[11:37 AM, 11/19/2019] Soh Wei Yu: 🌺 ~Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche🌺

ཨེ་མ་ཧོ།
E Ma Ho!

When we say 'Emaho' ('Wonder')(in german : 'Wunderbar') it is the wonder or surprise that comes from realizing the unborn nature. Phenomena have never been born in the past, they do not dwell in the present, and they will never cease in the future. They neither come nor go. This is the real meaning of the absolute truth, the primordial nature.

Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche – (Zurchungpa's Testament Commentaries – on Wisdom –Collected Works, Vol III – pg 291, Shambhala)
.
[11:38 AM, 11/19/2019] Soh Wei Yu: "What we call ‘Buddha Mind’ is synonymous with the three temporal worlds of past, present, and future. This Mind and the three temporal worlds are not separated from each other by so much as one single hair’s breadth. Even so, when we are discussing the two as things that are distinct and separate from each other, then they are farther apart than eighteen thousand breadths of hair. Thus, if I were asked what the phrase “This is the mind of the past” means, I would have to say in response, “This cannot be grasped.” If I were asked what the phrase “This is the mind of the present” means, I would have to say in response, “This cannot be grasped.” If I were asked what the phrase “This is the mind of the future” means, I would say in response, “This cannot be grasped.”

As to the mind of which I am speaking, if I say that there is Mind, which at the present moment is described as ‘Mind that cannot be grasped,’ then I say, “At the present moment, It cannot be grasped.” I do not say, “The mind cannot be grasped,” I say in all earnestness, “It cannot be grasped.” I do not say, “The mind can be grasped,” I say in all earnestness, “It cannot be grasped.” Further, should you ask me, “What is the mind of the past which cannot be grasped?” I would say, “It is synonymous with being born and dying, going and coming.” Should you ask, “What is the mind of the present which cannot be grasped?” I would say, “It is synonymous with being born and dying, going and coming.” Should you ask, “What is the mind of the future which cannot be grasped?” I would say, “It is synonymous with being born and dying, going and coming.”

In sum, there is Buddha Mind, which is the fences and walls, tiles* and stones, and all the Buddhas in the three temporal worlds directly experience It as something that cannot be held onto. There are only the fences and walls, tiles and stones, which are Buddha Mind, and all Buddhas directly experience It in the three temporal worlds as ungraspable. What is more, That which is ungraspable within the great earth with its mountains and rivers exists there by Its very nature. That which is ungraspable in grasses and trees, wind and water, accordingly, is Mind. Also, It is what is ungraspable in “Letting our mind abide nowhere and giving rise to the Mind.” 3  And also, the Mind Beyond Grasping, which gives voice to the eighty thousand Gates by means of all the Buddhas throughout all generations everywhere, is the same as this."

- Dogen (Shin Fukatoku)
[11:38 AM, 11/19/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Seems contradictory but i think both are impt lol
[11:40 AM, 11/19/2019] John Tan: ?
[11:40 AM, 11/19/2019] John Tan: Which one u r talking about?
[11:40 AM, 11/19/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Dilgo khyentse and dogen quote
[11:41 AM, 11/19/2019] Soh Wei Yu: One talks about no three times, no coming and going. The other talks about buddha mind as three times, coming and going
[11:41 AM, 11/19/2019] John Tan: It's the same
[11:42 AM, 11/19/2019] John Tan: But for one to understand Buddha mind as the 3 times is to understand anatta.
[11:43 AM, 11/19/2019] John Tan: There is no mind beyond 3 times. There is no beyond.
[11:44 AM, 11/19/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Ic..
[11:45 AM, 11/19/2019] Soh Wei Yu: One is talking about non arising the other is anatta right
[11:48 AM, 11/19/2019] John Tan: Dunno never read the below 2 articles.
[11:50 AM, 11/19/2019] John Tan: Dogen is clear... non-arisen frees one from the extremes of existence and non-existence...
[11:51 AM, 11/19/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[11:51 AM, 11/19/2019] Soh Wei Yu: I think if people dont realise what dogen said, mind will be substantiated
[11:51 AM, 11/19/2019] Soh Wei Yu: But if they dont realise what dilgo said then phenomena may be substantiated
[11:52 AM, 11/19/2019] John Tan: Yes
[11:53 AM, 11/19/2019] John Tan: Like I said, there is nothing wrong using Awareness.
[11:53 AM, 11/19/2019] John Tan: However one should see that it is only a conventional expression.
[11:55 AM, 11/19/2019] John Tan: But the teaching of DO, emptiness and non-arisen about the chariot analogy is pointing more to the actual taste of what appears in a conceptual way. To get us familiarised and understand in the right way.

 

 

..........

 

 

“We cannot be separated from time. This means that because, in reality, there is no coming or going in time, when we cross the river or climb the mountain we exist in the eternal present of time; this time includes all past and present time. . . . Most people think time is passing and do not realize that there is an aspect that is not passing”

- Dogen, Soto Zen Master

 

“That which, taken as causal or dependent, is the process of being born and passing on, is, taken non-causally and beyond all dependence, declared to be nirvāṇa.

— Nāgārjuna , Mūlamadhyamikakārikā

Meditation tip:
If you are sleepy, you can try chanting the Oooommmmmm mantra slowly and many times. This will raise your vibrational and energy frequency and bring you to a state of wakeful and alert pure Presence. It can also be a doorway to Maha total exertion, where the chanting vibrates as the universe.

Someone sent me this article. This article is a good article at explaining emptiness teachings, with the added caveat by Thusness/John Tan, "Yeah but what is important is know that relativity has a taste like earth, water, air, space and fire that we mistaken them concrete things. We also only see "relative and relations" as conceptual thought and fail to see and taste them in "live"."

https://emptinessteachings.com/2014/09/11/the-two-truths-of-buddhism-and-the-emptiness-of-emptiness/

Was flipping through the Works of Kukai and other books on Shingon Buddhism. The founder of Shingon Buddhism, Kukai, was into anatta and total exertion. Sent some excerpts to Thusness and he too said "Yes. Total exertion.", "Yes, Kukai's expression is good."

It should be noted that Li or Ri (理) is better translated as 'Principle' than 'Noumenon'. 







"Although mind is distinguished from form, they share the same nature. Form is mind, mind is forms. They interfuse with one another without difficulty. Therefore, knowing is the objects of knowledge, and the objects, knowing. Knowing is reality, reality knowing."

- Kūkai

GAMPOPA & THE 1ST. KARMAPA, DÜSUM KHYENPA

Gampopa’s Instructions to the First Karmapa

Among the many oral instructions that the first Karmapa received from Gampopa was the mahamudra view that thoughts need not be artificially amputated during meditation. Gampopa said, “This co-emergent unification of ours is one of our key oral instructions. Whatever thought occurs in your conscious mind, no matter how much you may want it or not want it—you simply observe that thought as mind. Likewise, whatever arises as appearances is seen as mind. In this way, we take thoughts and appearances onto the path. Thoughts are not the problem; it is our discursive attachment to those thoughts that creates obstacles.” [Note: Dudjom Lingpa takes exactly the same approach in his dzogchen instructions. He calls it, “taking the impure mind as the path”.]

After Karmapa had practiced in retreat for a time, he felt he had a genuine experience of bliss, luminosity, and non-conceptuality, so, he told Gampopa about it. The teacher replied, "Ah, you looked directly at it; that’s good. Now tell me—where did the root of those experiences come from?" Dusum Khyenpa couldn’t answer that, so Gampopa said, "Well then, you need to continue to meditate just like that. Meditate often, but only for short sessions. Keep that up, and whatever else you do, make consciousness your servant!"

So Karmapa continued alternating like this, meditating in retreat and then discussing it with Gampopa. One night he dreamt that a monk appeared and explained a new dharma to him that he had not heard before. The dream was very lucid, so he hurriedly reported it to his guru. Gampopa asked him, "Did you like that dream?" Karmapa said yes indeed, he liked it a lot! Gampopa flew into a rage and rebuked his student, “Listen, you are going to have all sorts of marvels happening when you meditate, but you have to understand that they are all just illusory appearances. Treat them as illusory appearances, and they will turn into the path. But, if you hold those appearances to be real entities, they will remain obstacles! So, whatever comes up in mind, do not cling to any of it as good, and do not reject any of it as bad. Understand all of it to be non-dual. Whenever a thought arises, don’t let it spawn a discursive stream of analysis; know it simply as conditioned mind arising from latent karma, and let it go.”

So, Karmapa continued this sequence of retreats and interviews, and one day he came down and reported, “The rigpa that I have developed is usually clear during the day, but at night there is still distraction.” Gampopa answered, “Yes, you still have a fault. You have the fault that when the awareness is clear you like it, and when it is not clear, you don't! That is not the right approach. Put your rigpa in empty clarity as usual, and then whatever arises, know it as non-dual mind. During the day, the luminosity will mix rigpa with appearances, and at night the luminosity will mix with dreams. No matter what arises, remain in equanimity. When you are among crowds, regulate your speech and meditate! Whatever you are doing, be mindful of the stillness of your awareness in the midst of the movements of samsara.”

So, Karmapa continued on with his practice, and eventually he was able to report progress to Gampopa. He said, “Finally, my abiding has lessened. When I entrusted everything to pure rigpa, any discursive thought that arose also went into the state of pure rigpa. As each discursive thought arose, the experience was deepened by it. Then, when I let that rigpa go free as well, an experience of luminous emptiness remained in unfabricated equanimity. Even in post-meditation, the result was that nothing arising in the six sense consciousnesses was reified as inherently existing externally. Everything was present as mind.”

When Gampopa heard this, he replied, “Well… that’s it!”

***Adapted from the Complete Works of Gampopa, translated by Tony Duff in ‘Gampopa Teaches Essence Mahamudra’, 2011]

[5:58 PM, 10/28/2019] John Tan: Now as I told you, there are two level... one is seeing through conventional constructs as empty and non-arisen. As I always asked you, why not just say the constructs are non-existence?

[6:00 PM, 10/28/2019] John Tan: Is non-existence a more appropriate phrase than "emptiness" and why DO? why do we say whatever arises in dependent is empty and non-arisen? why brings in DO at all?

[6:01 PM, 10/28/2019] John Tan: Isn't non-existence I mean.

[6:04 PM, 10/28/2019] John Tan: I told you that the purpose of telling you that is to allow you to understand the nature of mind/phenomena. It is to train the mind so that when it comes face to face, it recognizes that is the nature of presence.

[6:11 PM, 10/28/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Emptiness is not non existence because emptiness is empty presencing/appearing, which is not the same as non existence but neither is it existent, rather empty presencing is like reflections that appear via dependencies but empty

[6:13 PM, 10/28/2019] John Tan: So what is the purpose of teaching us the idea of conventional constructs are empty and non-arisen? What is the purpose of teaching DO?

[6:16 PM, 10/28/2019] John Tan: For this recognition right?

[6:16 PM, 10/28/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Yeah

[6:17 PM, 10/28/2019] John Tan: So that when you come face to face this empty presencing you can directly recognize it...appears but not found..

[6:19 PM, 10/28/2019] John Tan: When you look at this empty display, you realize it cannot be said to be mind nor not mind, neither internal nor external, either here nor not here...

[6:19 PM, 10/28/2019] John Tan: Nothing to do with non-conceptuality

[6:19 PM, 10/28/2019] John Tan: But the nature of it.

[6:19 PM, 10/28/2019] John Tan: Get what I mean?

[6:21 PM, 10/28/2019] John Tan: That is you see through conventionalities and recognize the nature of what appears...

[27/10/19, 1:14:30 PM] Soh Wei Yu: All appearances are appearance of oneself in dzogchen but not cosmic consciousness
[27/10/19, 1:49:11 PM] John Tan: Quite good youtube. Who is he?
[27/10/19, 1:52:33 PM] John Tan: All appearances are one's radiance clarity. However since both object and subject are seen through, it cannot be said to be mind or other than mind.
[27/10/19, 1:53:56 PM] Soh Wei Yu: He is a quite famous dzogchen teacher i think
[27/10/19, 1:54:00 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[27/10/19, 1:54:07 PM] John Tan: What appears are neither in here nor out there.
[27/10/19, 1:54:53 PM] John Tan: The very idea of in or out, me and other are conceptually designated.
[27/10/19, 1:56:31 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic.. i think he is trying to point out non solipsism and non cosmic consciousness.. different mindstreams. In another video he said how his view is not solipsism
[27/10/19, 1:58:04 PM] John Tan: The "neither this nor that" of freedom from extremes is not the same as "neither this nor that" of non-conceptuality.
[27/10/19, 1:58:10 PM] Soh Wei Yu: _______
[27/10/19, 1:58:15 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[27/10/19, 1:58:22 PM] John Tan: Can provide the link.
[27/10/19, 1:58:47 PM] John Tan: He is ______?
[27/10/19, 1:59:01 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Yeah
[27/10/19, 1:59:26 PM] John Tan: His lecture seems to be better than his writings...lol
[27/10/19, 1:59:32 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Lol
[27/10/19, 1:59:37 PM] Soh Wei Yu: you read his writings before?
[27/10/19, 1:59:50 PM] John Tan: But still a subtle sense of awareness
[27/10/19, 1:59:55 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic..
[27/10/19, 2:02:47 PM] John Tan: He is using simple English...like mind is the creator which is no good
[27/10/19, 2:03:27 PM] Soh Wei Yu: you mean book or lecture
[27/10/19, 2:03:43 PM] John Tan: Both
[27/10/19, 2:04:31 PM] John Tan: His lectures link that you sent me but explanation is quite good.  However the taste of anatta is not there.
[27/10/19, 2:05:08 PM] John Tan: Means it can still be an explanation of non-dual.
[27/10/19, 2:09:03 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic.. ya i get the impression of one mind from his old writings
[27/10/19, 2:11:12 PM] John Tan: For anatta to be clear, that background is gone that is why experiences become direct. It has to because there is nothing there to dualify as simple as that...no need li li loh loh (be longwinded)...
[27/10/19, 2:11:36 PM] John Tan: Grasper and grasped disappeared.
[27/10/19, 2:16:10 PM] John Tan: Now when there is no self, you are left with those aggregates.  What are those aggregates?
[27/10/19, 2:54:57 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Empty radiance in total exertion