A summary of Seeing that Frees by Rob Burbea.


[11:59 PM, 8/10/2020] John Tan: This is a really good quality book by Rob Burbea.  Easy to read, lots of tips for practice and full of valuable pointers. Should put into our blog, preferably "must read" section.
[12:00 AM, 8/11/2020] Soh Wei Yu: you mean the summary or the book itself?
[12:00 AM, 8/11/2020] John Tan: Summary
[12:01 AM, 8/11/2020] Soh Wei Yu: ok i post
[12:03 AM, 8/11/2020] John Tan: Almost attempts to integrate everything...
[12:03 AM, 8/11/2020] John Tan: Lol
[12:04 AM, 8/11/2020] John Tan: Maybe I should buy the book...but the section on cause and effect and production is too short.
[12:05 AM, 8/11/2020] Soh Wei Yu: ya i think so.. i remember hale oh likes it very much i think
[12:05 AM, 8/11/2020] Soh Wei Yu: too bad rob burbea died recently from cancer
[12:08 AM, 8/11/2020] Soh Wei Yu: haven't read the book before though. think will get it
[12:08 AM, 8/11/2020] John Tan: Yes
[12:09 AM, 8/11/2020] John Tan: Go read about the summary...u will understand why it is good guide for practice.

Link to buy the book: https://www.amazon.com/Seeing-That-Frees-Meditations-Emptiness-ebook/dp/B00SI7PQD8

This is a reminder that if you are interested in Arcaya Malcolm Smith's teaching on Dzogchen - Dzogchen Retreat with Arcaya Malcolm - please sign up now. Registration for TWS online retreat closes in 2 days, Aug. 7th.

I can't say everyone is going to resonate with these teachings, since it depends on one's proclivities, etc. But personally, John Tan and I find what Arcaya Malcolm Smith teaches to be highly resonating, so both of us will be attending the online retreat.

I have just updated this page which contains a collection of some of Malcolm's writings concerning the view of Dzogchen: Clarifications on Dharmakaya and Basis by Loppön Namdrol/Malcolm


[12:16 AM, 8/5/2020] John Tan: https://youtu.be/QYcMqaAtmZ4

[12:17 AM, 8/5/2020] John Tan: I like guy newland.
[12:18 AM, 8/5/2020] John Tan: Dzogchen, madhyamaka from Nyingma perspective...he choose mipham beacon of certainty
[12:19 AM, 8/5/2020] John Tan: Go watch
[12:34 AM, 8/5/2020] John Tan: Damn happy listening to this youtube

[9:09 PM, 8/4/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Just saw this in chnn book [Crystal and the Way of Light]:

we could even go so far as to say that, essentially, in Dzogchen, the Base is the primordial state, the Path is the primordial state, and the Fruit is the primordial state—and that there is thus a perfect continuity between them in that they all refer to the same thing: the true condition of the individual and the universe.
[11:34 PM, 8/4/2020] John Tan: Yes.
[11:37 PM, 8/4/2020] John Tan: Practice as if you r buddha but u r not yet Buddha.
[11:38 PM, 8/4/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[11:41 PM, 8/4/2020] John Tan: I think U pasted to me right?  Something like result is taken as the basis.
[11:42 PM, 8/4/2020] John Tan: So not from the view that life is impermanent, no-self and suffering.
[12:14 AM, 8/5/2020] Soh Wei Yu: What do u mean
[12:14 AM, 8/5/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Oh taking buddha nature rather than impermanence no self suffering as basis and path of practicing?
[12:15 AM, 8/5/2020] John Tan: Yes
[12:34 AM, 8/5/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Do you mean these excerpts by Malcolm:

There are two ways be free of grasping: regarding all things as impure and rejecting them as such (Hinayāna and common Mahāyāna), and regarding all things as pure and accepting them as such. The latter method more rapid, but requires special methods, so that it is not merely an intellectual posture.

...

In sūtra there is no antidotal method of conceiving the appearance of things as pure which are typically conceived by ordinary sentient being as impure. Emptiness, in sutra, is provided as cure for this, in terms of nature, but not in terms of appearance. Vajrayāna address both nature and appearance; sūtra only addresses nature, not appearance.

...


In common Mahāyāna, like Hinayāna schools, relatively speaking, phenomena, other than path dharmas, are still compounded, suffering, and not-self, and hence impure. Their ultimate nature, emptiness, is pure.

In uncommon Mahāyāna Secret Mantra, phenomena are rendered pure through special methods which change our attitude towards phenomena.
[12:34 AM, 8/5/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Ok
[12:35 AM, 8/5/2020] John Tan: Yeah

 

 

---

 

For further reading: Excerpts from Clarifications on Dharmakaya and Basis by Loppön Namdrol/Malcolm

 

Malcolm wrote:

It is pretty straightfoward according to Mipham:

 

"In the realization of the Great Perfection that the three times are not time, there are no phenomena of the ten directions and three times that are not perfect. Therefore, this is the dharmakāya at the time of the basis, but because the temporary afflictions have not been purified it has not ripened into the nature of the result.

 

While maintaining the position, “This purification of any obscurations is the feature of the time of path. This total purification of obscurations is the feature of the time of the result,” is in accord with the mode of appearance of sentient beings, from the perspective of the mode of existence of dharmatā, it is not possible to move even slightly away from abiding in state of uniformity which lacks any divisions of dualistic phenomena such as division by three times, division into pure and impure, sentient beings and buddhas, and so on."

 

Thus, florin and krodha are both correct. Florin is correct from the point of view of mode of reality [gnas tshul], kyle is correct from the point of view of the mode of appearances [snang tshul] for sentient beings.

 

...

 

Krodha (Kyle Dixon):

 

Thanks. Although I suppose my gripe is that I'm willing to (and strive to) account for both sides of the equation (mode of reality and appearances) whereas Florin is solely clinging to the mode of reality and declaring that the mode of appearances is irrelevant and "not Dzogchen", which is essentially nihilism.

 

...

 

Malcolm:

 

The so called "primordial state" aka the original basis is called "the basis" because it has not been realized. When that is realized, it is given the name, "the result." "The path" is just the method of realizing that, which in the case of the Great Perfection, is the intimate instructions of the direct introduction and their application.

 

Florin's point of view is influenced very much by "sems sde", which is primarily about the basis. Your point of view is more influenced by man ngag sde, which is more concerned with the methods of realizing that basis.

 

Another useful snippet from Mipham:

 

According to that principle, though from the perspective of ultimate reality it is necessary to propose that the universe and beings are primordial buddhahood and meditate in that way, from the perspective of the conventions of the mode of appearances, the differentiation by wisdom into three — the basis, the reasoning that buddhahood is valid; the path, the time of practice; and the result, the culmination of purification — are asserted up to the Great Perfection. Also the treatises of the Great Perfection purpose buddhahood once the fives paths of trekchö and the four visions of thögal are finished, but in terms of the mode of appearances, they never assert the accomplishment of buddhahood without finishing the path. When these two are differentiated, after the darkness of doubt about the topics that any of the vehicles of the cause and result have difficulty realizing, since there arises the appearance of confidence knowledge that cannot be diverted, this differentiation is very important.

 

...

 

Florin:

 

I dont really understand this quote.

I think it needs some work.

 

Malcolm:

 

All Mipham is saying is that there are two perspectives, how things are and how things appear. From the perspective of how things are, "it is necessary to propose that the universe and beings are primordial buddhahood and meditate in that way."

 

From the point of view of how things appear, the basis, path and result are divvied up by wisdom according their features: the basis concerns proving the validity of buddhahood. This is why, for example, we have the account of Samantabhadra's buddhahood and the account of the delusion of sentient beings. There is also a practice, and also the culmination of the purification of the delusion which gave rise to sentient beings in the first place. Since only deluded people are concerned with liberation, the path of Dzogchen is very much concerned with correcting the delusion that arises from ignorance [ma rig pa] by remaining in the knowledge [rig pa] of how things actually are, i.e. that the universe and beings are primordial buddhahood.

 

We are not approaching practice from the point of view of accepting something that is not true, i.e., that the universe and beings are impure, etc. But we must acquiesce that this is indeed how things appear to us, and that as long as things appear in this way to us, we are under the influence of the two obscurations, which while temporary and not innate, conceal from us our actual state.

 

M

For Chinese readers only:

Recently compiled more articles (almost 130 pages) I previously didn't add to the document by Zen Master Hong Wen Liang - https://app.box.com/s/c0ir271dp8xkxow1ydy26xu8kg90z24d

For the full updated list of Zen Master Hong Wen Liang's writings (hundreds of pages), see https://app.box.com/s/ceb9i7wsk0lkfl2sjex97ai56l1k52pf
A common misunderstanding is that Buddha taught "life is suffering". As Mr./Ms. AS pointed out, there is often an overemphasis on  suffering, but actually in Buddhism, there is only suffering when there  is appropriation and clinging. To be clear: Buddha has never said "life is suffering", however, he did teach right from the beginning in his first discourse on the four noble truths that "appropriated aggregates are suffering", and by appropriated I mean tainted with I-making and mine-making.

In the Pali suttas, clinging and appropriation are not equated with the sheer aggregates ( https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN44.html ), and as Stian mentioned, he thinks aggregates are almost never mentioned in the sense of 'sheer aggregates' in the Pali canon. I think you get glimpses of how are 'sheer aggregates experienced by Buddha/arahants' in scriptures like Bahiya Sutta and Kalaka Sutta. In any case, the appropriation is what causes suffering, and the end of appropriation is the end of suffering.

In Bahiya Sutta ( http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2008/01/ajahn-amaro-on-non-duality-and.html ), the end of appropriation is equated to the end of suffering, and it is the definition of Nirvana ( http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2012/09/great-resource-of-buddha-teachings.html ). The first discourse he taught was on the four noble truths and one of his five students attained stream entry then, and the second discourse ( https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2018/12/the-anatta-lakkhana-sutta.html ) he taught was on anatta and all the five monks became arahants.

Now when we come to the Mahayana teachings, all aggregates are taught to be primordially pure and luminous. Does this negate the Pali suttas which says appropriated aggregates are suffering? No, it does not, if understood correctly in context.

Here's some nice clarifications on Dhammawheel:

badge icon


"
Sobhana wrote:
The Buddha sums up his definition of dukkha with: "aggregates subject to clinging are suffering" (pancu­padanak­khan­dha).
What is the meaning and what are the implications?"
"Since "upadana" means "appropriation",
more accurate translation would be "appropriated aggregates are suffering". This implies that suffering continues as long as the aggregates are appropriated, identified with.
Best wishes!
Post by vinasp » Wed Feb 22, 2017 8:10 am
Hi everyone,
I intend to quote some discourses which speak of the cessation of the clinging aggregates, using the alternative term 'sakkaya.'
One problem with this term is that every translator seems to use a different word for it.
Bhikkhu Bodhi uses 'identity', Ven. Thanissaro uses 'identification'.
However, I first need to show that 'identity' does indeed mean the five aggregates subject to clinging, this is stated in MN 44
"Lady,'identity, identity' is said. What is called identity by the Blessed One?"
"Friend Visakha, these five aggregates affected by clinging are called identity by the Blessed One..."
[Bhikkhu Bodhi, MLDB,- MN 44.2]
When I looked on suttacentral I found that they were not using BB's translation for MN 44, but the one that they are using is very good, it is by Anandajoti Bhikkhu.
“ ‘Embodiment, embodiment,’ is said, Noble Lady. What, Noble Lady, is said to be embodiment by the Gracious One?”
“These five constituents (of mind and body) that provide fuel for attachment, friend Visākha, are said to be embodiment by the Gracious One, as follows:
the form constituent that provides fuel for attachment, the feelings constituent that provides fuel for attachment, the perceptions constituent that provides fuel for attachment, the (mental) processes constituent that provides fuel for attachment, the consciousness constituent that provides fuel for attachment...." [suttacentral.net - MN 44]
Clinging is a mistranslation of 'upadana', fuel or nutriment is much better, I prefer 'sustain' because this sustaining is the cause of 'bhava' (becoming or existence), the continuation of the existence of the apparent self.
“These five constituents (of mind and body) that provide fuel for attachment ..."
Should be understood as: “These five constituents (of mind and body) that provide fuel for becoming (bhava).."
See also SN 12.11 where the 'four nutriments' are said to have craving as their source or origin. This is Dependent Origination with the four nutriments replacing clinging (upadana).
Regards, Vincent.


....


“Yes, upadana-khandha means 'object of clinging' ('aggregate of clinging').
It does not mean a potential object of clinging but it means an object of actual clinging.
Therefore, a lamp is not an upadanakhandha until there is attachment to the lamp as 'my lamp'.
It follows the word compound 'upadanakhandha' can be translated as 'aggregates subject to clinging' or 'aggregates of clinging'.


.....

[11:32 AM, 8/2/2020] John Tan: Tsongkhapa spoke about appropriated aggregates in his lam-rim chen-mo.

[11:32 AM, 8/2/2020] John Tan: Mmk [Mūlamadhyamakakārikā] also

....


https://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=29517&p=425812#p425812
Re: The 3 marks of what, exactly?
Unread post by vinasp » Sun May 21, 2017 11:55 am
Hi everyone,
"Bhikkhus, form is impermanent, feeling is impermanent, perception is impermanent, volitional formations are impermanent, consciousness is impermanent....." SN 22.12
“Bhikkhus, form is suffering, feeling is suffering, perception is suffering, volitional formations are suffering, consciousness is suffering....." SN 22.13
“Bhikkhus, form is nonself, feeling is nonself, perception is nonself, volitional formations are nonself, consciousness is nonself....." SN 22.14
These may appear to be talking about the five aggregates, but I think that the five clinging aggregates are meant. All three continue in this way:
"Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple experiences revulsion towards form, revulsion towards feeling, revulsion towards perception, revulsion towards volitional formations, revulsion towards consciousness. Experiencing revulsion, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion his mind is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’ He understands: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.’”
Clearly, the aggregates mentioned at the start are those of an unliberated individual.
Another possibility is that 'form is suffering', and the rest, are not meant to be understood as ontological statements, but as how these things should be regarded. This explains 'seeing thus' as what leads to liberation.
Actual form is experienced, but the 'form aggregate' may mean a habit of regarding form in the wrong way, as permanent, a source of pleasure, and in relation to a self. If so, then the form aggregate will vanish when seen in the right way.
It seems that the discourses do not always make an explicit distinction between the aggregates and the clinging aggregates.
Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi, while not entirely rejecting the distinction, follows the Abhidhamma and Commentaries, arguing that the Arahant is still described by clinging aggregates.
Perhaps we should assume that almost all teaching on the aggregates is about the five clinging aggregates.
Regards, Vincent.


....

A.      From MN 44, the Culavedalla Sutta, The Shorter Series of Questions and Answers

Scene: Householder Visakha has a Q&A with Bukkhuni Dhammadina

 

2. “Lady…What is called identity by the Blessed One?”

“Friend Visakha, the five aggregates affected by clinging are called identity by the Blessed One; that is, the material form aggregate affected by clinging, the feeling aggregate affected by clinging, the perception aggregate affected by clinging, the mental formations aggregate affected by clinging, and the consciousness aggregate affected by clinging.”

7. “Lady, how does identity view come to be?”

“Here, friend Visakha, an untaught person regards …material form as self, or self as possessed of material form…..feeling as self, or self as possessed of feeling…. He regards perceptions as self or as self possessed of perceptions…. mental formations as self, or self as possessed of mental formations…. consciousness as self, or self as possessed of consciousness….”

8. “Lady, how does identity view not come to be?”

“Here, friend Visakha, a well-taught noble disciple, who has regard for the noble ones and is skilled and disciplined in their Dhamma….does not regard feeling as self or self as of possessed of feeling…. He does not regard perceptions as self or self as possessed of perception….He does not regard material form as self or self as possessed of material form….he does not regard mental formations as self…..does not regard consciousness as self….”



.........


William Lim
Why is "all aggregates subjected to appropriation" suffering?



    Soh Wei Yu
    “Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of suffering: birth is suffering, aging is suffering, illness is suffering, death is suffering; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is suffering; in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are suffering.
    SUTTACENTRAL.NET
    suttacentral.net | 502: Bad gateway
    suttacentral.net | 502: Bad gateway

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 7h

  • Soh Wei Yu
    The ending of appropriation is happiness:
    MN 22:
    Not Yours
    “Therefore, bhikkhus, whatever is not yours, abandon it; when you have abandoned it, that will lead to your welfare and happiness for a long time. What is it that is not yours? Material form is not yours. Abandon it. When you have abandoned it, that will lead to your welfare and happiness for a long time. Feeling is not yours. Abandon it. When you have abandoned it, that will lead to your welfare and happiness for a long time. Perception is not yours. Abandon it. When you have abandoned it, that will lead to your welfare and happiness for a long time. Formations are not yours. Abandon them. When you have abandoned them, that will lead to your welfare and happiness for a long time. Consciousness is not yours. Abandon it. When you have abandoned it, that will lead to your welfare and happiness for a long time.
    “Bhikkhus, what do you think? If people carried off the grass, sticks, branches, and leaves in this Jeta Grove, or burned them, or did what they liked with them, would you think: ‘People are carrying us off or burning us or doing what they like with us’?”—“No, venerable sir. Why not? Because that is neither our self nor what belongs to our self.”—“So too, bhikkhus, whatever is not yours, abandon it; when you have abandoned it, that will lead to your welfare and happiness for a long time. What is it that is not yours? Material form is not yours…Feeling is not yours…Perception is not yours…Formations are not yours…Consciousness is not yours. Abandon it. When you have abandoned it, that will lead to your welfare and happiness for a long time.


  • SUTTACENTRAL.NET
    suttacentral.net | 502: Bad gateway
    suttacentral.net | 502: Bad gateway

        • Reply
        • Remove Preview
        • 7h

     


    .........
    Also related:

    Fetter

    "The eye is not the fetter of forms, nor are forms the fetter of the eye. Whatever desire & passion arises in dependence on the two of them: That is the fetter there. The ear is not the fetter of sounds... The nose is not the fetter of aromas... The tongue is not the fetter of flavors... The body is not the fetter of tactile sensations... The intellect is not the fetter of ideas, nor are ideas the fetter of the intellect. Whatever desire & passion arises in dependence on the two of them: That is the fetter there." -- Buddha, SN 35.191 (PTS: S IV 162) 

    "My son, we are not bound by appearances; we are bound by our clinging to them." - Tilopa to Naropa

    "The five senses arising with their objects are unimpeded radiance.
    What is born from not grasping at objects is the unborn basic state.
    Attachment to appearances may be unceasing but reverse it: meditate naturally settled.
    Empty appearances arising free from the intellect is the path of natural expressions.
    Do not see appearances as problems, let go of clinging.
    There will come a time when you will arrive in the valley of one taste meditation." - Yang Gönpa
    John Tan sent me the Aspiration Prayers of Mahamudra by the 3rd Karmapa today and said "I like Mahamudra... beautifully expressed"