appearance of clarity with no existence, emptiness with no bias, and self-clarity with no foundation. (ii) (The subject), if analyzed, is emptiness without root. By analyzing (whether) the self-clear, baseless mind (exists) in the external appearances, inner physical body, or intermediate movements, or if the entity of the self-dwelling mind itself (can be) recognized in (its) design, color, birth, cessation, and abiding, one will realize that its nature is non-existence, baseless and free from the extremes of either existence or non-existence. In this training the devotion to the Lama is the only important thing. [19/6/23, 5:18:24 PM] Soh Wei Yu: So i think for longchenpa, nyingma, their freedom from elaborations include the emptiness of inherent existence [19/6/23, 5:18:39 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Maybe they differ from gelug in expression and emphasis? [19/6/23, 7:15:53 PM] John Tan: To me, this separation of "existence" from "what appears" is unique and very skillful. "Non-existence" appearance is essentially the same insight as anatta. It involves the 2 authentications: 1. Seeing through the reification of conventional construct and 2. Recognition of appearances as one's empty clarity. What makes appearances appear "real, solid and external" are our mistaken perception of the inherent framework of subject-action-object. But that is only part of the confusion. The other is not realizing what appears is just radiance, that is y it is illusory and insubstantial. However if we deconstruct entities and characteristics, then mind and phenomena, consciousness and conditions are all deconstructed, u can't treat mind as real due to point 1. Otherwise one skewed towards yogacara (but then yogacara doesn't actually treat mind as real either). It is sort of straw-man stereotyping a group of practitioners attaching to mind as real. ..... [1/8/23, 12:06:48 PM] John Tan: It is difficult for a mind holding essential view to understand conceptually seamlessness, free of divisions, boundaries and non-difference. The best it can do within the limitation of it's inherent framework is to describe the taste is like everything emerges from space or emptiness. So as a skillful mean, there is nothing wrong taking things dissolve into an all encompassing dharmadhatu much like how vajrayana visualize everything as deities. But like how ocean is realized as a construct as well as wave, ocean is not any special than wave. Then when background consciousness is gone and only empty appearances left, even "wave" is gone. Many got stuck at One-Mind, there r also many that got stuck in non-conceptualities also in de-construction and do know know the actual taste of empty radiance. [1/8/23, 12:08:49 PM] John Tan: Everything is of "nature" of space in contrast to everything dissolves into space and space becomes a special substratum. ..... [1/8/23, 12:14:20 PM] John Tan: Yes I agree. Coz many understand from essential view and thought they understood freedom from all elaborations. If it contradicts DO, then the view is essential view like what Tsongkhapa said. Means there is no contradiction between spontaneous presence and dependent arising. Also when one deconstruct, there r 2 authentications; one relates to de-construction of conceptual mind and the other is recognizing and directly tasting the empty radiance. [1/8/23, 12:15:44 PM] John Tan: Whether, we deconstruct self, internality-externality, physicality, cause-effect, we must have this direct taste of radiance and relates to the actual taste. ..... [27/8/23, 9:29:26 AM] John Tan: 👍 Not only that u cannot realize emptiness without the clarity, u cannot realize dependent origination without clarity, they r both talking about radiance and light. Another important point is we do not realize that we r analysing and understanding from the perspective from essential view. We "negate" from the standpoint of an essential view; we understand dependent arising from an inherent view without realizing it. We do not understand from the perspective of light and radiance. They understand "illusion" from an essential view and thought that because of illusoriness, it is inconsequential. ..... [8/9/23, 2:26:14 PM] John Tan: I suggest u look into DO, emptiness and understand the non-contradiction between free from all elaborations and DO-emptiness of the conventional. It is not easy to understand functioning in the non-essential way of manifestations. Even if one is clear of how the mind confuses itself with essential view in terms reification of entities-characteristics, it does not mean one can understand how empty radiance functions in the non-essential way. This requires not only stable insights but also very stable authentication of energy and radiance patterns -- that the natural expressions of empty radiance exhibits certain patterns. [8/9/23, 2:35:06 PM] John Tan: For example, u think it is so easy to come out the 12 afflictive chain of DO? [8/9/23, 2:36:49 PM] John Tan: This requires very stable insight and radiance experience and observe how a mind in confusion sets the wheel of samsara in action. [8/9/23, 2:42:06 PM] John Tan: Do u think it is so easy to point out consciousness and phenomena are like the 8 similes of illusions? Or despite vivid appearances, there is nothing that is "there" at all, no "thingness" can be found at all and because of this empty nature, whole of samsara as well of the immense diversities of radiance can manifest? How skillful is it in that pointing? Yet we just simply read pass such profound pointing. ..... ..... [8/9/23, 2:44:04 PM] John Tan: Yes. Only when we deeply experience and authenticate, then our faith in the teaching can grow. Not through blind believe and we will practice diligently ...... [8/9/23, 3:07:42 PM] John Tan: Yes and even micro and macro cosmic orbit breathing of taoism. But one doesn't need to know all or suddenly change path. De-construction of mental constructions and conceptualities for example is a very effective way until one releases itself in openness of radiance clarity. Every de-construction of reification is energy-related, it is a full path itself also just that we do not carry it all the way. ..... [8/9/23, 3:16:00 PM] John Tan: For example, as we let go reifications into presence, it is not something just "mental", it is equally "physical"; it is not just "mind", it is equally "body", "breath" and "energies". When we alternately experience total exertion and freedom from elaborations, the seamlessness and intimacies without self and inherentness of empty parts allow deeper insights of the non-essential (empty) radiance. Then it allows us to glimpse the non-contradiction between the ultimate and relative. [8/9/23, 3:16:33 PM] John Tan: This is very good yin ling, don't lose track and continue ur meditation. [8/9/23, 3:35:44 PM] John Tan: Then we slowly have a deep understanding of the "conventional" and "conceptual" not only from mental perspective like arm-chair philosophers, but we "SEE and TASTE" dimensions of energies, radiances, "physicalities" in these so called "conventional concepts". So when we say they r only "conceptually" designated, the depth of understanding is different. [8/9/23, 3:42:53 PM] John Tan: "Self" for example, is not just a conceptual construct, it is also at the same time immense energies "stuck" in conflicts manifested everywhere in our body.😬🤣

 

 

-----------

 

 

André A. Pais
The point, however, is not that one keeps rehearsing in one's head the reasonings leading to an understanding of DO. If the aim is some kind of insightful lucidity free of conceptual elaborations, the 'presence' that is realized is not "a non-entity," or "empty of intrinsic nature." Those are just super useful conceptual elaborations, used prior to meditative equipoise or after, in post meditation discourse.

Reply
7h

André A. Pais
It's always important to distinguish path and fruition, equipoise and post meditation, approximate ultimate and actual ultimate, etc.

Reply
6h

Soh Wei Yu
André A. Pais What you said is not wrong, equipoise is without seer, seeing, seen, free from elaborations. But it is not seen here as contradicting D.O.:
[1/8/23, 12:14:20 PM] John Tan: Yes I agree. Coz many understand from essential view and thought they understood freedom from all elaborations. If it contradicts DO, then the view is essential view like what Tsongkhapa said.
Means there is no contradiction between spontaneous presence and dependent arising.
Also when one deconstruct, there r 2 authentications; one relates to de-construction of conceptual mind and the other is recognizing and directly tasting the empty radiance.
[1/8/23, 12:15:44 PM] John Tan: Whether, we deconstruct self, internality-externality, physicality, cause-effect, we must have this direct taste of radiance and relates to the actual taste.
.....
[27/8/23, 9:29:26 AM] John Tan: 👍
Not only that u cannot realize emptiness without the clarity, u cannot realize dependent origination without clarity, they r both talking about radiance and light.
Another important point is we do not realize that we r analysing and understanding from the perspective from essential view. We "negate" from the standpoint of an essential view; we understand dependent arising from an inherent view without realizing it. We do not understand from the perspective of light and radiance.
They understand "illusion" from an essential view and thought that because of illusoriness, it is inconsequential.
.....
[8/9/23, 2:26:14 PM] John Tan: I suggest u look into DO, emptiness and understand the non-contradiction between free from all elaborations and DO-emptiness of the conventional.
It is not easy to understand functioning in the non-essential way of manifestations.
Even if one is clear of how the mind confuses itself with essential view in terms reification of entities-characteristics, it does not mean one can understand how empty radiance functions in the non-essential way.
This requires not only stable insights but also very stable authentication of energy and radiance patterns -- that the natural expressions of empty radiance exhibits certain patterns.
[8/9/23, 2:35:06 PM] John Tan: For example, u think it is so easy to come out the 12 afflictive chain of DO?
[8/9/23, 2:36:49 PM] John Tan: This requires very stable insight and radiance experience and observe how a mind in confusion sets the wheel of samsara in action.
[8/9/23, 2:42:06 PM] John Tan: Do u think it is so easy to point out consciousness and phenomena are like the 8 similes of illusions? Or despite vivid appearances, there is nothing that is "there" at all, no "thingness" can be found at all and because of this empty nature, whole of samsara as well of the immense diversities of radiance can manifest? How skillful is it in that pointing? Yet we just simply read pass such profound pointing. .....
.....
John tan also wrote in 2022, “Should not be immobilized by ultimate otherwise ultimate becomes a stage or a state. Whether Dzogchen or Yogacara, they both have their views of the conventional. So no worry of formulating a valid view of the conventional clearly as whatever views formulated will not survive ultimate analysis and that is how one refine our insights as thoroughly understanding the emptiness of the conventional, one liberates further one's mind. Even Dzogchen of basis is also a view so it too is empty when subject to ultimate analysis.”

Reply
18m
Edited

Soh Wei Yu
Ultimate and Relative
"If asked what I am most drawn to (in Tsongkhapa's teachings), I am most drawn to Prasangika's "mere imputation". The quintessence of "mere imputation" is IMO the essence of Buddhism. It is the whole of 2 truths; the whole of 2 folds. How the masters present and how it is being taught is entirely another matter. It is because in non-conceptuality, the whole of the structure of "mere imputation" is totally exerted into an instantaneous appearance that we r unable to see the truth of it. In conceptuality, it is expanded and realized to be in that structure. A structure that awakens us the living truth of emptiness and dependent arising that is difficult to see in dimensionless appearance."
"In ultimate (empty dimensionless appearance), there is no trace of causes and conditions, just a single sphere of suchness. In relative, there is dependent arising. Therefore distinct in relative when expressed conventionally but seamlessly non-dual in ultimate."
"When suchness is expressed relatively, it is dependent arising. Dependent designation in addition to causal dependency is to bring out a deeper aspect when one sees thoroughly that if phenomena is profoundly without essence then it is always only dependent designations."
- Thusness, 2015
Labels: Dependent Designation, Dependent Origination, Emptiness, Madhyamaka |

Reply
17m

Soh Wei Yu
Those who hold the view that ultimate is non-dependent and separate from the relative are the more extreme forms of Shentong that veer into Advaita Vedanta. No different from Advaita Vedanta view

Reply
17m

 [17/6/23, 11:34:30 AM] John Tan: The explanation about the taste of no mirror reflecting and illusory reflection as empty clarity = 一枚宝镜 is good.👍 (Soh: referring to audio recording I sent which contains excerpts from https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2017/01/excerpts-from-jewel-mirror-samadhi.html )

However,
1.  insubstantial non-dual must be understood from

2.  DO emptiness before freeing both mind and phenomena

3.  into freedom from all elaborations.

4. As natural state of the basis.
[17/6/23, 11:36:41 AM] John Tan: When some one hit a "bell", sentient being felt it is "external" but is it?  If it is not then is it "internal"?  If it isn't both "internal" and "external", then what does it mean?
[17/6/23, 11:57:39 AM] John Tan: Do take note that ur X is also talking about that, but y is it so different?
[17/6/23, 3:49:49 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Internal and external are both subsets of inherent existence view. In the case of one mind and i am, subjectivity is inherent.. in the case of AF, subjectivity is seen through but externality is inherent.

If instead its like chariot and parts, everything is dependently designated in the presence of the parts and conditions and these parts and conditions do not amount to anything inherently existing or produced apart from that mere name designated in dependence, then we do not have such views where subject or object or externality needs to be inherent. Mind is name only and so is phenomena.. nothing has core or essence or intrinsic existence
[17/6/23, 3:50:33 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Imo she skips to freedom from all elaborations and natural state of no mind without going through insights of anatta, dependent origination or emptiness clearly
[17/6/23, 3:50:48 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Just say silence all conventionalities into state of no mind
[17/6/23, 3:50:52 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Insight isnt clear
[17/6/23, 3:50:57 PM] Soh Wei Yu: I doubt she is clear even about anatta
[17/6/23, 3:52:28 PM] Yin Ling: Hwa shang Mahayana
[17/6/23, 4:55:53 PM] John Tan: "Hwa Shang" is a bad translation of "和尚“ Moheyan of northern Buddhism in China.  Gelug and Tsongkhapa are attacking strawman and making him a stereotype for non-mentation of Zen practice.  We know that this is not true.  Zen is nothing like that.
[17/6/23, 4:56:53 PM] Yin Ling: I see
[17/6/23, 4:57:21 PM] Yin Ling: That’s kinda mean 😂
[17/6/23, 5:00:04 PM] John Tan: Here u r talking about "inherent existence" but X isn't.  In fact many are not.  That is y non-inherent experience and dependent origination are extremely crucial for right understanding.  It is not just doing away with conventionalities and conceptualities.  But it involves several critical insights.  So what r the differences, why jumping to freedom of all elaborations this way resulted in such a different experience and understanding?
[17/6/23, 5:00:48 PM] John Tan: Tibetan has this bad habit
[17/6/23, 5:34:19 PM] Yin Ling: The object of inherent existence is left unnegated if straight jump. It’s almost impossible to liberate theoretically , just dissociate .
[17/6/23, 5:34:47 PM] Yin Ling: Maybe they debate too much 😂 everyday debate
[17/6/23, 5:36:54 PM] John Tan: Yes.  This idea of inherent existence in which "anatta" is just part of the entire spectrum is an all together insight that is made explicitly clear only by Tsongkhapa although gelug tend to turn extremely analytical.
[17/6/23, 5:41:33 PM] John Tan: Both see through conceptual conceptual constructs, but they r different.  But difference in what sense is not easy to see.  As we become clearer and used to it, we will realize that the entire mmk is actually emphasizing this particular insight.  Mmk is not just saying the conceptual layering must be eliminated like non-mentation.  When we integrate into practice, we become clearer and have more confidence.  Both mind and phenomena are both released, conventionalities r released but differently.  I have been trying to bring out the taste of this aspect on my posts in FB "weight of thoughts"...lol.
[17/6/23, 5:51:30 PM] Yin Ling: Yeah not just concepts but the whole referent itself is the conceptualisation. It’s hard for me to actualised yet lol
[17/6/23, 6:01:50 PM] John Tan: 1. A referent is a reified mental construct or "named things".  We din realize that.  We thought it is real.

2.  If we see through this, what happened?
[17/6/23, 6:17:30 PM] Yin Ling: If we see through then nothing “real” is there. 😂
[17/6/23, 6:17:43 PM] Yin Ling: Then the mind can stop elaborating and be at peace
[17/6/23, 11:55:03 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Quietening the mind actually doesnt see through the referents. Like ramana maharshi talks about silence. But the Self is seen as truly existing and solid and real. AF sees through self/Self and resides in nonconceptual pce but the referent of world as solid and real and ultimate is still there
[17/6/23, 11:55:38 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Samadhi etc, quietness doesnt necessarily release the very realness and solidness or inherency of Self and phenomena
[17/6/23, 11:55:58 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Even if one can have peak experience of no mind it is not the same as having an insight that sees through self
[18/6/23, 12:15:41 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Imo true insight of emptiness should lead to an equipoise of in the seen only the seen as med par gsal snang a “nonexistent clear appearance” or a “clearly apparent nonexistent,” , thus no seer, no seeing and nothing seen
[18/6/23, 12:15:58 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Otherwise resting in nonconceptual presence can still be a state of alaya
[18/6/23, 12:17:15 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Otherwise even if one says all conventionalities are silenced it may not be the same thing
[18/6/23, 12:19:56 AM] Yin Ling: Ya this is very difficult actually even after understanding
[18/6/23, 12:20:13 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Its actually the realness and inherentness thats released not merely mentation or labelling
[18/6/23, 12:21:38 AM] Yin Ling: Ya even the person writing on instagram“talking to higher self” is sort of holding onto Alaya in his sleep and practice
[18/6/23, 12:21:58 AM] Yin Ling: Not sure though. Just my feeling
[18/6/23, 12:23:29 AM] Soh Wei Yu: I thought so too
[18/6/23, 12:23:44 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Thats why i sent him the 7 stages but i think not easy to understand la haha
[18/6/23, 12:23:52 AM] Soh Wei Yu: But some of his stuff are interesting
[18/6/23, 12:27:35 AM] Yin Ling: Did u? Lol
[18/6/23, 12:28:06 AM] Yin Ling: Must not be easy because his practice is so mature
[18/6/23, 12:28:36 AM] Yin Ling: I mean practice for a long time
[18/6/23, 12:46:14 AM] Soh Wei Yu: I sent everybody i think can benefit 🤣
[18/6/23, 12:46:24 AM] Soh Wei Yu: In 2006 i sent eckhart tolle 🤣
[18/6/23, 12:46:38 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Yeah
[18/6/23, 12:46:47 AM] Yin Ling: Did he reply you lol
[18/6/23, 12:49:29 AM] Soh Wei Yu: That time i sent in envelope or cd i think.. or maybe email I forgot. He didnt reply
[18/6/23, 12:49:36 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Recent one someone replied for him
[18/6/23, 12:49:38 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Sam M, Jun 24, 2022, 9:30 AM MDT:
Hello Soh,
 
Thank you for contacting Eckhart Teachings. We are deeply touched and moved by the many people that write into Eckhart and Kim, leaving no doubt there is an unprecedented shift in consciousness happening around us. Unfortunately, Eckhart is not able to send personal replies or accept gifts but sends his deepest gratitude to you for wanting to share with him.
 
We thank you for reaching out to Eckhart and wish you the very best in your journey.
Sam M | Customer Care
Eckhart Teachings | Toll Free 1-844-595-3316
support@eckharttolle.com
Monday - Friday, 8 am - 5:00 pm MT
[18/6/23, 12:51:13 AM] Yin Ling: Wow epic
[18/6/23, 12:51:35 AM] Yin Ling: Customer service 🤦🏻‍♀️
[18/6/23, 12:58:07 AM] John Tan: U have a serious addiction for sending the phases of insights.
[18/6/23, 1:07:21 AM] John Tan: 👍
No seer, no seeing, nothing seen means freedom from all elaborations into the natural state -- spontaneously presents and naturally perfected.

A state free from conceptual elaborations can be non-mentation like what Tsongkhapa said, there is no wisdom and insight involved.  Insight of non-inherentness will result in direct taste non-existence clear appearances.
‎[18/6/23, 11:42:13 AM] Yin Ling: ‎image omitted
[18/6/23, 11:42:13 AM] Yin Ling: 😅





———-


P.s. just recalled some nice excerpts on equipoise I shared from years ago:



Sonam Thakchoe (The Two Truths Debate: Tsongkhapa and Gorampa on the Middle Way):


"Tsongkhapa regards the nondual realization of ultimate truth as an epistemic event... ...Tsongkhapa does not hold the achievement of nondual wisdom as equivalent to the cessation of cognitive activity...


Tsongkhapa's description of the way the meditator arrives at nondual understanding is as follows. The cognitive agent experiences a fusion of subjectivity and its object, which refer here not to self and outside world but rather to elements within the meditator's own psychophysical aggregates. The meditator remains introspective, not engaging the outside world, but the outside world as such does not disappear. What occurs is instead a total cessation of the dualities between subject I and object mine, between thinker and thought, between feeler and feelings, between mind and body, between seeing and seen, and so forth. Initially a meditator perceives, for instance, that in each act of seeing, two factors are always present: the object seen and the act of seeing it. While each single act of seeing involves dissolution, the object seen and the act of seeing actually consist of numerous physical and mental processes that are seen to dissolve serially and successively. Eventually, the meditator also notices the dissolution of the dissolution itself.


In other words, the meditator first realizes the fluctuating and transitory character of the five aggregates, which is then followed by further realization of the aggregates as empty and selfless, and finally by the realization of the emptiness of even the empty and selfless phenomena. Nondual knowledge is thus arrived at, in Tsongkhapa's view, through the direct experience of seeing the truths within one's own aggregates, rather than being convinced of the truth of certain abstractions through rational argument or persuasion. Since the process here is a cognitive experience that operates entirely within the domain of one's psychophysical aggregates, it is therefore an epistemic but not a metaphysical nonduality.


This is how, according to Tsongkhapa, an arya has direct nonconceptual and nondual access to the transcendent nature of his own five psychophysical aggregates during meditative equipoise. In the wake of meditative equipoise, an arya engages with dualistic worldly activities, such as taking part in philosophical discourse, practicing different social conventions, and so on. The arya will thus make use of socio-linguistic conventions, but since the arya has eradicated all reifying tendencies, even these worldly dualistic engagements will be seen as consistent with nondual wisdom. Both non-dual and dual wisdoms, especially in the case of a buddha, Tsongkhapa argues, are fully commensurate."


"Both Tsong khapa and Go rampa describe non-dual knowledge as being like a process of mixing water. They argue that the fusion between subjectivity and objectivity, from the meditator's point of view, reaches its climax in their non-dual state in a way that is like mixing clean water from two different jars by pouring it all into one jar. Tsong khapa for example argues: "from the vantage point of the wisdom that directly realises ultimate reality, there is not even the slightest duality between object and the object-possessing consciousness. Like mixing water with water, [yogi] dwells in the meditative equipoise".' Tsongkhapa insists, however, that this metaphor should not be taken too far or too literally. It refers only to the cognitive process that occurs in total dissolution, and to the experience associated with that process, and must not be taken to represent the achivement of a metaphysical unity."


“So, as far as Tsong khapa is concerned, there is no contradiction in claiming that, from the empirical standpoint, on the one hand, non-dual wisdom constitutes the subjective pole of consciousnesses with ultimate truth as its objective counterpart; from the ultimate vantage point, on the other hand, non-dual wisdom and ultimate truth, "are free from the duality of act (bya ba) and object acted upon (byed pa)".


In the non-dual state, even the cognitive interplay between subject and object appears, from the meditator's point of view, completely to cease. This is because, as Tsong khapa points out, "duality of act and object acted upon is posited strictly from the perspective of empirical cognition".


Although the dual appearances of subject and object completely dissolve from the perspective of non-dual wisdom, and thus the meditator does not experience the mutual interaction between distinct and separate elements—between the seer and the seen—the meditator nonetheless engages in an act of 'mere seeing'. As the Buddha explains to Bahiya:


In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the

heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In

reference to the cognised, only the cognised. That is how you should

train yourself [Ud I. 10]... then Bahiya, there is no you in terms of that.

When there is no you in terms of that, there is no you there. When there

is no you there, you are neither here not yonder nor between the two.

This, just this, is the end of stress [Ud I. 101.


The experience of 'mere seeing' in a non-dual form is valid only when it is empirically grounded and when there is cognitive activity occurring between non-dual wisdom and non-dual ultimate truth.”


"Although all empirically given truths such as the aggregate of form, feelings etc., are contingently produced and have diverse conventional characters, all of them, according to Tsong khapa, are ultimately empty of the inherent arising. They share the universal characteristic (ro gcig, eka-rasa), literally, the same 'taste'. The Buddha, for example, makes this statement: "just as the great ocean has but one taste, the taste of salt, even so does this dharma and discipline have but one taste, the taste of release" [AN VIII.19].


The Samadhirajasatra (ting nge 'dzin rgyal po'i mdo) tells us: "By knowing one all are known. And by seeing one all are seen. Despite many things are said about [ultimate truth] in the conventional terms, no haughtiness should arise from it",' and furthermore, "Just as you have recognised ('du shes) personality, even so you should apply the same insight with respect to all [phenomena]. All phenomena are of the [same] nature like a clear space".


In the Gaganagamjasamadhi (Nam mkha'i mdzod kyi ting nge 'dzin), it is stated that: "Whoever by meditating on one phenomenon knows all phenomena as apprehensible like illusions and mirages, and knows them as hollow, false and ephemeral will before long reach the summum bonum (snying po) of enlightenment".


And Aryadeva also tells us that "whosoever sees one is said to see all. That which is emptiness of one is the emptiness of all" [VIII:191].


Referring to this last passage from Aryadeva, Candrakirti has this to say:


The emptiness of the essence of form is itself the emptinesses of the essences of aggregates such as feeling. Similarly, the emptiness of the essence of eye-source is itself the emptinesses of the essences of all twelve sources. Likewise, the emptiness of the essence of eye-constituent is itself the emptinesses of the essences of all eighteen constituents. Equally so are [the emptinesses of the essences of] the infinite categories of things due to the distinct divisions in things, spaces, times and references. For whatever is the emptiness of the essence of one thing, is itself the emptinesses of the essences of all things. In spite of the fact that jars and bowls for example are distinct, space is not distinct. While things such as form are distinct, insofar as they all lack of essential arising of the form etc., they are not distinct. By understanding the lack the essential arising of merely one phenomenon, one understands the lack of the essential arising of all phenomena.'


Since all phenomena are empty of any substance or essence, they are all dependently arisen and relational entities. Tsong khapa agrees.' Yet to endorse the claim that the ultimate nature of all phenomena is fundamentally the same does not, in Tsong khapa's view, make one a monist. While accepting this account of the ultimate nature of things, Tsongkhapa remains committed to a pluralistic view. "A pluralistic view of the world", as Kalupahana puts it, "is not incompatible with dependent arising (pratityasamputpada).


Pluralism in the context of dependent arising does not imply the existence of self-contradictory truths. It need not necessarily lead to a notion of an Absolute that transcends such self-contradictory truths. As far as Tsong khapa is concerned, the ultimate reality of, for instance, the table in front of my eyes, cannot be treated as simply identical with the ultimate reality pertaining to the chair that I am sitting on. The empty table cannot be the taken as identical with the empty chair since the emptiness of the table is constitutive, not only of the empty table, but of the empty conceptual-linguistic conventions imposed upon it as well. Those conventions belong exclusively to the ultimate truth of the table and are not present in the chair.


According to Tsong khapa, however, conceding this much does not prevent one from arguing for the universality of ultimate truth. Just as different objects occupy different spaces, and yet the space those objects occupy has the same 'non-obstructive' characteristic, so the ultimate realities of both table and chair are different, notwithstanding the fact that two ultimate realities have identical natures—they share 'the same taste'. Both of these emptinesses imply insubstantiality and essenceless in the negative sense, as well as dependently arisen and relational nature in the affirmative sense." 

 

~ VERSES TO ESTABLISH THE PROFOUND VIEW ~
.
INTRODUCTORY VERSES
.
If those whose lord is Death himself,
Ruler of the three worlds, without a master,
Sleep like true vanquishers,
What could be more improper?
~ Aryadeva
Without sleep the night is long,
Without rest the journey is long,
Without knowledge of the best dharma,
For those children, existence is long.
~ Gendun Chopel
Meditate again and again
until you have turned your mind away
from the activities of this life,
which are like adorning yourself
while being led to the execution ground.
~ Tsongkhapa
To liberate myself alone
will bring no benefit,
For sentient beings of the three realms
are all my fathers and mothers.
How disgusting to leave my parents
in the thick of suffering,
While wishing and seeking
for just my happiness alone!
So may the suffering
of all the three realms ripen on me,
May my merits be taken
by sentient beings,
And through the blessings
of the merit of this,
May all beings attain buddhahood!
~ Jetsun Drakpa Gyaltsen
.
MAIN BODY OF THE TEXT
.
I prostrate to the perfect Buddha,
The supreme teacher, who taught
That dependent origination
Is without ceasing and without arising,
Without extinction and without permanence,
Without coming and without going,
Not different and not one.
It is the peace in which discursiveness
is completely still.
~ Nagarjuna
When there is an “I”, there is a perception of other,
And from the ideas of self and other
come attachment and aversion.
As a result of getting wrapped up in these,
All possible faults come into being.
~ Dharmakirti
All beings consist of causes and effects,
In which there is no ‘sentient being’ at all.
From phenomena
which are exclusively empty,
There arise only empty phenomena.
All things are devoid of any ‘I’ or ‘mine’.
Like a recitation, a candle,
a mirror, a seal,
A magnifying glass, a seed,
sourness, or a sound,
So also with the continuation
of the aggregates—
The wise should know
they are not transferred.
If the self were the aggregates,
It would have arising and ceasing
(as properties).
If it were different from the aggregates,
It would not have
the characteristics of the aggregates.
Neither the aggregates,
nor different from the aggregates,
The aggregates are not in him,
nor is he in the aggregates.
The Tathagata does not possess
the aggregates.
What is the Tathagata?
~ Nagarjuna
The entities that our and other schools affirm,
Since they exist inherently in neither singular nor plural,
In ultimate reality are without intrinsic being;
They are like reflections.
~ Shantarakshita
Not from itself, not from another,
not from both, nor without cause:
Never in any way is there any
existing thing that has arisen.
Like an illusion, like a dream,
like the city of the gandharvas,
so origination, duration, and cessation
are declared to be.
Since origination, duration,
and cessation are not established,
there is nothing that is conditioned.
And in the absence
of the establishment of the conditioned,
What unconditioned thing will be established?
Whatever is dependently co-arisen
That is explained to be emptiness.
That, being a dependent designation
Is itself the Middle Way.
Something that is not dependently arisen
Such a thing does not exist.
Therefore a non-empty thing
Does not exist.
~ Nagarjuna
The practice of all the bodhisattvas
is never to entertain concepts,
Which revolve around dualistic notions
of perceiver and perceived,
In the knowledge that all these
appearances are but the mind itself,
Whilst mind’s own nature is forever
beyond the limitations of ideas.
~ Gyalse Thogme Zangpo
Through the perception of mind-only
One achieves the nonperception of objects;
Through the nonperception of objects
There is also the nonperception of mind.
~ Vasubandhu
When scrutinized with insight,
Neither the imaginary, nor the dependent,
Nor the perfect [nature] exists.
So how could insight conceive of an entity?
~ The Sutra of the Arrival in Lanka
Consider all dharmas as dreamlike:
As this indicates,
the whole environment
and the beings within it,
which we perceive as objects,
are dreamlike.
They appear as they do
because our own minds are deluded
and not as a result
of even the slightest factor
aside from mind.
We must therefore put a stop
to our projections.
We might then wonder
whether the mind itself is real,
so the root text says:
Examine the nature
of unborn awareness:
Mind itself is empty of the three stages
of arising, remaining and ceasing.
It has no colour, no shape, and so on.
It does not abide outside
or within the body.
It has no fixed character at all
and cannot therefore
be apprehended in any way.
Rest in an experience beyond thought.
If any thought of an antidote
—such as considering that body
and mind are empty—
should arise, then as the root text says:
Let even the antidote
be freed in its own place:
We look into the essence
of the antidote itself,
and when we realize
that it has no true nature,
we rest with that experience.
As for how to rest, the root text says:
Rest in the ālaya,
the essence of the path:
Avoiding all the projection
and absorption associated
with the other seven types of consciousness,
we must settle with lucid clarity
in an experience that is beyond thought.
We must not mentally fixate in any way
on what has no fixed character at all.
~ Gyalse Thogme Zangpo
Physical phenomena
are assemblages of subtle particles.
When one analyzes these particles
by splitting them into their own sections,
not even the smallest part is left.
Not even the tiniest appearance remains.
The nonphysical refers to mind.
The mind of the past
has ceased and dissolved.
The mind of the future
has not arisen or come into being.
The mind of the present
is extremely difficult to identify:
it has no color or shape; it is like space.
Therefore it is not established.
Furthermore, it is beyond
being one or many things,
it has never arisen,
and it is luminous by nature.
We use these and other forms
of the sword of reasoning
to investigate and analyze phenomena.
Through this, we realize
that they do not inherently exist.
Since both physical
and nonphysical phenomena
are not established as any entity
and do not exist,
the prajñā of discriminating investigation
also does not exist.
Once all specifically
and generally characterized phenomena
have been established as nonexistent,
the prajñā no longer appears;
it is luminous,
not existing in any manner whatsoever.
~ Atisha
Without referring to an imputed entity,
One cannot apprehend the lack of this entity
Therefore, the lack of a delusive entity
Is clearly delusive [too].
Thus, when one’s son dies in a dream,
The conception “He does not exist”
Removes the thought that he does exist,
But it is also delusive.
Once neither entities nor nonentities
Remain before the mind,
There is no other mental flux.
Therefore, it is utter nonreferential peace.
~ Shantideva
The world would be unproduced,
unceased, and unchangeable,
it would be devoid of its manifold appearances,
if there were intrinsic nature.
If there is no entitihood,
What changes?
If there were entity,
How could it be correct
that something changes?
If there is no essence,
What could become other?
If there is essence,
What could become other?
~ Nagarjuna
Any thought such as miserliness and so on
Is held to be an afflictive obscuration.
Any thought of ‘subject’, ‘object’ and ‘action’
Is held to be a cognitive obscuration.
~ Maitreya
To say “existence” is the clinging to permanence.
To say “nonexistence” is the view of extinction.
Therefore, the learned should not dwell
In either existence or non-existence.
...
If you grasp at existence,
there is no liberation;
If you grasp at non-existence,
there are no higher rebirths;
If you grasp at both,
you are just ignorant,
So do the best you can,
to remain in non-duality!
The nature of appearances
is like a magical illusion,
And the way they arise
is through interdependence:
That’s the way things are,
which cannot be expressed in words,
So do the best you can, to dwell
in a state which is inexpressible!
~ Jetsun Drakpa Gyaltsen
In this, there is not a thing to be removed,
Nor the slightest thing to be added.
It is looking perfectly into reality itself,
And when reality is seen, complete liberation.
~ Nagarjuna / Maitreya
The true nature of things
is naturally free of conceptual projections.
It does not exist, since even
the victorious ones do not see it.
Yet neither is it non-existent,
as it is the ground of all samsara and nirvana.
There is no contradiction here,
for it lies beyond the realm of expression.
~ From the Longchen Nyingthig
All compounded phenomena,
as arising and ceasing things,
Are not bound and not released.
For this reason a sentient being
Is not bound, not released.
The nature of things is to be, like nirvāṇa,
without origination or cessation.
In terms of its imaginary aspect,
this very other-dependent nature is samsara.
In terms of its perfect aspect,
it is nirvāṇa
...
There is no distinction whatsoever
between saṃsāra and nirvāṇa.
There is no distinction whatsoever
between nirvāṇa and saṃsāra.
What is the limit of nirvāṇa,
that is the limit of saṃsāra.
There is not even the finest gap
to be found between the two.
What is the nature of the thus-gone one,
that is the nature of the world.
The thus-gone one is devoid of nature;
the world is devoid of nature.
Those who develop mental fabrications
with regard to the Buddha,
Who has gone beyond all fabrications,
As a consequence of those cognitive fabrications,
Fail to see the Tathagata.
By taking any standpoint whatsoever,
You will be snatched by
the cunning snakes of the afflictions.
Those whose minds have no standpoint
Will not be caught.
The victorious ones have said
That emptiness is the relinquishing of all views.
For whomever emptiness is a view,
That one has achieved nothing.
In order to relinquish all imagination,
You taught the nectar of emptiness.
However, those who cling to it
Are also blamed by you.
~ Nagarjuna
Therefore, there is no such thing
That ultimately can be proved to be.
And thus the Tathagatas all have taught
That all phenomena are unproduced.
Since with the ultimate this is attuned,
It is referred to as the ultimate.
And yet the actual ultimate is free
From constructs and elaborations.
Production and the rest have no reality,
Thus nonproduction and the rest
are equally impossible.
In and of themselves, both are disproved,
And therefore names cannot express them.
Where there are no objects,
There can be no arguments refuting them.
Even “nonproduction,” entertained conceptually,
Is relative and is not ultimate.
~ Shantarakshita
Since the negation of arising and so on
Concords with actuality, we accept it.
Since there is nothing to be negated,
It is clear that, actually, there is no negation.
How should the negation of an imputation’s
Own nature not be an imputation?
Hence, seemingly, this is
The meaning of actuality, but not actuality [itself].
In actuality, neither exists.
This is the lack of discursiveness:
Mañjuśrī asked about actuality,
And the son of the Victors [Vimalakirti] remained silent.
~ Jnanagarbha
The ultimate is freedom from discursiveness.
Being empty of all discursiveness
Is to be understood
As the nonnominal ultimate.
Its character is neither existent, nor nonexistent,
Nor [both] existent and nonexistent, nor neither.
Centrists should know true reality
That is free from these four possibilities
The purpose of emptiness
is its characteristic of all discursiveness
being at utter peace.
~ Bhavaviveka
Since this lack of arising
is concordant with realizing the ultimate,
it is called “the ultimate.”
Since there is no object of negation,
such as arising, that is established,
[its] lack [cannot really] be
related to this non-existent object.
Therefore, to apprehend
the lack of arising and such
is nothing but a reference point...
Ultimately, true reality
cannot be expressed
as the lack of arising and such.
Therefore, Noble Mañjuśrī
asked about true reality
and Noble Vimalakirti said nothing.
~ Kamalashila
Engagement with the idea
that form is empty,
or that it is not empty,
is still engagement with marks.
It is not engagement with transcendent insight.
When there is no engagement
with anything at all,
it is the engagement with transcendent insight.
~ The Mother of the Victorious Ones [Sutra]:
Kāśyapa, I say that
the one who observes emptiness,
and thus conceives of emptiness,
has failed, failed entirely,
with respect to these teachings.
Having a belief in personal existence
that is as solid as the King of Mountains
is a minor problem compared
to the arrogant view of emptiness.
Why is that? Because emptiness
is a deliverance from all views.
Hence, I say that if the view
is exclusively emptiness,
then there is no cure.
~ The Noble Jewel Mound [Sutra]
Perfectly discerned
by self-cognizing primordial wisdom alone,
this is an ineffable experience
beyond thought and word,
a state of equality like the very center of space.
This is what the ultimate nature is like,
and therefore it is said that
if the Bodhisattvas understand and proclaim
that “the aggregates are empty,”
they are still caught up in characteristics.
They have no faith in the unborn nature.
~ Mipham Rinpoche
The pacification of all objectification
And the pacification of illusion:
No Dharma was taught by the Buddha
At any time, in any place, to any person.
~ Nagarjuna
.
DEDICATORY VERSES
.
I salute Gautama, who,
based on compassion,
taught the true Dharma
for the abandonment of all views.
~ Nagarjuna
Through whatever merit
has here been gained,
may all beings generate sublime bodhicitta,
both relative and absolute,
and through this,
come to equal Lord Avalokiteśvara,
transcending the extremes
of existence and quiescence.
~ Gyaltse Thogme Zangpo
May the Dharma, suffering’s only cure,
And the source of all real happiness,
Always be valued and respected,
And remain long into the future!
~ Shantideva