Showing posts with label Maha. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Maha. Show all posts


    When listening to the rain drops and roaring thunder, feeling the intimacy:
    Not translating. More poetic. 😁


    Yin Ling
    What is 应?

    John Tan
    Yin Ling "meeting". When conditions meet.

  • Yin Ling
    John Tan ok got it 谢谢。

  • John Tan
    Yin Ling Just capturing the 意境... First when hearing the rain and thundering, then the intimacy in feeling. Then the thought of seamlessness of the "meeting" conditions, then the joy.🤪

    • Reply
    • 3h
    • Edited

  • Yin Ling
    John Tan oh I thought it was 4 separate 意境.. ok now it is completely different haha

  • Reply
  • 3h

    • Stian Gudmundsen Høiland
      "Not translating. More poetic. 😁"
      I’m sure your translation would be more poetic than the automatic one I got:
      "All ears while listening,
      It's all over the body,
      It's all about hatred when it comes to time,
      Laughter makes your body happy."

    • Stian Gudmundsen Høiland
      The FB Koan Collection

    • John Tan
      When hearing, all manifest as ears.
      When feeling, all manifest as body.
      When engaging, all manifest as conditions.
      When laughing, all dharma are in joy.

    • Stian Gudmundsen Høiland
      Nice. Reminds me of something Mason said once, but which I can’t find right now.
      Also reminds me of something Nyananada said:
      “The word tajjo comes from tat + ja. Tat means ‘that [itself]’. It is the root of
      such important words as tādī and tammaya. So tatja means ‘arisen out of that
      itself’. What is samannāhāra? You might remember that, in the Caṅkī Sutta,
      the Buddha happens to see the Kāpaṭhika Brahmin youth. There we find the
      word upasaṃharati along with samannāhāra,[2] referring to a sort of focusing
      that may have not been planned – a chance meeting of eye to eye.
      Samannāhāra (āharati = brings) refers to a certain ‘bringing together’.
      “So tajjo samannāhāra points to the fact that this ‘bringing together’ of the
      necessary factors for the arising of consciousness is inherent to the situation
      itself. It is unique to the situation, and does not come from within a person or
      from the outside. It is not exerted by oneself or an external agent: some
      thought that there is an ātman inside who is in charge, while others said that it
      is a God that injects consciousness into the man. Letting go of all these
      extremes, Ven. Sāriputta Thera pointed out the crucial role of tajjo
      samannāhāra with his analysis of the three possibilities.”
      And then Bhante falls silent, and looks on with a smile.
      After a few moments, he asks: “What do you hear?”
      There is a bird singing in the distance.
      “Did it start singing only now?”
      It probably had started earlier (and now that I am listening to the tapes as I
      transcribe this, I know that it had started many minutes earlier).
      “It must have been singing all this while, but only now...” I say.
      “Only now...?”
      “Only now did the attention went there.”
      “There you have tajjo samannāhāra! So is it only because of the sound of the bird that you heard it? Didn’t you hear it only after I stopped talking? There
      could be other reasons too: had there been louder noises, you may not have
      heard it. So we see that it is circumstantial. That is why we mentioned in our
      writings: everything is circumstantial; nothing is substantial.”
      Please allow me to interject here and add that the last sentence would remain
      something that I’ll always cherish from these interviews. Not only because of
      the simple profundity of the statement or the nice little practical experiment
      that led up to it, but also because of the gentle kindness in the way it was
      “The attention that is present in a situation is to be understood as having
      arisen out of the circumstances. If there is anything of value in the Paṭṭḥāna,
      that would be here, in its analysis of the 24 causes. I can’t say for certain, but
      it may well be an attempt at systematising the general concept mentioned in
      this sutta: how a thought is connected to another. Since it is impossible to
      explain this mechanism by breaking it apart with words, Ven. Sāriputta Thera
      says it is circumstantial – unique to the situation itself.

    • Stian Gudmundsen Høiland
      Here is what Mason wrote:
      > We think our smile or our frown has some kind of metaphysical significance.
      But it's all bullshit.
      > When the conditions for smiling are there, then smiling is there.
      > When the conditions for frowning are there, then frowning.
      > When the conditions for seeing the world as a joke are there, the world is
      > When the conditions for seeing the world as a horrible cycle of suffering are
      there, then the world is a horrible cycle of suffering

      • Reply
      • 3h
      • Edited

    • John Tan
      "Smiling" and "frowning" should also not be taken as a "then" consequence of conditions as presented in the sevenfold reasoning of Chandra, hence, orignating dependently without establishment.

    • Reply
    • 2h
    • Edited


    You know how radical the buddha is?
    Let's try one scenario.
    We often take ourselves as a separate entity and the world outside as another separate fixed entity and we move inside this world.
    We fly from Singapore to New York,
    We walk from the mall to the carpark.
    Sounds normal?
    right. of course.
    The buddha says NOPE.
    He taught "dependent origination".
    What does that means?
    It means... are you even ready for this... lol
    He says
    You are not moving anywhere.
    the whole scenery that "you" are looking at arises due to conditions changing.
    You don't move from mall to carpark.
    You are the mall, which morphs into the carpark, when conditions change.
    which then morphs into sceneries on the road,
    And this morphing happens moment to moment
    And the whole scenery is your own appearances,
    Dependently originating.
    So "you" never move
    There is no coming or going.
    and then he says,
    Because this is only dependently originating, so it doesn't really exist out there.
    so you are literally a whole holographic scenic emanation which morphs moment to moment without an existence.
    If you accept this doctrine
    you literally live this way looking at the world this way.
    now you see how radical the buddha is?
    can you even accept this ?
    This is not even that shocking. 😛


    Yasmin El-Hakim
    more fantastic than “the matrix”
    I love it ❤️

    Yin Ling
    Yasmin El-Hakim hahahaha best still it's reality.
    ever since I chance upon the buddha's teachings I have never touch fiction.
    This is so much more intriguing lol

  • Tony Taylor
    Gratitude there was morphing from drinking coffee to reading these words and back again. So helpful. Look at all these conditions conspiring for understanding to clarify here deeper and deeper. 😎. Thanks Co dependent arising of Yin. Very helpful 🤣

  • Ng Xin Zhao
    Is it just like shifting frame of reference?
    Like we can put reference frame of road, then chicken crosses the road.
    Or reference frame with chicken, then the road crosses under the chicken.
    Reference frame with the sun (non rotating), the earth goes around the sun. Or reference frame the earth, the sun goes around the earth. This is not the reason for day and night, but the reason for seasonal changes.
    So instead of putting reference frame onto the external reality, there's just reference frame of this body and mind, since the 6 senses are carried by this body and mind. It's like putting on VR and haptic suit. Total immersion, where one is at the same place, but the sense data changes.
    My hunch is that it's way more than this. But so far that's the interpretation that I got from your statement. It's also not the first time I heard this. Hor Tuck Loon from WISE said this too.

  • Yin Ling
    Yes , almost like that in a way.
    Only I feel there is completely no frame of reference.
    No Center.
    Well you can say everywhere is a Center too.
    There’s completely no “I” to fixate upon.
    Completely gone.
    So it feels as though the whole “world” is fluxing non stop.
    When the chicken crosses the road, we will see as though a chicken as static crossing another thing that is static.
    But once seen through both are fluxing. Bam bam bam every fraction of second it is just dependent arising , no movement .
    It is like you scroll fb on your phone ,
    You feel like some news feed coming out from below, but it is not. It is every fraction of a second the screen changes dependently on the data, eye consciousness etc etc. and every moment is a new moment .
    Only now it is not just the phone and fb, it is every sensations in the whole world lol
    It is crazy 😌😌😌😌😌😳

  • Yin Ling
    Ng Xin Zhao it’s like this
    May be an image of 1 person and text

  • Ng Xin Zhao
    Yin Ling another concept from physics is Julien Barbour's end of time interpretation.
    Basically, there's no flow of time, just each snapshot of nows. Like pictures frames in movie. It doesn't seem to gel well with eternal timeless now experience, as the timeless now seems to have change, but the nows in Barbour's interpretation is more like a static picture, no change. Change is illusion due to the past being embedded in the nows like fossils in the ground.
    The End of Time, non-self and Nibbana
    The End of Time, non-self and Nibbana
    The End of Time, non-self and Nibbana

  • Yin Ling
    Cannot read dogen with logic but it can be experentially felt. Like the whole universe if fully exerted into the boating 🛶 and there’s no person doing anything .. even the leaf is moving the boat, the whole universe past future is boating.
    The Buddha is the most radical teacher ever
    Hence why he doesn’t even want to teach when he became enlightened. Lol

  • Yin Ling
    Ng Xin Zhao yeah but in barbours writing he reify the “now” you see and a static picture and the past is like fossils - all these are cognitive obscuration in Buddhism terms
    The Buddha is so radical that when he says -no self- even “here and now” is not a self, not something independently existing
    The Buddha proposed something even crazier, - there is no now, no here- just this one whole arising. And this whole arising cannot be located and cannot be found.
    What good fun 🤩

  • Ng Xin Zhao
    Yin Ling am I right to say: cannot be located/found, means that to locate stuffs, one would need to grasp it, to reify it as truly existing, to make it into a concept. Thus something solid which can be grasped onto.
    It just that the world is like bubbles from rain splashing onto the road, changes too fast, just rest in the impermanence, the suchness of things, without needing to make a base of even here and now to stand in?

  • Yin Ling
    Imo, “Cannot be located”
    Can actually be experienced very vividly
    We can locate sthg now because we have a frame of reference of “self” in the body. So things are there.
    Once no-self. The whole contracted energy in the body is hollowed out and pacified.
    The whole scenery/sounds/ touch, sensations all pop in and out and whenever it pops in “you” are there.
    But this “you” is not an identification you. It’s just this sensation knowing itself.
    So it is sort of like neutral sensation of “suchness” nature dancing it’s dependently arising dance. These sensations does not exist lol
    One doesn’t feel like a “person” anymore.
    Just this whole ping ping ping
    Ephemeral sensations that are soo so empty playing out it’s splendour like a show boundlessly
    The bodg doesn’t feel more than a cup,
    The body sensation not more than a sound.
    Equality abounds,
    No self anywhere.
    Just dependent arising everywhere going about it’s own business
    All the sensations is one’s own appearances
    Thanks for letting me talk crazily
    But I’m reporting literally 😂😂😂😂 this is the most literal I can get. Reality cannot be understood 😁

  • Ng Xin Zhao
    Yin Ling sensation knowing itself... This should not be read as reifying the sensation as a mini sentient thing which can know itself like? Like the movie "inside out" where those 5 emotions are reified as mini humans living inside the head of humans.
    Tree sees itself, is not that tree has a mind which sees itself. Cup sees itself is not like cup suddenly become sentient and got eyes to loop back to see itself. It's just lacking any suitable words that there's no more self, no more referent to say the subject sees object, but ordinary language has this object subject structure, so it's not easy to communicate what you're experiencing using normal language?
    Welcome. Thanks for talking crazy. I think it's just crazy if we take it as really the cup is sentient and sees itself. But it's an inherent flaw in language. Am I right? Or maybe the panpsychism people are right, that everything has consciousness?

  • Yin Ling
    It’s not sentient.
    But it’s the nature of every sensation that dependently arise.
    If you look into the buddhas teaching- especially the 12 ayatanas (origin and base) and 18 dhatus teaching in theravada, it has been describe , just the Buddha don’t talk modern like me lol
    Basically ear, ear consciousness and sohnd dependently arise and a sound is heard , it is ONE ARISING ,right??
    But we normally perceive as - sound ther, then I hear from here, 2 moments of arising
    But the Buddha say nope not like that, one arising, all depdenlt arising in one moment
    the sound is heard
    And something is aware of the sound
    We can be sure of that
    Something knows the sound
    And the Buddha says one whole dependent arising
    So how?
    Where is the awareness?
    This investigation needs to be done until conviction arise
    And if we want to refer to a parallel Buddha steaching- the Bahiya sutta when Bahiya heard of the sutta and become an Arahant prior to dying. ..
    The Buddha taught Bahiya to practise
    In the heard only the heard
    In the seen only the seen
    Hence if you pair this with the dhatus and ayatanas teaching
    In the heard,
    It is a whole dependent Arising of ear sound ear consciousness bell air waves etc etc etc
    But only the heard.
    Only the sound
    All package in ☝️ one
    All conditions being totally exerted into producing the sound
    So where is the awareness ?
    Hehe so I often say sound hears
    But it’s not like sound become a human and hear , 2 moments
    It is sound intrinsically have sound consciousness in it already
    It is the nature of all sensation that it is only ONE arising. (Refer to dhatus and ayatanas and Bahiya)
    One arising means - the knowing of the sound is intrinsic already to the sound
    It is not like sound there, then I hear from here , 2 moments of consciousness
    It is one arising
    The sound consciousness and sound is one arising
    In the heard only the heard
    All sensations have similar nature 😬😬😬😬
    Radical Buddha continue to teaches radically if one cares to really understand him 😉

  • Ng Xin Zhao
    Yin Ling hard to gel with the physics common assumption of the physical world existing out there.
    Say light from stars. It had been travelling for years to reach the earth. Before it lands into the eye, there's still light there, but there's no knowing of light from the stars. Indeed, once there's contact, there's naturally the eye consciousness there.
    But yes, philosophically speaking, we can say, who can verify that there's light coming from stars without anyone to see the light? Is the moon there when no one is looking? Does the falling tree make a sound in the forest, if no one is there?
    Perhaps one can say that the photon and sound wave of compressed air etc are ideals, concepts, which cannot be perceived. Once perceived, there's the light, sound, inherently there's consciousness there. Before perceived, it's more of imagined. The way photon appears to consciousness, it's presentation may not be the same as the underlying thing before it lands to the eye. But no one has access to the photon before it lands to the eye, so this is what Kant might call things in itself. And the Buddhist philosophy might say, it doesn't exist since it's outside the range of the 6 senses. Ok maybe not outside the range of imagination, the mind sense.
    Sorry. I think so much, make it so complicated.

  • Yin Ling
    Ng Xin Zhao I understnd what you are saying 🙂
    No we don’t have access to anything apart from our consciousness and we don’t have evidence for that
    And we will never find out because without our cosciisunesd there is nothing
    Hence physics always look outside , ignoring the observer which is also part of the deal.
    Only when recently they found thjnfs change with observations, they realis sthg is very radical yet not budging from their cherished seat of observer hahaha so I am not v much interested in physics coz I can see how their looking is not gonna go any where

  • Yin Ling
    Ng Xin Zhao I will give physics another 100 years to come to the buddhas teaching 😂🙃🌈🙈

  • J.P. Hamilton
    Yin Ling Your book is going to be really good.

  • Christopher
    That’s how game works. The character is always in the middle but the surrounding is moving whenever you control the character or a racing car.

    Yin Ling
    Christopher yeah they take out the human in the middle
    Reality is “you” are also the game 🤣🤣🤣

  • Kl Lim
    It just blew me away. Love it!

    Yin Ling
    Kl Lim it can be experienced ! Hehe
    It is just the doctrine of no self, emptiness and dependent origination coming together
    Nothing really out there, just our karmic imprints manifesting as all, just our own appearances looking back at us 🙂

  • Kl Lim
    Yin Ling the beauty was how you stripped it down plain and simple to touch the core of me, the padawan. Gratitude for that.

  • Yin Ling
    Kl Lim Haha don't say like the brother Lim. It's just a sharing from my understanding walking around the park every morning thinkign how would these insight fits haha, very free lately

  • Kl Lim
    It is no walk in the park for everyone. Your walk in the park reinforces my admiration. Sadhu!

  • Darius Gan
    Sounds like how warp drive works

    Yin Ling
    Only it’s reality 🙂

  • Daniel Lester
    Yes dependent origination is super interesting.
    also can see this in it bare and naked form in deep meditation, if you reach deep highly concentrated vipassana then switch to samatha these frames of thoughts, frames of images, are almost like a strobe light flickering. Images and phenomena coming out of nothingness from nothingness. The beginning of Thoughts bubbling up to the surface of consciousness then dissipating into nothingness again. Each frame is separate to itself. The same analogy as a 60hrz computer screen that is constantly flickering yet not visible to our common vision.

    Yin Ling
    Daniel Lester haha yes. It’s very interesting. Sometimes post meditation I will see things flickering in and out of consciousness for awhile before it stabilises .
    Sometimes the ground will “melt” below me in the park 😂 all just a show playing out.

  • Stian Gudmundsen Høiland
    Sounds like ____ to me 🙃 Seriously, ____ is like that for me.

  • Reply
  • 3h
  • Edited