Showing posts with label Sixth Ch'an Patriarch Hui-Neng. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sixth Ch'an Patriarch Hui-Neng. Show all posts


Soh's translation: When one does not conceive that there is a Mind which has existence or non-existence, this is the constant samadhi, wherefore the exit and entrance? If there is exit or entry, it is not the Great Samadhi.
Soh's translation: Only let Mind be like empty space, without grasping at views of emptiness. Functioning responsively without obstructions, no mind amidst movement or stillness. Feelings of ordinariness or saintliness forgotten, subject and object completely vanish, nature and appearances are such[ness]. At no time is there lack of samadhi.
- Sixth Ch'an/Zen Patriarch Hui-Neng in Platform Sutra

[8/10/21, 8:56:46 PM] John Tan: Read the foundation of dzogchen philosophy
[8/10/21, 9:13:05 PM] John Tan: It is in the book
[8/10/21, 9:13:59 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ok
[8/10/21, 9:25:44 PM] John Tan: The book "foundation" goes in extensively to define what is zhi and kun zhi, their histories and development...etc...both r termed as "ground" which I do not think it as appropriate for a praxis that rest entirely on abolishing "ground" even when talking abt "zhi".  Malcolm is more cautious on this aspect.
[8/10/21, 11:17:28 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[8/10/21, 11:17:58 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Malcolm translate it as basis
[8/10/21, 11:18:06 PM] Soh Wei Yu: malcolm:

And this so-called "god" aka basis [gzhi] is just a nonexistent mere appearance, that is, our primordial potentiality also has no real existence, which is stated over and over again in countless Dzogchen tantras.

For those whom emptiness is possible, everything is possible.
For those whom emptiness is not possible, nothing is possible.

-- Nāgārjuna.
[8/10/21, 11:21:37 PM] Soh Wei Yu: master shen kai teacher chen lzls etc uses the term 宇宙本体
[8/10/21, 11:26:48 PM] John Tan: Although David Higgins used the word "ground", he qualifies it as "insubstantial and unestablished in any sense".
[8/10/21, 11:27:07 PM] Soh Wei Yu: oic..
[9/10/21, 2:16:55 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Tommy McNally
You're friends on Facebook
New Facebook Account
Today at 1:58 AM
1:58 AM
Tommy McNally
Hiya! Thanks for adding me to the group, it's really good to see you and John's opinions on the subtleties of Dzogchen as they seem to align with my own. I've been writing another blog for the last year that's mainly dharma-based, but I've tried to keep it simple and practical while combining it with motivation/mindset training. There's a few posts on there that I'd love to hear your opinion on, especially in the context of John's 7 stage model.
[9/10/21, 7:57:37 AM] John Tan: What r the posts?
[9/10/21, 4:35:37 PM] John Tan: I wonder y there is a need for Dzogchen to emphasize so much on gzhi and kun gzhi.  I do not see any real help in actual practice.  In fact seeing through self-nature is sufficient.  Direct and simple and straight forward🤣.  Although there r some important points in the praxis of dzogchen.
[9/10/21, 4:39:30 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[9/10/21, 4:48:35 PM] John Tan: Also in early texts of Dzogchen and Nyingma scholars actually do not differentiate between gzhi and kun gzhi.
[9/10/21, 5:13:47 PM] John Tan: Btw how is ur uncle?
[9/10/21, 5:20:17 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Dont know.. never heard since
[9/10/21, 5:20:19 PM] Soh Wei Yu: I see
[9/10/21, 7:23:42 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Mahamudra also talk about “ground” but dunno what term they use

The ground of purification is the mind itself,
indivisible cognitive clarity and emptiness.
That which purifies is the great vajra yoga of mahamudra.
What is to be purified are the adventitious,
temporary contaminations of confusion,
May the fruit of purification, the stainless dharmakaya, be manifest.
Resolving doubts about the ground brings conviction in the view.
Then keeping one's awareness unwavering in accordance with the view,
is the subtle pith of meditation.
Putting all aspects of meditation into practice is the supreme action.
The view, the meditation, the action--may there be confidence in these.
All phenomena are illusory displays of mind.
Mind is no mind--the mind's nature is empty of any entity that is mind
Being empty, it is unceasing and unimpeded,
manifesting as everything whatsoever.
Examining well, may all doubts about the ground be discerned and cut.
[9/10/21, 7:23:53 PM] Soh Wei Yu: I suppose dzogchen and mahamudra should be the same view
[9/10/21, 7:57:53 PM] John Tan: Dzogchen is the path that starts from taking the view that anatta is a seal, always and already so.
[9/10/21, 7:59:37 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic.. mahamudra is the same?
[9/10/21, 8:09:09 PM] John Tan: I guessed so but I don't want to comment on this.
[9/10/21, 8:22:32 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic.. i guess zen should also be so
[9/10/21, 8:22:36 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Especially for dogen soto zen
[9/10/21, 8:22:42 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Even bodhidharma
[9/10/21, 8:34:03 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Even for sixth patriarch hui neng although initially talk about Self, in his teachings he said impermanence is buddha nature and refute non buddhist views
[9/10/21, 8:35:02 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Yet sadly few zen masters in china understand that. Maybe ven hui lu (See: True Mind and Unconditioned Dharma) and hong wen liang
[9/10/21, 8:40:21 PM] Soh Wei Yu: 僧志彻:弟子常览《涅槃经》,未晓常无常义。乞和尚慈悲,略为解说。   师曰:无常者,即佛性也;有常者,即一切善恶诸法分别心也。   曰:和尚所说,大违经文。   师曰:吾传佛心印,安敢违于佛经?   曰:经说佛性是常,和尚却言无常;善恶诸法,乃至菩提心,皆是无常,和尚却言是常。此即相违。令学人转加疑惑。   师曰:《涅槃经》,吾昔听尼无尽藏读诵一遍,便为讲说,无一宇一义不合经文。乃至为汝,终无二说。   曰:学人识量浅昧,愿和尚委曲开示。   师曰:汝知否?佛性若常,更说什么善恶诸法,乃至穷劫,无有一人发菩提心者。故吾说无常,正是佛说真常之道也。又一切诸法若无常者,即物物皆有自性,容受生死,而真常性有不遍之处。故吾说常者,正是佛说真无常义。佛比为凡夫外道执于邪常,诸二乘人于常计无常,共成八倒。故于涅槃了义教中,破彼偏见,而显说真常、真乐、真我、真净。汝今依言背义,以断灭无常,及确定死常,而错解佛之圆妙最后微言,纵览千遍,有何所益?   行昌忽然大悟,说偈云:   因守无常心,佛说有常性。   不知方便者,犹春池拾磔。   我今不施功,佛性而现前。   非师相授与,我亦无所得。   师曰:汝今彻也,宜名志彻。彻礼谢而退。
引自 佛性无常
[9/10/21, 9:07:56 PM] Soh Wei Yu: The monk Chih-ch’e was a native of Kiangsi. . . . After the Zen school split into southern and northern factions, though the leaders of the two groups made no such discriminations themselves, rivalry grew between their followers, which gave rise to intense feelings of partiality. Followers of the northern faction arbitrarily put forward their leader Shen-hsiu as the Sixth Patriarch and were thus envious when it became widely known that the patriarchal robe had been transmitted to Hui-neng, leader of the southern group. They enlisted the services of Hsing-ch’ang and told him to murder Hui-neng. Hui-neng, with his all-knowing mind, perceived what they were about. He placed ten taels of silver in his room. One dark night, Hsing-ch’ang entered the room and prepared to strike Hui-neng. Hui-neng stretched out his neck in readiness. Hsing-ch’ang struck three times but was unable to inflict any injury. Hui-neng said, “A just sword does not miss its mark; an unjust sword cannot strike true. I’ll give you money, but not my life.” Hsing-ch’ang fell over in a swoon. When he revived, he penitently begged Hui-neng to pity him and make him a monk. Handing him the money, Hui-neng said, “You had best leave. I’m afraid my followers might try to take revenge. In the future you can disguise yourself and come here again. I will receive you then.” Hsing-ch’ang followed Hui-neng’s advice and escaped into the night.
Afterward, he went to a priest and had himself ordained, receiving the full precepts and devoting himself to religious practice. One day, recalling Hui- neng’s words, he traveled to visit him. Hui-neng said, “You’ve been on my mind all this time. What has kept you so long?” Hsing-ch’ang said, “Before, you forgave my criminal behavior. Today, I am engaged in austere discipline as a monk. But I have been unable to find any way to requite your kindness. I will just do all I can to transmit the Dharma for the sake of others. I always study the Nirvana Sutra, but I haven’t been able to grasp the meaning of permanence and impermanence. Please, master, in your compassion, would you briefly explain it for me?” Hui-neng said, “Impermanence is the Buddha-nature. Per- manence is the mind that discriminates all the various dharmas good and bad.” “That’s not at all what the sutra says,” replied Hsing-ch’ang. “I transmit the seal of the Buddha-mind, why would I deliberately say something that is counter to the Buddha’s sutras?” said Hui-neng. “The sutra preaches that the Buddha- nature is permanent, but you say it is impermanent. The sutra says all dharmas good and bad and even the mind of enlightenment are impermanent. You say they are permanent,” said Hsing-ch’ang. “Those differences only deepen my doubt.” Hui-neng said, “Once when I heard the nun Wu Chin-tsang read the Nirvana Sutra, I made some impromptu comments on it. Not one of my words or their meaning was in disagreement with the sutra’s. It’s the same when I teach you. I never say anything different from the sutra.” Hsing-ch’ang said, “My powers of understanding are poor. Please, could you explain it in more detail?” Hui-neng said, “If the Buddha-nature were permanent, what would be the need to preach beyond that about all dharmas good and bad? Even in the passage of an entire kalpa, there would not be a single person who would ever raise the mind of enlightenment. That is why I preach impermanence, and that itself is the way of true permanence preached by the Buddha. If, on the other hand, all dharmas were impermanent, then each thing would have a selfhood and take part in birth-and-death, and there would be areas to which true permanence did not reach. Therefore, I preach permanence, and it is just the same as the meaning of true impermanence preached by the Buddha. The attachment to illusory permanence of unenlightened non-Buddhists, and the discriminations of followers of the two vehicles that take permanence as imper- manence—which together make up the eight topsy-turvy views—were refuted as distorted, one-sided views by the Buddha when he expounded his complete and perfect teaching of nirvana and made explicit the teaching of true permanence, true pleasure, true self, and true purity. By relying merely on words, you now subvert their inner meaning. If you mistake the perfect and subtle words the Buddha spoke just prior to his demise as indicating nihilistic imper- manence or lifeless permanence, you could get no benefit from the Nirvana Sutra, even though you read it a thousand times over. Hsing-ch’ang suddenly attained a great enlightenment. He made a verse:
Holding firmly to the mind of impermanence The Buddha preached permanence;
Those unaware of his skillful means
Just seize on a pebble in a spring pool. Though I now put forth no effort at all, Buddha-nature is right under my nose.
It is not received from my teacher, Nor is it something I gained either.
Hui-neng said, “You have penetrated it. I must give you the name Chih- ch’e (Aspiration Penetrates).” Chih-ch’e bowed in thanks and left (from the Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch [Liu-tsu t’an-ching]).

(Translation taken from The Heart of Dogen's Shobogenzo translated by Norman Waddell and Masao Abe)
[9/10/21, 9:10:30 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Hui neng is saying impermanence is buddha nature (anatta) and furthermore all dharmas are non arising without selfhood (emptiness)
[9/10/21, 9:12:17 PM] Soh Wei Yu: So actually platform sutra leads to the seven phases lol first the hui neng koan what is your original face before thinking good and bad, then the teaching about impermanence is buddha nature and non arising of dharmas
[9/10/21, 9:23:43 PM] John Tan: Original face means to realize that appearances has always been one's radiance clarity, primordially luminous and naturally free.
[9/10/21, 9:23:56 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[9/10/21, 9:31:32 PM] John Tan: Problem is most ppl that engaged in the so called highest teachings r having a dualistic and substantialist view.  If we do not recognize the nature of appearances and kept emphasizing on primordial knowing, taking the non-progressive is imo a great disservice than help.
[9/10/21, 9:33:28 PM] John Tan: Just like when u r at I M, u already like to talk about spontaneous presence which I caution u don't talk about that until at least mature non-dual.
[9/10/21, 9:37:43 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic.. lol yeah

  • Instantaneous kind of person dont go though IAMness. Huineng didnt go as an example.

    • Reply
    • 22h

    badge icon
    Actually that is not correct. Huineng initial poem is not about anatta and no mirror but about I AMness.
    The translation taken by
    Myriad Objects
    and Rob Burbea is inaccurate.
    Huineng went through two awakenings. Will elaborate later

    • Reply
    • 22h

  • Soh Wei Yu
    In platform sutra it says literally "I became Buddha". I can recognize de hanzi for buddha in the text. What you think? Anway Dakpo and Mahamudra in general recognize instantaneous type of person. Any opinion? (not my case :D:D 😃)

    • Reply
    • 21h
    • Edited

  • badge icon
    Huineng's initial poem only expresses I AM, which was why 5th patriarch was still unimpressed. This is the point made by John Tan, my Taiwanese teacher, and a few Mahayana teachers I've seen.
    I explained in 2014:
    Nope. Huineng simply realized the I AM at that time. The 5th patriarch rubbed his no-mirror-stand poem off with his feet saying that too is not an expression of great realization, told him to go meet him at midnight with a cryptic message from his staff. Upon meeting, the 5th patriarch explained the Diamond Sutra, and upon hearing the verse "giving rise to an unsupported mind" he realized "great awakening". This is written in chapter 1 of Platform Sutra
    badge icon
    Its important to note that at the time Hui-neng wrote the no-mirror-stand (not no-mirror) quote, he has not yet attained great enlightenment. It is more like a realization of the formless I AM, and how the I AM is fundamentally void of sensory/mental obscurations. But this is still way better than Shenxiu, who was still talking from the viewpoint of purifying the mind through shamatha, without any realization of his Mind. Hui-neng's great enlightenment occurred later on.
    A better translation (by me):
    Bodhi (Awareness/Mind/Self) is originally without tree
    The Clear Mirror (Awareness/Mind) is not a Stand
    Originally (in the Source) there is not one phenomena
    Where does dust alight?
    Session Start: Fri Nov 04 23:00:58 2005
    Session Ident: ^john^
    [23:00] Session Ident: ^john^ (
    [23:00] <^john^> Thevoice msg me. Don't say i m around. 🙂
    [23:01] <ZeN`n1th> hahah
    [23:01] <ZeN`n1th> why u ignore him
    [23:01] <^john^> this is a very important site.
    [23:01] <ZeN`n1th> oh ya
    [23:01] <^john^> finally found one that explains how we lost ourselves.
    [23:01] <ZeN`n1th> u gave me the link b4
    [23:01] <ZeN`n1th> i will bookmark it
    [23:02] <^john^> about luminosity and emptiness?
    [23:02] <^john^> the danger of emphasizing luminosity?
    [23:02] <ZeN`n1th> u gave me the link a year ago
    [23:03] <^john^> ic...i can't find the link.
    [23:03] <ZeN`n1th> huh
    [23:03] <^john^> search for about a yr.
    [23:03] <^john^> lol
    [23:03] <ZeN`n1th> lol
    [23:03] <ZeN`n1th> so u found it again?
    [23:03] <ZeN`n1th> me too, i cant find it for a long tie
    [23:03] <ZeN`n1th> time
    [23:03] <^john^> yeah...i was trying to find it.
    [23:03] <^john^> put it into the forum.
    [23:04] <^john^> as for thevoice, not the time yet. 🙂
    [23:05] <ZeN`n1th> oic...
    [23:05] <ZeN`n1th> okie
    [23:05] <ZeN`n1th> hmm so when is the time for thevoice?
    [23:05] <ZeN`n1th> lol
    [23:05] <^john^> lost one more time. 🙂
    [23:05] <ZeN`n1th> lost wat?
    [23:06] <^john^> nowadays many zen books and masters are overemphasizing the luminosity aspect of pure awareness. Found it at the right time. 🙂
    Question & Answers
    Question & Answers
    Question & Answers

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 6m

  • badge icon
    [00:49] <^john^> it is not difficult to see the emphasis of most zen masters is on pure awareness lucidity and clarity.
    [00:51] <^john^> i must say tibetan masters are more balanced. I
    [00:51] <ZeN`n1th> how about e.g 6th zen patriarch hui neng?
    [00:51] <ZeN`n1th> u saying most/all or only limited to some?
    [00:51] <ZeN`n1th> i mean, some zen masters?
    [00:53] <^john^> yes they are.  
    [00:53] <ZeN`n1th> there are what?
    [00:53] <ZeN`n1th> enlightened?
    [00:53] <ZeN`n1th> btw 6th zen patriarch is enlightened isnt it
    [00:54] <ZeN`n1th> anyway lineages are only passed down to enlightened ppl, so i presume all the zen lineage holders are enlightened?
    [00:55] <^john^> yes
    [00:55] <^john^> not the first time.
    [00:55] <^john^> the popular poem puti ben wu shu.  
    [00:56] <ZeN`n1th> [00:55] <^john^> not the first time. --> huh?
    [00:57] <ZeN`n1th> not the first time on what
    [00:57] <ZeN`n1th> [00:55] <^john^> the popular poem puti ben wu shu.   --> so u mean the poem showcase hui neng's enlightenment?
    [00:57] <^john^> yes
    [00:57] <ZeN`n1th> oic
    [00:57] <ZeN`n1th> anyway u mean first time is what
    [00:58] <^john^> when he wrote the poem.
    [00:58] <ZeN`n1th> u mean Shen-hsiu's poem?
    [00:59] <^john^> after he came out from hiding, he is entirely different.
    [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> The body is the bodhi tree,
    [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> The mind is like a clear mirror.
    [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> At all times we must strive to polish it,
    [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> And must not let the dust collect.
    [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> (Yampolsky 130)
    [00:59] <^john^> yes.
    [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> 2) Hui-neng offers the following alternative verse:
    [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> Bodhi originally has no tree,
    [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> The mirror(-like mind) has no stand.
    [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> Buddha-nature (emptiness/oneness) is always clean and pure;
    [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> Where is there room for dust (to alight)?
    [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> (Yampolsky 132)
    [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> [00:59] <^john^> after he came out from hiding, he is entirely different. --> oic..
    [01:00] <^john^> anyway i m not in the position to comment on huineng.  
    [01:01] <^john^> but zen books tend to overemphasize this aspect.
    [01:01] <ZeN`n1th> actually i tink u got the timeline wrong
    [01:01] <ZeN`n1th> it is only after hui neng wrote the poem, and the 5th patriarch was impressed
    [01:01] <ZeN`n1th> then he told hui neng to go into hiding
    [01:01] <ZeN`n1th> lol
    [01:01] <^john^> u will not find much diff between the 'atman'
    [01:01] <ZeN`n1th> icic..
    [01:01] <^john^> yes he told hui neng to go into hiding coz he isn't ready.  
    [01:02] <ZeN`n1th> isn't ready for?
    [01:02] <^john^> preaching.  
    [01:02] <ZeN`n1th> icic
    [01:02] <ZeN`n1th> but when he wrote this poem, he is already enlightened right?
    [01:02] <ZeN`n1th> [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> 2) Hui-neng offers the following alternative verse:
    [01:02] <ZeN`n1th> [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> Bodhi originally has no tree,
    [01:02] <ZeN`n1th> [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> The mirror(-like mind) has no stand.
    [01:02] <ZeN`n1th> [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> Buddha-nature (emptiness/oneness) is always clean and pure;
    [01:02] <ZeN`n1th> [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> Where is there room for dust (to alight)?
    [01:02] <ZeN`n1th> [00:59] <ZeN`n1th> (Yampolsky 132)
    [01:02] <^john^> i think i told utpala few yrs back that xing1 is not xin4
    [01:03] <ZeN`n1th> xing = mind? xin4 = ? faith?
    [01:03] <^john^> xing4 as in nature.
    [01:03] <ZeN`n1th> nature, mind?
    [01:03] <^john^> u know ming xin jian xing
    [01:03] <ZeN`n1th> yes
    [01:04] <^john^> know ur mind and see ur nature
    [01:04] <^john^> nature is emptiness
    [01:04] <^john^> i told utpala ming xin does not mean jian xing4
    [01:04] <ZeN`n1th> then what is ming xin
    [01:05] <^john^> its intuitive perception of consciousness
    [01:05] <ZeN`n1th> icic
    [01:05] <^john^> knowing what is consciousness.
    [01:06] <^john^> but not it's nature.
    [01:07] <^john^> realised its briliance, bright, lucidity, unborn aspect of consciousness
    [01:07] <ZeN`n1th> icic..
    [01:07] <^john^> not the emptiness aspect
    [01:07] <ZeN`n1th> hmm
    [01:08] <ZeN`n1th> but when hui neng wrote this, is he already enlightened or not yet enlightened

    • Reply
    • 5m

  • badge icon
    [01:08] <ZeN`n1th> Fundamentally no wisdom-tree exists,
    [01:08] <ZeN`n1th> Nor the stand of a mirror bright.
    [01:08] <ZeN`n1th> Since all is empty from the beginning,
    [01:08] <ZeN`n1th> Where can the dust alight
    [01:09] <^john^> not completely enlightened from my perspective.  
    [01:09] <ZeN`n1th> huh how come? i tot he already understood emptiness?  
    [01:10] <^john^> which line tell u the characteristic of emptiness?
    [01:11] <ZeN`n1th> i dunnu, but using the analogy of mirror as mind, he said that the mirror is also empty.. so isnt it what u said 'jian xing'?
    [01:12] <^john^> i mean not just in words
    [01:12] <^john^> but which line tell us the meaning of emptiness
    [01:13] <ZeN`n1th> i dunnu leh
    [01:13] <ZeN`n1th> it just says empty lor
    [01:13] <ZeN`n1th> lol
    [01:13] <^john^> lol
    [01:14] <^john^> more on the aspect that the pristine awareness does not lost its lucidity and brightness.
    [01:14] <^john^> no dust can alight.
    [01:14] <ZeN`n1th> oic..
    [01:14] <^john^> even when we are in samsara, it still remain clearly bright.
    [01:15] <ZeN`n1th> icic
    [01:15] <^john^> there is no wisdom needed because it is luminosity itself
    [01:16] <^john^> mirror bright does not require a stand
    [01:16] <ZeN`n1th> oic..
    [01:16] <^john^> empty here is not the essence of the nature, but refers to the formless nature of consciousness
    [01:17] <^john^> essence of emptiness i mean
    [01:17] <ZeN`n1th> oic..
    [01:18] <ZeN`n1th> oh ya i wanted to ask u something another day
    [01:18] <ZeN`n1th> does theravada even teach about luminosity?
    [01:18] <ZeN`n1th> lol
    [01:18] <^john^> direct perception of consciousness is important but must go hand in hand with emptiness.
    [01:18] <^john^> yes
    [01:18] <ZeN`n1th> how
    [01:19] <ZeN`n1th> i mean
    [01:19] <ZeN`n1th> what did theravada says about luminosity
    [01:19] <ZeN`n1th> got mention meh
    [01:20] <^john^> more than what u thought.  
    [01:21] <^john^> u know about vipassana meditation?
    [01:22] <ZeN`n1th> uh ya
    [01:22] <ZeN`n1th> sort of
    [01:22] <ZeN`n1th> y?
    [01:22] <ZeN`n1th> btw mindfulness = awareness right?
    [01:22] <ZeN`n1th> mindfulness = pure awareness
    [01:22] <^john^> yes
    [01:23] <ZeN`n1th> icic
    [01:23] <^john^> in certain sense but mindfulness is an action
    [01:23] <^john^> very good site.
    [01:24] <ZeN`n1th> oic
    [01:25] <^john^> where as pure awareness is the reality
    [01:28] <ZeN`n1th> icic
    [01:42] <^john^> go to go now. Take care.  
    Session Close: Sat Nov 05 01:58:09 2005
    Karma and Anatta or Non-self and Kamma - Buddha's world
    Karma and Anatta or Non-self and Kamma - Buddha's world

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 5m
  • Soh Wei Yu
    Alan Smith " I always understood the original poem about the mirror needing to be cleaned to be I AM insight."
    No, once you realise I AM you just realise that is what you are and forever untainted by anything. It is not a state that is in need of cleaning.
    Jan 2005:
    [19:21] <^john^> learn how to experience emptiness and no-selfness. 🙂
    [19:22] <^john^> this is the only way to liberate.
    [19:22] <^john^> not to dwell too deeply into the minor aspect of pure awareness.
    [19:23] <^john^> of late i have been seeing songs and poems relating to the luminosity aspect of Pure Awareness.
    [19:23] <^john^> uncreated, original, mirror bright, not lost in nirvana and samsara..etc
    [19:23] <^john^> what use is there?
    [19:24] <ZeN`n1th> oic...
    [19:24] <^john^> we have from the very beginning so and yet lost for countless aeons of lives.
    [19:25] <^john^> buddha did not come to tell only about the luminosity aspect of pure awareness.
    [19:25] <^john^> this has already been expressed in vedas.
    [19:25] <^john^> but it becomes Self.
    [19:25] <^john^> the ultimate controller
    [19:26] <^john^> the deathless
    [19:26] <^john^> the supreme..etc
    [19:26] <^john^> this is the problem.
    [19:26] <^john^> this is not the ultimate nature of Pure Awareness.
    [19:27] <^john^> for full enlightenment to take place, experience the clarity and emptiness. That's all.
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1m

  • Alan Smith
    It seems to me "cleaning the mirror" is like the person who has an I AM insight and is trying to re-confirm the ever-presence of awareness.
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 9m
  • Soh Wei Yu
    Cleaning the mirror is more like trying to get rid of thoughts to discover or reveal the underlying mirror. That is still someone on the process of trying to realise I AM, not one who had the eureka realisation of what he/she truly is. One who realises I AM just has a total confidence and doubtless certainty of what true Beingness is that cannot be lost -- that the I AM is his/her immediate ground of Being all the time. Although there can still be tendencies to inclined towards nirvikalpa samadhi etc, it is not a really seen as a state nor as something in need of cleaning, nor can it be affected or tainted by any thoughts or activities that comes and goes in the infinite canvas of primordial Beingness/Awareness
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 3m
    • Edited

    Soh Wei Yu

    Alan Smith Also I wrote in AtR guide the I AM realization is not a maintenance state.
    "What the I AM Realization Is Not
    The key aspect that distinguishes I AM realization from I AM experience is that there is the quality of complete doubtless certainty of Self that is unshakeable, a Eureka moment where you have found out what you truly are, and that certainty remains from that point onwards.
    Furthermore - the I AM is not a fabricated state. It is Unfabricated Presence-Awareness. You do not “cultivate” the I AM Presence. It is not merely a state of Witnessing to be maintained. It is not a maintenance state. It is not a state to be reached through effort and cultivation. Instead it is discovered and directly realized to be one’s doubtless shining core of Existence, much like the clouds dissipating (our misidentification with perceived objects of mind and body as self) revealing the shining sun that was all along present but never noticed.
    If one has an experience of being a Witness or enter into a state of Witnessing, but it needs to be “maintained” or is felt to be “gained” or “lost”, even if one intuits that Witness to be ever-present, that is still an “experience” but not “realization” (see the classifications above). This does not mean after the I AM realization one can never be distracted by thoughts ever, it just means there is a kind of unshakeable certainty of Being that is never lost. You realized this is You without a shadow of doubt, as the ground of Being. As John Tan puts it, “Being freed from individuality -- coming and going, life and death, all phenomenon merely pop in and out from the background of the AMness. The AMness is not experienced as an ‘entity’ residing anywhere, neither within nor without; rather it is experienced as the ground reality for all phenomenon to take place. Even in the moment of subsiding (death), the yogi is thoroughly authenticated with that reality; experiencing the ‘Real’ as clear as it can be. We cannot lose that AMness; rather all things can only dissolve and re-emerges from it. The AMness has not moved, there is no coming and going. This "AMness" is God.”
    The I AM is also not something that one can only “experience” during a state of meditative trance at a faraway mountain shielded from daily life. Someone who realized I AM will come to understand, as John Tan puts it in 2007, “AMness has limitless potential and must be expressed in a relative world in constant interaction.” As the source and ground of everything, AMness is seen to have infinite potentiality to express in, through and as everything.
    The I AM Presence as discovered in Self-Realization is a non-dual, Self-Aware Presence of Being. You realize yourself to be a shining Aware-Presence, but it is not a subject-object awareness where “you” know you are a “presence” that is “aware”, it is not ‘you’ knowing Presence (subject knowing object) but there is only You Being Presence-Awareness. It is a non-dual direct realization and direct taste of Mind. At a later phase, this non-dual luminous taste of ‘existence’ is brought from the background to the foreground into all manifestation, which will be elaborated on in the further chapters of this guide.
    “After Self-Realization, there is a doubtless certainty of Being that was never lost, so I no longer needed to do self inquiry. I had a certainty that Awareness is what I am, and it is not a maintenance state, not something I can 'gain' and 'lose'.” - Soh, 2018
    “You experience of 'Iness" has not come to a point of stillness yet. That is why it is not that sort of Realization I am looking at.” - John Tan to Soh in 2009, one year prior to Soh’s realization of I AM
    If you are still unsure if what you had is a glimpse of recognition or experience of I AM or the doubtless Self-Realization, check out this article -
    I AM Experience/Glimpse/Recognition vs I AM Realization (Certainty of Being)
    I AM Experience/Glimpse/Recognition vs I AM Realization (Certainty of Being)
    I AM Experience/Glimpse/Recognition vs I AM Realization (Certainty of Being)
    ReplyRemove Preview2m

    badge icon
    神秀说的是渐修,而禅宗是顿悟、顿修、顿证的圆顿法,所以五祖不把衣钵给他。六祖说:“本来无一物。”这就偏空了。所以五祖说:“也没有见性!”若 真见性了,五祖为什么还要三更说法,说到“应无所住而生其心”六祖才大悟呢?这个偈子改一改:“菩提权做树,明镜假作台。”现相妙用啊,暂且做做树台也不 妨!“本来不染污,说净亦尘埃”。有个清净,还是尘埃。本性是不垢不净,空无一物的,垢既无有,净又何来!?但现在把这两个偈子联合起来亦很当用。因为现 代人根钝,不“常常勤拂拭”,扫除妄习,怎能成道?不作“本来无一物”会,又怎能不著有?所以近人说:六祖与神秀大师合起来,六祖是摩醯首罗一只眼,而神 秀是双目圆明,信不诬也。----- 桥流水不流

    • Reply
    • 3m

  • Soh Wei Yu
    Its sounds right to me, but the sutra says another thing. Anyway who knows? I dont know a case of direct Anatman realization so...

    • Reply
    • 2m

  • badge icon
    Òskar K. Linares
    The sutra clearly states the the 5th patriarch was unimpressed with the original poem, and the poem in Chinese is clearly expressing it as I AMness (not 'no mirror' or anatta as some translated it into). The platform sutra also states that Huineng had a further "great awakening" after meeting 5th patriarch that night, implying his understanding prior was not the great awakening. So our interpretation is correct because we are Chinese readers... lol

  • Reply
  • 1m