New book: https://www.amazon.com/Searching-Self-Library-Wisdom-Compassion/dp/1614297959/ref=sr_1_1?qid=1653580994&refinements=p_27%3AHis+Holiness+the+Dalai+Lama&s=books&sr=1-1&text=His+Holiness+the+Dalai+Lama

• Active

  Yin Ling

  noSosp1ag1h67hct19cl0la65  ·

  I like this v much

  .

  In the Questions of Adhyāśaya Sūtra (Adhyāśayasaṃśōdana Sūtra), the Buddha makes this point in a dialogue with a disciple (CTB 161):

  “For example, during a magical display, a man sees a woman created by a magician and desire arises in him. His mind becomes ensnared with desire, and he is frightened and ashamed in front of his companions.

  Rising from his seat, he leaves and later considers the woman to be ugly, impermanent, unsatisfactory, and selfless.

  O child of a good lineage, what do you think? Is that man behaving correctly or incorrectly?”

  “Blessed One, he who strives to consider a nonexistent woman to be ugly, impermanent, unsatisfactory, and selfless behaves incorrectly.”

  The Blessed One said, “O child of a good lineage, you should similarly view those bhikṣus, bhikṣuṇīs, laymen, and laywomen who consider unproduced and unarisen phenomena to be ugly, impermanent, unsatisfactory, and selfless.

  I do not say that these foolish persons are cultivating the path; they are practicing in an incorrect manner.”

  Here the Buddha emphasizes that if we contemplate nonexistent objects of attachment as ugly, impermanent, empty, and lacking a self-sufficient substantially existent I, we are missing the point.

  There’s no use contemplating the impermanence and so forth of nonexistents; if we understood that these things did not exist to start with, our attachment to them would vanish. Meditating on the attributes of coarse true duḥkha is like discussing how to dispose of wilted flowers in a hologram or how to shave the moustache off a turtle when such flowers and such a moustache do not exist.

  To attain liberation, realization of the ultimate mode of existence—the emptiness of inherent existence of both persons and phenomena—is essential. Saying phenomena are unproduced and unarisen indicates that they are not inherently produced and do not inherently arise, although they are produced and arise conventionally.

  ~HHDL

  0 Comments

  
  

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
Active

Yin Ling

eptdno1al255 8a :lr911 MaYhyP66d6estt8e  ·
HHDL :
To review the causal sequence of saṃsāra: the elaboration of grasping inherent existence gives rise to distorted conceptions—erroneous thought processes—which, in turn, provoke afflictions. Afflictions lead to the creation of actions that bring rebirth in saṃsāra and its attendant duḥkha.
To give a rough analogy, self-grasping ignorance and its elaborations are like the unscrupulous boss of a company producing faulty products; conceptualizations and distorted concepts are like the salespeople who exaggerate the qualities of the product; afflictions are like our signing the contract; and karma is all the actions we take afterward.
What ends this chain of events? The realization of the emptiness of true existence. Bringing an end to elaborations involves dismantling all grasping of an objectified basis (T. yul gyi ngos nas yod pa) of persons and phenomena, all grasping of persons and phenomena as having an inherent, independent essence.

0 Comments




• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
Active

Yin Ling

eptdno1al254 7a :lr951 MaYhyP66d6estt8e  ·
From HHDL new book :
The Development of Afflictions in Daily Life
Although afflictions often arise quickly in our mind, seeming to come out of nowhere, they develop through a sequential process. To have the notion of I, one or more of our mental or physical aggregates must appear.
Based on this appearance, a valid sense of I arises. This I exists by being merely designated in dependence on the aggregates. Observing this mere I, ignorance erroneously grasps it to exist inherently. That grasping is the view of a personal identity grasping I (ahaṃkāra).
Based on that, the view of a personal identity grasping mine (mamakāra) arises when we think, “This is my body. These are my thoughts.” The object of the grasping at mine is the sense of “myness,” the I that makes things mine; it is not the body or the thoughts themselves.
Grasping the body or thoughts to be inherently existent is self-grasping of phenomena, not self-grasping of persons.
Tsongkhapa says (FEW 43):
. . . the observed object of an innate awareness thinking “mine” is that very “mine.” It should not be held that your own eyes and so forth are the observed object.
The body, intelligence, table, and so forth are examples of “mine” because in ordinary language we say, “This body is mine. This table is mine.”
But the observed object of grasping “mine” is the mine that is the owner, and not the body, intelligence, or table.
Once the I is grasped as inherently existent, attachment, anger, and other destructive emotions quickly follow, because we want to give this I pleasure and protect it from pain.
These mental factors arise very quickly, one right after the other. If our mindfulness is sharp, we can observe this process and thwart it. Otherwise, these afflictions control us.
Grasping the inherent existence of I and mine are erroneous minds. They are not present every time we use the conventions “I” and “mine.”
When we casually and calmly say “I’m walking” or “This is my book,” grasping I or mine is not present. This way of apprehending I and mine differs greatly from the self-grasping that is present when we arrogantly think “I am famous,” or greedily say “This is mine.”

3 Comments

• 
  
Yasmin El-Hakim
even if one knows very well that this I as an existing person with its body and thoughts is a card house is merely a false identification, even then this feeling of an I is there
• 
  
• Reply
• 1d
• 
  
Yin Ling
Yasmin El-Hakim yes it takes patience and determination
• 
  
• • Reply
  • 1d
• 
  
Yasmin El-Hakim
Yin Ling there is much patience and determination here
• 
  
• • Reply
  • 20h

 https://www.amazon.com/How-See-Yourself-You-Really/dp/0743290461

Ng Xin Zhao
http://greg-goode.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/CHAPTER-9-NOTES.pdf
You were able to get the level 9 and beyond, calm abiding here? It seems that it's an important prerequisite before exploring many of the insight meditations. Is it that most of the teachers you recommended already got this prerequisite too? Then I need to focus more on this.

Reply
1d

Yin Ling
Ng Xin Zhao imo it’s dependent
Insights dependent on concentration vice Versa
No need to wait till last stage to practise insight
Once mind calm enough, can start investigating
With more clear seeing, the mind calms further
I’m mostly doing the last one now- calm abiding with insight
That will penetrate daily experience. Hence the constant bliss and tranquility Throughout the day as long as I tune into empty clarity
And not let thoughts distract me
Post no-self insight which is 1st fold emptiness one can do that .. stay in ultimate
Reply
1d
André A. Pais
Some teachers say that stage 9 shamatha is nearly impossible to attain these days. I don't know. Definitely one shouldn't wait for samadhi before practicing insight.
Reply
5h
Soh Wei Yu
André A. Pais
Malcolm said few months ago,
https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=616369#p616369
“Re: Is first dhyāna necessary for the first bhūmi?
Report Quote
Post Tue Feb 01, 2022 4:37 am
Caoimhghín wrote: ↑
The title says it all. Related: Is first dhyāna necessary for any particular significant degree of Bodhi?
Malcolm:
Nope.”
“Samadhi is a natural mental factor of one pointedness. People with no experience, who like to follow books like recipe guides, say such things as "first dhyāna is absolutely mandatory for the path of seeing." But then you have to ask them if they have discovered the path of seeing. If they say no, then obviously they are just going to the basis of what they have heard or read in a book. If they say yes, there are other tests you can apply.
In Mahāyāna, the samadhi part is not perfected until the fifth bhumi. There is no requirement for the first dhyāna to realize the first bhumi. The first bhumi merely requires realization of śunyatā. That can come about as a result of the union of śamatha and vipaśyāna, or it can be arrived at merely through vipaśyāna. It depends on the person. All that is really necessary is that aspiring bodhisattva can focus on their analysis on the emptiness of objects without being distracted, but is certainly does not mean that they have to first perfect all four or five factors of the first dhyāna. It won't harm them if they do, but it is not required.
You should examine Discerning the Middle from the Extremes, it presents a concise summary of the five paths and how they are realized in Mahāyāna. Madhyamaka texts do not discuss this so much, at least, not early ones.”
“That's what I meant by people who just read books. The only concentration one needs is to be able to focus on one's analysis without being distracted. That's it.
If one goes chasing after samadhi, one will waste a lot of time and never realize emptiness, and that is a fact.”
“Below the path of seeing, the dhyānas are just causes for rebirth.”
“Without vipaśyanā, samādhi is useless——this is why there are three prajñās, not only one. Meditation just isn't the main point of Buddhadharma. Prajñā is.”
“Prajñā is not acquired through samādhi at all. However, śila provides a basis for a focused mind (samādhi), and a focused mind provides a basis for prajñā.
Prajñā is acquired through hearing (śrutimayāprajñā), reflection (cintamayāprajñā), and cultivation (bhāvanamayīprajñā).
The dhyānas are not required for this at all. Samādhi is just mental one-pointedness on a object. For most people, that would be TV, these days.”
“The only difference between the samādhi of watching TV and the training of samādhi in the Dharma is that the former is contaminated, and the latter is not. But the samādhi, the mental factor, is identical in both cases, only the object is different. What makes the samādhi part hard is that it is difficult to shift one's focus from mundane contaminated objects to mundane uncontaminated objects, such as the path dharmas. Hence, the need for śila as a basis for samādhi. But this has nothing actually to do with samādhi itself. Samādhi can be focused wherever one likes. And in the case of a practitioners, that concentration is focused on Dharma. It also has nothing developing rarified samadhis, etc. Samādhi here just means being able to focus the mind at will. Thats it. People keep turning these things into strange beasts. We avoid things that disturb our minds (śila), so that we can focus (samādhi) on developing the three wisdoms. That's it. It's not complicated.
Its better to understand the essence of a thing, rather than pile elaboration on top of elaboration.”
Is first dhyāna necessary for the first bhūmi? - Dharma Wheel
DHARMAWHEEL.NET
Is first dhyāna necessary for the first bhūmi? - Dharma Wheel
Is first dhyāna necessary for the first bhūmi? - Dharma Wheel
Reply
Remove Preview
1m
Soh Wei Yu
So.. samadhi is required, but maybe not the dhyanas.
More on dhyana: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../dzogchen-meditation...
Dzogchen, Meditation and Jhana
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Dzogchen, Meditation and Jhana
Dzogchen, Meditation and Jhana
Reply
Remove Preview
1m