Answering someone’s question: “ Thanks for the clarification Soh. So you think an arahat from sutra and dzogchen buddhahood would have the same realization?”

Soh:

“Acarya malcolm smith has said to me before that dzogchen goal of buddhahood is same as other buddhism (or particularly how mahayana buddhism is defined, and dzogchen is one type of mahayana buddhism, as with vajrayana, the 'uncommon mahayana')

which is defined as the elimination of the twin obscurations - afflictive and knowledge obscurations

https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Two_obscurations

"Two obscurations

Jump to navigationJump to search

Two obscurations (Tib. སྒྲིབ་པ་གཉིས་, dribpa nyi; Wyl. sgrib pa gnyis) — emotional and cognitive obscurations.

Emotional obscurations are defined according to their essence, cause and function.

In essence, they are the opposite of the six paramitas, as described in the Gyü Lama:

"Thoughts such as avarice and so on,

These are the emotional obscurations."

Their cause is grasping at a personal ego, or the “self of the individual”.

They function to prevent liberation from samsara.

Cognitive obscurations are also defined according to their essence, cause and function.

In essence, they are thoughts that involve the three conceptual ‘spheres’ of subject, object and action. The Gyü Lama says:

"Thoughts that involve the three spheres,

These are the cognitive obscurations."

Their cause is grasping at phenomena as truly existent, or, in other words, the “self of phenomena”.

Their function is to prevent complete enlightenment."

this is how mahayana understands the difference between sravaka and buddha's enlightenment, as stated in the very famous lankavatara sutra:

"“...Therefore, Mahamati, the assurances given to shravakas and bodhisattvas do not differ. Mahamati, what doesn’t differ is the taste of liberation when shravakas and pratyeka-buddhas or buddhas and tathagatas get rid of the obstruction of passion, not when they get rid of the obstruction of knowledge. Mahamati, the obstruction of knowledge is purified when they see that dharmas have no self. The obstruction of passion is removed prior to this when they become accustomed to seeing that persons have no self. It is when the seventh consciousness ceases that they are liberated from the obstruction of dharmas. And it is when the habit-energy of the repository consciousness ceases that their purification is complete.”"

here's how jamgon mipham describes it.

"PATHS TO ENLIGHTENMENT

What follows is a short explanation of the way Mipam presents the structure of the Buddhist path to awakening. According to him, we can only go so far in the Lesser Vehicle, realizing the lack of a personal self based on its path, but without the Great Vehicle, we will not come to fully realize the lack of self (that is, emptiness) with respect to all phenomena. In other words, those in the Lesser Vehicle realize only part of emptiness (the lack of a personal self) but do not realize the entire scope of emptiness. They hang on to an ultimate foundation of reality (the fundamental elements of reality, or dharmas), whereas there is actually no such foundation. Therefore, according to Mipam, one cannot become a buddha based solely on the Lesser Vehicle path; becoming a buddha is the result of the Great Vehicle. Nevertheless, realizing the lack of a personal self is enough to free us from samsara, because in doing so, we relinquish the obscurations of the afflictive emotions. The afflictive emotions can be included within the “three poisons” of attachment, aversion, and delusion.

These afflictive obscurations function to prevent liberation, and they are tied in with the apprehension of a personal self. Based on the notion of such a self, we become attached (to me and mine) and averse (to what is other). This notion of self keeps the wheel of samsara rolling, because it perpetuates the distorted framework through which we selfishly act out attachment and aversion, thus sowing the seeds of suffering. Afflictive obscurations have two aspects: a gross, imputed aspect and a more subtle, innate aspect. According to Mipam, the imputed aspects are relinquished on the first “ground” (Tib. sa, Skt. bhūmi) when you directly perceive the suchness of reality. This experiential realization is called “the path of seeing.”

The imputed aspects of the afflictive obscurations are learned and not inborn like the innate aspects. Imputed aspects involve distortions that are explicitly conceptual, as opposed to the perceptual distortions that comprise the innate aspects. The difference between the imputed and innate aspects can be understood as something like the difference between software and hardware: the innate aspects are embedded more deeply in one’s mind-stream and are thus more difficult to eliminate. Imputed ego-clinging refers to imputing qualities to the self that are not there—namely, apprehending the self as a singular, permanent, and independent entity. This is overcome on the first bodhisattva ground in a direct, nonconceptual experience of reality that is the culminating insight of analysis. Nevertheless, the more subtle, innate aspect of ego-clinging hangs on.

The innate ego-clinging, as the bare sense of self that is imputed on the basis of the five aggregates, is more difficult to remove. Rather than construing qualities to the self such as singularity or permanence, it is a more subtle feeling of simply “I am” when, for instance, we wake up in the morning. This innate sense of self is a deeply rooted, instinctual habit. It thus involves more than just imputed identity; it is a deeper experiential orientation of distorted subjectivity. Although analysis into the nature of the self paves the way for it to be overcome, it cannot fall away by analysis alone. Rather, it has to be relinquished through cultivating the path of meditation. According to Mipam, there are no innate aspects of the afflictive obscurations left on the eighth ground. However, the afflictive emotions are only one of two types of obscurations, the other being cognitive obscurations.

Cognitive obscurations are nothing less than conceptuality: the threefold conceptualization of agent, object, and action. Conceptuality is tied in to apprehending a self of phenomena, which includes mistaking phenomena as real, objectifying phenomena, and simply perceiving dualistically. Such conceptualization serves to obstruct omniscience. Based on the Great Vehicle, these cognitive obscurations can be completely relinquished; thereby, the result of the Great Vehicle path culminates in not merely escaping samsara, as in the Lesser Vehicle, but in becoming an omniscient buddha. According to Mipam, up to the seventh ground, the realization (of the twofold selflessness) and abandonment (of the twofold obscurations) are the same in the Great and Lesser Vehicles.

As with the Great Vehicle, he maintains that accomplishing the path of the Lesser Vehicle entails the realization of the selflessness of phenomena, to see that phenomena are empty. Those who accomplish the Lesser Vehicle path also realize the selflessness of phenomena, because their realization of emptiness with respect to a person is one instance of realizing the emptiness of phenomena. The final realization of the Lesser Vehicle path, however, is incomplete. Mipam compares it to taking a small gulp of the water of the ocean: we can say that those who realize emptiness in the Lesser Vehicle have drunk the water of the ocean, just not all of it.150 The final realization of the bodhisattva’s path in the Great Vehicle, however, is the full realization of emptiness, like drinking the entire ocean.

- Jamgon Mipam: His Life and Teachings"

“John Tan

Just free ourselves from sense of self first, then it is probably 60% done. After then gradually to all notions into supreme purity.

 · Reply · 1d

Arthur Deller

John Tan I like that. Where did the 60% factor in!?!? No self is true. For whom would the other 40% apply. 😎

 · Reply · 1d

John Tan

Arthur Deller an arbitrary number...haha. "For whom" is within the 60%. If we start from other notions like cause and effect, will most likely end up as intellectual entertainment.😝

 · Reply · 1d

Arthur Deller

in the words of Maximus. “Are you not entertained”.

I’ve had enough intellectual stimulation to last an eon or so.

In thinking no thinker

Thought with no thinking.

 · Reply · 1d

John Tan

If both thinker and thinking are deconstructed, why do you keep that thought?

 · Reply · 1d

Arthur Deller

John Tan I don’t. They just come and go. Like pixels. Fuzzy characters with no landing place.

 · Reply · 1d

John Tan

Arthur Deller then notion of "coming", "landing" and "going" must be subjected to the same scrutiny like thinker, thinking and thought.

 · Reply · 1d · Edited

Arthur Deller

John Tan I had a feeling that you picked up on that. Was gonna go into the non-arising via DO, but my brain 🧠 said it isn’t necessary.

 · Reply · 1d

Arthur Deller

John Tan you just lit a 🔥. In deep samadhi and insight meditation that’s very clear. On the go throughout the day while interacting, not as much.

 · Reply · 1d

John Tan

Arthur Deller distinguishing appearances and imputed notions added to mere appearances is a life long journey and indeed, daily engagement is the real meditation.

 · Reply · 1d · Edited

Arthur Deller

John Tan Hence the other 40%. Nice.

 · Reply · 1d” - https://www.facebook.com/john.tan.9231712/posts/3879135162144236?__cft__[0]=AZW9RMcYxD4U-putKbNMFwVgGJ1iKh64xsoaT3Tc3EzfVLkeuA5VG4CquWq5ipwB8kPc1Wbbj1joppYUOo7ScaavSsmh_FaCwwogRuobR1hhpoNbrWMOTtQla5jMo00gw6akvIMQebu92niQQFO-vKUCtXSP5eM-vMSfM8WiOWAx5Of804uq1Q3AXWtzLG72mSo&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R 

[17/6/18, 6:53:49 PM] John Tan: Chariot analogy is next step of anatta

[17/6/18, 6:54:32 PM] John Tan: It is THE view for practitioners that has arisen insight of anatta

[17/6/18, 6:54:40 PM] John Tan: But there is a catch

[17/6/18, 6:54:48 PM] John Tan: It is in the way it is presented

[17/6/18, 6:56:00 PM] John Tan: In fact anatta is the most key and base insight after knowing dzogchen, mahamudra, madhyamaka, zen

[17/6/18, 6:56:46 PM] John Tan: you need anatta to beam through dzogchen and mahamudra but to have a stable base you need some further insight into mmk [Soh: Nagarjuna’s teaching on Mūlamadhyamakakārikā].

“Entities do not exist In their causes, 

in their conditions, 

in aggregations of many things, 

or in individual things.

Therefore, all entities are empty.”

― Nāgārjuna

Sevenfold reasoning of the Chariot

“There is no chariot which is other than its parts

There is no chariot which is the same as its parts

There is no chariot which possesses its parts

There is no chariot which depends on its parts

There is no chariot upon which the parts depend

There is no chariot which is the collection of its parts

There is no chariot which is the shape of its parts”

- Chandrakirti, on 'mere designation'

2011:

Soh: Btw u saw my email regarding teacher chen summary

Thusness: i do not know

Thusness: i don't want to comment on teacher chen

Thusness: it is disrespectful

Thusness: what summary

Thusness: the diagram?

Soh: He says hinayana realise anatta, then mahayana arise the realization of emptiness

Thusness: no

Soh: Then finally the realization of equality arise

Thusness: he sees hinayana as "I am"

Soh: That's like what u said right I mean sounds like the process he went through

Soh: Oic..

Thusness signed in.

Soh: The diagram sounds like a process he went through himself

Thusness: Yeah

Thusness: like polishing mirror

Soh: What u mean

Thusness: 证悟觉体 (realizing the substance of awareness) as the final destination of theravada practice (comments by Soh: I have seen more than one Mahayana teacher made this mistaken equation of theravada as I AM and mahayana as One Mind)

Thusness: maybe that is the practice and realization in modern time

Thusness: but not during Buddha's time i am sure.

Soh: I see

Thusness: for anyone talking about that will kena (get scolded) from Buddha...lol

Soh: Lol

Thusness: Theravada is the realisation of anatta

Thusness: that must be very clear

Thusness: it is not substantialist non dual

Soh: Oic..

Thusness: only the clarity of anatta and clearly seeing what it means is not clear

Thusness: into the second fold emptiness

Thusness: that is 'seeing' the true meaning of the view

Thusness: one can realize anatta and experience no-mind, no agent

Thusness: but not depth in the view

Soh: Oic.. Btw pegembara is from theravada and the phena sutta which he quotes is also from pali canon... I think the clarity of phena sutta on the secondfold emptiness is on par with the prajnaparamita sutras

Thusness: yet there is no direct insight of anatta

Soh: Also I'm not sure about this but apparently different arhats can have different degree of insight into emptiness. Sariputra is known as "jie kong di yi" (foremost in understanding emptiness).. But I guess its true that arhats mostly stress on anatta

Soh: Oic

Thusness: of course.

Soh: I see..

---

also in his view, perfection of wisdom (complete perfection of the wisdom into twofold emptiness related to clearing knowledge/cognitive obscurations totally) is not necessary for the arhat level of liberation from samsara. but although realizing anatta is fundamental for that liberation, it is also insufficient (the realization only brings you to stream entry level of awakening, see https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/08/insight-buddhism-reconsideration-of.html and https://www.reddit.com/r/streamentry/comments/igored/insight_buddhism_a_reconsideration_of_the_meaning/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf%20), key is total dispassion leading to cessation of all afflictions (arahantship level of awakening/liberation):

“Regarding arahant, John Tan thinks perfection of wisdom is not necessary, but dispassion and experience of cessation [of passion, aggression and delusion] are crucial:

John TanSaturday, November 1, 2014 at 6:58pm UTC+08

Perfection of wisdom is not necessary IMO.

John TanSaturday, November 1, 2014 at 6:59pm UTC+08

Dispassion and experience of cessation are crucial factors.

John TanSaturday, November 1, 2014 at 7:00pm UTC+08

That is why I thought of reading autonomy school of thoughts

...

John TanThursday, October 23, 2014 at 11:02pm UTC+08

Cessation imo is not just the ability to shut down consciousness ... It is consciousness coming to a complete rest due to dispassion...genuine calming down of the mind 贪嗔痴 (passion, aggression, delusion)...the fruition of a mind in total peace...

...

John TanTuesday, August 26, 2014 at 12:29am UTC+08

In later phase, you will prefer dispassion, letting go than concentration

John TanTuesday, August 26, 2014 at 12:30am UTC+08

You will find you know very little of how to let go despite strong attainment in concentration. Then you will revisit whatever you learnt and realized.

...

John TanSunday, July 13, 2014 at 9:59pm UTC+08

Dispassion will grow with time if you practice. When you experience the truth of 成住坏空 (formation, existence, destruction and emptiness) in life, together with your practice...dispassion will eventually arise.

...

“John TanFriday, January 23, 2015 at 6:04pm UTC+08

Cyclical existence ends when selflessness of person is actualized because that is the cause of cyclical existence. However in mahayana and vajrayana if i am not wrong, anatta ends cyclical existence and led to liberation whereas further realization and actualization of selflessness in phenomena resulted in omniscience Buddhahood.”

...

John TanWednesday, January 28, 2015 at 12:08pm UTC+08

I don't think the Theravada teaching is about that [annihilation]. In the lower tenet of the great exposition and sutra systems, they are very careful not to fall into the extremes of annihilation. When you get up the ladder be it yogacara, middle way up to Dzogchen and mahamudra, it is imo just a matter of refining the view of selflessness with direct experiential insights but still a sort of "middle path" from top to bottom...nvr a skewed towards the extreme of annihilation.

John TanWednesday, January 28, 2015 at 12:25pm UTC+08

Cessation is imp and once cessation is actualized, attachment to experiences of whatever samadhi is "cool down", so any form of promotion towards annihilation is unnecessary and extra (imo). Even shutting down of senses into an oblivious state is not exactly an extraordinary state, we enter in deep sleep every night anyway. The seeing through of any form of experience as dis-satisfactory that led to the direct taste of dispassion, dis-identification and atammayata should be the focus. Peace and liberation is directly related to this taste, so is the non-arisen of dharma. This is a state of evenness, calm and peace...and consciousness as well as senses can come to a shut down. Shutting down is not a secret or some exalted state for one that has gone through deep letting go in meditation but the cause that let one into it is. Anyway that is just my opinion.

...

John TanMonday, January 26, 2015 at 8:36am UTC+08

You must also understand a state of oblivion like deep sleep too is a landing ground, an escape into the cessation of experience. A movement from experience into non-experience and therefore it is driven by the same cause. It is not extinguishing the cause. The cessation is not to be understood as a shut down of senses and consciousness but disenchantment and dispassion that led to the ending of grasping. The mind no more chases anything and everything settles down, gone cool and is seen to be in a state of rest and peace.

John TanMonday, January 26, 2015 at 8:40am UTC+08

But it can and will lead to the shut down of senses and consciousness like deep sleep which is a natural consequent. So do not chase of the state of oblivion but the gradual extinguishing of grasping and into 寂静 (quiescence).

John TanMonday, January 26, 2015 at 8:45am UTC+08

This is no different from deep sleep...what is important is the cause that led a practitioner into that state...in any case if seen from the perspective of the cause, the shutting down of senses and consciousness become quite irrelevant and should not be presented that way.

...

John TanSunday, January 25, 2015 at 8:47am UTC+08

This is what must be tasted as an experience ... The experience of cessation...everything coming to a complete rest...relax and rest...relax and let go of whatever completely into cessation. Even to the extent of cessation of consciousness...be more nihilistic than nihilist… are you able to do that?

John TanSunday, January 25, 2015 at 8:53am UTC+08

Not as what Kenneth said as a "realization" but as a taste until the ending of that taste...everything comes to an end...it is like what you wrote the other time...Arahat happily waiting for death...terminating all passions...extinction...all your so called grand beauty of lsd experiences into extinction… are you able to do that?

[Soh: This is referring to this text:

Ven. Sañkicca:

I don’t delight in death,

don’t delight in living.

I await my time

as a worker his wage.

I don’t delight in death,

don’t delight in living.

I await my time

mindful, alert. — Thag 11]

Soh Wei YuSunday, January 25, 2015 at 9:22am UTC+08

Don’t think so yet..

John TanSunday, January 25, 2015 at 9:51am UTC+08

Should paste it in blog...it is a good realization of 寂...寂靜 (quiescence) is often overlooked and presence is often over-emphasized. As such even non-arising nature is understood analytically, it is not appropriately tasted. There are blissful experience but there is no peace and there is no liberation without 寂. As for 万法无生，本自寂静(all dharmas are non-arising, fundamentally quiescent) is a realization. To actualize it, we must be able to have some taste of 寂静 (quiescence) first then we can recognize it when insight dawn.

...

John TanSunday, November 16, 2014 at 9:10am UTC+08

Bliss of presence and bliss of cessation... both are related to the emptying of self/Self. After anatta the sense of self/Self is realized to be fabrication and the entire chain of afflictive D.O. [dependent origination] can come to a rest by seeing how stressful, dis-satisfying and suffering the chain is. That is right intention in the Noble Eightfold Path. Taste this afflictive D.O. coming to rest in relation to the need to maintain the Self/self or beingness. When the mind let go this way seeing the dis-satisfactoriness... it is by way of renunciation, dispassion, dis-identification… the freedom and bliss that come from Atammayata is the bliss of cessation (寂灭为乐), it is understood to be many times more blissful than any form of pleasure and beingness. However cutting the cause of suffering at root in Mahayana is about seeing the emptiness of self and phenomena. The bliss of cessation of the Theravadins are replaced by tasting the non-arising of phenomena therefore 观法如化，三昧常寂, 见闻觉知，本自圆寂。（contemplating all dharmas as illusory, [always in] samadhi-quiescence, seen-heard-cognized-sensed, are by nature completely quiescent [nirvana])” - Soh, 2020

....

regarding the difference between arhat and buddha, i think there are some subtle differences in opinions by different teachers. 

but this is acarya malcolm's view:

Seeker12 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 20, 2021 4:47 am

It's sometimes said that an arhat corresponds to an 8th Bhumi Bodhisattva, or that an arhat can enter the Mahayana and basically they start at the 8th Bhumi or will very quickly get there, or similar things.

Malcolm:

“No, this is a mistaken view. If this were the case, the three incalculable eons necessary for buddhahood in sūtrayāna could bypassed by attaining arhatship.

But it does not work like that. First, the emptiness realized by arhats is only the emptiness of the person, not of phenomena, and not of the emptiness of the four extremes.

Gorampa Sonam Senge addresses all these issues in his Differentiation of Views. You can look there.”

...

eighth bhumi bodhisattva is similar to arhat in terms of both completely cutting off samsara and eliminating the afflictive obscuration, however, as acarya malcolm said they have different levels of realization. hence they cannot be equated

Someone commented to me that Dzogchen Trekcho is similar to TWIM (Tranquil Wisdom Insight Meditation).

I replied:

Im not familiar with twim. Does twim lead to realizing radiance / I AM and then anatta? btw did you see this before: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/12/vipassana-must-go-with-luminous.html

If not its just common shamatha and nothing to do with trekcho cos you cant even begin to practice trekcho without rigpa or realizing radiance first

Excerpts from https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=657524&hilit=trekcho+rigpa#p657524

Malcolm wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:02 am

Longchenpa quotes this opinion of Kumarāja in chapter ten of his commentary on the Treasury of the Dharmadhātu:

"As it is said, "Here some confused ones, who are not knowledgable in the tantras, make random comments and cling to words literally, think these four cog bzhag are the method of equipoise of thogal. They are not connected with the dharma, and they do not understand the application of the practice at all. They literally apply the words of the Blossoming Lotus Commentary of the Tantra Without Syllables, applying them one-sidely. However, [the four cog bzhag] are to be applied in general. The Precious Appearance Handbook applies them to all."

The root of either trekcho and thogal is knowing how to nakedly expose this pellucid rigpa. If one does not know this, no matter what one applies is of no benefit. Since such a "trekcho" is lost in trivial methods of mental fixation through being mixed with the path of all confused great meditators, it will not transcend samsara and with respect to "thogal," one will deviate into the form realm due to clinging to entities and signs. Thus, it is very important here to recognize genuine, naked consciousness (zang ka rjen pa'i shes pa). It is not sufficient to merely recognize this, but one must constantly maintain this."

Longchenpa then goes onto describe the methods of equipoise, beginning with the cog bzhag of the ocean, and so on.

...

also:

Malcolm wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 11:41 pm

The term prajñā is used in various ways in Dzogchen. Trekcho is not an analytical prajñā, but it is a prajñā. For example, the Blazing Lamp Commentary states:

Therefore, in the present, wisdom arises the moment mere consciousness is without reification of thought.

Longchenpa writes in the Lama Yangthig trekcho manual:

In that state of momentary natural equipoise, dharmakāya is the reality of the pristine consciousness of vidyā in which thoughts have ceased.

And we know that on his deathbed, when people had doubts, he directed them to consult Lama Yangthig.

....

https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=637516&hilit=trekcho+rigpa#p637516

Malcolm:

"When one is distracted, yes, of course there is a subject-object bifurcation. Further, in Dzogchen teachings, we do not negate outer objects, etc., since it is not a yogacāra system [see Longchenpa'a commentary on the Treasury of Dharmadhātu for further clarification on this point].

Rigpa in this context however is just knowledge of one's own state. When we are in a moment of instant presence, or trekcho's rigpa, then no, there is no subject-object dichotomy. We are resting in the knowledge of our own state. This is called "knowledge of the essence." It is important to understand that this is not a reflexive cognizance where vidyā takes itself as an object, as in yogacāra. It is just resting in a moment of personally intuited gnosis (so sor rang gyis rig pa'i ye shes)."

"When we are in a moment of instant present, there are still the appearances of the six senses. We do not reject outer objects—they still appear to us—but we understand that our perception of them (rtsal) is just our own state (byang chub sems, the essence), separate from the apparent objects themselves (rolpa). This is what is means to say, "When we are in a moment of instant presence, or trekcho's rigpa, then no, there is no subject-object dichotomy." In other words we do not reify our perception into subject and object. That does not mean that there are no objects for rig pa.

Again, this is clearly explained by Longchnepa in the commentary of the Treasury of the Dharmadhātu, beginning in chapter eight. Why don't you read it and then get back to me?

Dzogchen is not Advaita. In fact, Dzogchen tantras explicitly reject nondualism and Advaita"

...

"Of course there is. You've been taught incorrectly. Otherwise you would be like a piece of wood, unable to move, talk, drive, and all of these things one can do in a state of instant presence. One is operating in a state of direct perception without reification. Longchenpa explains in the Lama Yangthig that the point of direct perception discussed by Dharmakīrti, etc., is basically the same point as trekcho. This is also how Chogyal Namkhai Norbu taught me, You remind me of the passage in the Chos dbyings mdzod about conceited oxen of Ati"

...

trekcho is similar to zen etc (also malcolm said dogen's descriptions in zen are closest to dzogchen and is similar to dzogchen rigpa), except the former is based on direct introduction

Malcolm:

“The question is framed incorrectly. Treckhöd is best described in general terms as a practice in which insight into emptiness and śamatha are combined. But below the path of seeing, this insight is conceptual, based on the example wisdom of the direct introduction. However, the emptiness meditated upon in trekchöd is also inferential until one mounts the path of seeing. There really is no difference between perfection of wisdom, mahāmudra, Chan/Zen, etc., and tregchöd. I have heard it said that Tulku Orgyen asserted that trekchöd exists in all yānas, perhaps EPK would be kind enough to confirm this. What separates from trekchöd from these other systems of the method of introduction. Trekchöd, like any secret mantra practice, is based on empowerment/introduction.”

“Actually, what one is resting is empty clarity. However, below the path of seeing, the emptiness of that clarity is a conceptual inference. However, when meditating, we just rest in the clarity aspect without engaging in concepts like "this is empty." We know already that it is empty since we confirmed this analytically during rushan of the mind or the semzin of gradual and sudden emptiness.”

...

"As for your first question. There are of course other differences, but the they are mainly technical, not practical. Dzogchen has a more extensive explanation of the basis, and differentiates between the basis (gzhi), and the mind that apprehends the basis (kun gzhi). In Mahāmudra this distinction is not made. However, the essential difference between Dzogchen and other systems is thögal. Otherwise, Mahāmudra, Lamdre, Trekchö and so on all have the same main point, equipoise in a moment of unfabricated consciousness aka tha mal gyi shes pa."

...

"Trekchö actually means one understands the meaning of Dzogchen directly."

----

Update: someone sent me this comment by Dzogchen teacher Acarya Malcolm Smith:

Rigpa is conditioned? - Dharma Wheel

Re: Rigpa is conditioned?

• Quote

Post by Malcolm » Fri Nov 11, 2022 4:34 pm

https://www.facebook.com/groups/AwakeningToReality/posts/25387480344200056/?__cft__[0]=AZWxPc5nkFkp7dxu92ygLcn5v9uSrB5UL2nNeJzNOGVo1zyV0JkHpFumQJDLERvZBrAUPW3USWV7I7uQ8R-zq41fMGX6Nj8pTIqkwX4oha1oSKnvz7rxJeHCYzswC6Pf2HY9d1xYKBeE5ShDF_hJNqbVJMYv4FTy9nr0ct5xJt6W1w&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R]-R


Mr M:

Interesting. The Buddha as found in the four major Nikayas of the Pali Canon was not much inclined to positive terms like 'luminous' and 'radiance'. I think those concepts come from Dzogchen, and possibly from the pre-Buddhist Bon tradition.

I think the Buddha avoided positive terms for good reason, and your AI picture sums them up for me. The picture is seductive - that's what AI art is about. Saccharine, anodyne, New Age. It reaches the largest possible audience.

Now, I'm a big fan of Longchempa, and in his hands 'luminous' etc has the gravitas of the Pali Canon, even though he probably didn't know it, and is more indebted to Tibetan masters than to the Buddha.

To me then the challenge is to use the language of luminosity without making it attractive, seductive, saccharine, anodyne and New Age.

16h

Reply

Soh Wei Yu replied:

Author

Admin

For a very accurate explanation of what Nirvana is, do read https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2012/09/great-resource-of-buddha-teachings.html

Nirvana is described in positive terms.

Not-fabricated (asaṅkhata) - Nibbāna is beyond constructed phenomena.

Not-inclined (anata) - It does not lean towards any condition or state.

Outflowless (anāsava) - Free from outflows or taints that perpetuate samsara.

Truth (sacca) - It represents the ultimate truth.

Farther shore (pāra) - Beyond the tumultuous river of samsaric existence.

Subtle (nipuṇa) - Refined and profound, difficult to grasp with ordinary mind.

Very hard to see (sududdasa) - Not easily perceived or understood.

Unaging (ajajjara) - Not subject to aging or decay.

Stable (dhuva) - Unchanging and permanent.

Undisintegrating (apalokita) - Does not break down or disintegrate.

Non-indicative (anidassana) - Not indicated by usual worldly signs.

Unproliferated (nippapañca) - Free from conceptual proliferation.

Peaceful (santa) - Utter peace and tranquility.

Death-free (amata) - Beyond death, immortal.

Sublime (paṇīta) - Of the highest quality or degree.

Auspicious (siva) - Auspicious and beneficial.

Secure (khema) - Safe and free from danger.

Elimination of craving (taṇhākkhaya) - End of craving.

Wonderful (acchariya) - Inspiring awe and wonder.

Amazing (abbhuta) - Marvelous and causing astonishment.

Calamity-free (anītika) - Free from disaster or calamity.

Dhamma free of calamity (anītikadhamma) - Teaching that is free from disaster.

Extinguishment (nibbāna) - The blowing out of the fires of greed, hatred, and delusion.

Unafflicted (abyāpajjha) - Not afflicted by suffering or stress.

Dispassion (virāga) - Freedom from passion and desire.

Purity (suddhi) - Pure and untainted state.

Freedom (mutti) - Liberation from all bondage.

Unadhesive (anālaya) - Not clinging or adhering to anything.

Island (dīpa) - A place of solace and refuge.

Cave (leṇa) - A natural shelter and protection.

Shelter (tāṇa) - Provides protection and safety.

Refuge (saraṇa) - A place to turn to for safety.

Destination (parāyana) - The ultimate goal or end.

And so on.

Great Resource of Buddha's Teachings

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

Great Resource of Buddha's Teachings

Great Resource of Buddha's Teachings

32m

Reply

Remove Preview

Soh Wei Yu

Author

Admin

Buddha discussed luminosity in Pabhassara Sutta: Luminous

""Luminous, monks, is the mind.[1] And it is defiled by incoming defilements." {I,v,9}

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." {I,v,10}

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person — there is no development of the mind." {I,vi,1}

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — there is development of the mind." {I,vi,2}"

Also,

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.049.than.html

"

"'If, good sir, you have directly known the extent of what has not been experienced through the allness of the all, may it not turn out to be actually vain and void for you.'

"'Consciousness without surface,

endless, radiant all around,

has not been experienced through the earthness of earth ... the liquidity of liquid ... the fieriness of fire ... the windiness of wind ... the allness of the all.'[9]"

Also

DN 11:

"'Your question should not be phrased in this way: Where do these four great elements — the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind property — cease without remainder? Instead, it should be phrased like this:

Where do water, earth, fire, & wind

have no footing?

Where are long & short,

coarse & fine,

fair & foul,

name & form

brought to an end?

"'And the answer to that is:

Consciousness without feature,[1]

without end,

luminous all around:

Here water, earth, fire, & wind

have no footing.

Here long & short

coarse & fine

fair & foul

name & form

are all brought to an end.

With the cessation of [the activity of] consciousness

each is here brought to an end.'"

Brahma-nimantanika Sutta: The Brahma Invitation

ACCESSTOINSIGHT.ORG

Brahma-nimantanika Sutta: The Brahma Invitation

Brahma-nimantanika Sutta: The Brahma Invitation

23m

Reply

Remove Preview

Soh Wei Yu

Author

Admin

https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/01/what-is-consciousness-without-feature.html

Jan

01

What is Consciousness Without Feature (Viññanam anidassanam)

[1:46 AM, 11/8/2020] Soh: malcolm says this quote by buddha from the pali canon: "Viññanam anidassanam from the Kevatta sutta:

Consciousness without feature, without end, luminous all around"

[1:47 AM, 11/8/2020] Soh: is equivalent to dzogchen pristine consciousness

"Malcolm wrote:

The view is self-originated pristine consciousness, free from the extreme of the dualism of an apprehended object and an apprehending subject.

— Self-Liberated Vidyā Tantra"

[7:52 AM, 11/8/2020] John Tan: Yes. But how it is understood.

[8:01 AM, 11/8/2020] John Tan: Can be I AM, can be anatta.

[8:05 AM, 11/8/2020] John Tan: This I m aware all along. Malcolm doesn't understand zen, they r pointing to the same essence and nature. The only difference is Dzogchen is strong in view and clear about freedom from extremes and mmk.

[Comments by Soh: I don't think Malcolm is saying Zen is not pointing to the same realization, as Malcolm also stated, "There really is no difference between perfection of wisdom, mahāmudra, Chan/Zen, etc., and tregchöd. I have heard it said that Tulku Orgyen asserted that trekchöd exists in all yānas, perhaps EPK would be kind enough to confirm this. What separates from trekchöd from these other systems of the method of introduction. Trekchöd, like any secret mantra practice, is based on empowerment/introduction."]

[8:55 AM, 11/8/2020] John Tan: Once we r free subject-object duality, consciousness/appearance is without feature, without end and luminous all around. So is there realization about mere appearances is key otherwise It is just reification of consciousness.

p.s. another term in Dzogchen is Zang Thal:

Kyle Dixon, "The reality of mind for him is non-arising which would be anatta

The difference between gsal ba and zang thal is difference between clarity experienced as background subject and clarity totally freed from that through realizing anatta"

He also wrote,

"Cognitive clarity is your cognizance reified as a subject, a self, while zangthal is that same aspect totally freed of all extremes and conditions."

Soh:

badge icon

Also, John Tan, 2014:

"It is also important that Buddha relates a description similar to consciousness without features in Bahiya sutta. This is what I told jax abt allowing the five elements to "kill u" when he asked me abt how I understand consciousness without features."

(Soh: referring to “ To Jax:

The place where there is no earth, fire, wind, space, water…

is the place where the earth, fire, wind, space and water kills “You” and fully shines as its own radiance, a complete taste of itself and fully itself.”)

"Consciousness without features. See how yor answer.

We must know that Buddha told the bhikkhu the way the question is phrased is invalid and must be understood not as a cessation of the 4 elements without remainder.

But I believe Stian is not seeing that way.

Therefore cessation/nirodha should b understood from the perspective of "no footing", the release without ground of the elements.

And a consciousness that is so is luminous without feature

Where the place without heat and cold

Not exactly no-mind but the featureless quality of groundlessness...that is u must understand the featureless quality in the experience."

"Just realized that kevatta consciousness without features is not the cessation of the 4 elements but the 4 elements having no footing.

Yes

Very often we say if there is no subject, how can there b object. This may sound logical but isn't verified as an experiential truth.

As we can c from the case of actual ism and two fold emptiness. Y is this so?

·

Reply

· 1m

Soh:

badge icon

<--- my recent post just wrote about the groundlessness. https://www.facebook.com/groups/AwakeningToReality/permalink/4978655378842519/?__cft__[0]=AZWrPtqjTPEE9Le_LE86i4TEkOiHh1un-uZe5Ly-OOEM2duSSgWe0yYHgH9QxuAlEGEgYSbTmGCugG_Ri_AosV0l2liRqXHE99d7BHnOZPWBhQ1R2WlN7ghPfn83GcWDpOC8gtFix03PMCOMP5ytn-JsDo3pE61Wb-NBPLp32SqSadRuoaUEYv-1MG_NDvb2n0E&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

·

Reply

· 1m

.......

http://sodapi.leighb.com/Dependent%20Origination%20and...

Leigh Brasington:

“So as quickly as a strong man could extend his arm or draw it back, that monk disappeared from the Brahmā realm and reappeared on

earth. He went to the Blessed One, saluted him, sat down at one side, and said: ‘Venerable sir, where do the four elements cease without

remainder?’ The Buddha replied, ‘You’ve been wandering around as far as the Brahmā realm asking this question. And now not finding

it, you come back to me. But, monk, you should not ask your question in that way – where do the four elements cease without

remainder? Instead, this is how the question should be put:

Where do earth, water, fire and air no footing find?

Where do long and short, small and great, beautiful and ugly -

Where do name-and-form completely come to an end?

And the answer is:

Where consciousness is signless, limitless, and all-illuminating.

That’s where earth, water, fire and air no footing find.

There both long and short, small and great, beautiful and ugly,

there name-and-form all come to an end.

With the cessation of consciousness, all this comes to an end.Ӡ

This is a bit cryptic. The wrong question is “Where do the four elements cease without remainder?” The right question is “Where do the

four elements no footing find?” This harkens back to the verses after the Bāhiya sutta, where the Buddha says where the four elements

no footing find, there dark and light don’t occur. Here, he expands the teaching to say it’s where consciousness is signless, limitless, and

all-illuminating.

What is Consciousness Without Feature (Viññanam anidassanam)

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

What is Consciousness Without Feature (Viññanam anidassanam)

What is Consciousness Without Feature (Viññanam anidassanam)

22m

Reply

Remove Preview

Soh Wei Yu

Author

Admin

When you see a table, you’re seeing the signs of a table. It’s got a flat top and legs holding it up off the ground. That’s how you know

it’s a table. You pick up the cues, the signs. So what does it mean that consciousness is signless? How about a consciousness that is,

well, in seeing is just seeing, in hearing is just hearing, in sensing is just sensing, in cognizing is just cognizing? How about a

consciousness that is not fabricating, not concocting a table, not giving birth to a table, not making this a table? It’s a way of

experiencing the world without fixating in any way on the objects or characteristics of any object being sensed – or on the one doing the

sensing. It's looking at the world from a non-dual perspective.

Nibbāna is not a thing. It doesn’t have ontological existence. It’s a realization. It’s a realization that there is nothing but streams of

dependently originated processes interacting, without even making a thing out of the streams. If you concoct “stream,” you still have not

quite gotten all the way to the point. Every thing is not a thing, it’s just dependent on other things which aren’t things. It’s a little hard to

talk about. You can see why the Buddha says it’s not this and it’s not that.

It’s consciousness that is signless. But it's not just your ordinary open awareness – which is also a form of consciousness that is signless.

Indeed open awareness/Bāhiya practice is certainly helpful in gaining this realization. But the realization of Nibbāna does seem to

require a breakthrough to a much deeper understanding – an understanding that is so profound that it permanently changes the way you

experience the world. The best totally inadequate simile I can offer is to ask you to remember what it was like when you found out there

was no Santa Claus (apologies to those of you who never believed in Santa Claus – it is an inadequate simile). I remember I saw the

world differently. There was fear – fear I wouldn't be getting any more of those really premium Christmas presents. But there was also a

different way of seeing the world and of relating to the big guy in the red suit. The world wasn't any different, but I was. The

breakthrough experience of Nibbāna is a realization so profound it permanently changes you and your relationship to the world. And a

very important component of what is experienced is signless consciousness.’”‡

When consciousness is signless, it’s also limitless. There can’t be any limits because a limit would be a sign. You’re not concocting the

end of this consciousness, it really is all-encompassing, and it’s all-illuminating. When viewing from this viewpoint, when realizing in

this way, nothing is hidden. Everything is experienced to be dependent on other things. Nothing stands alone. And nothing is a thing, it’s

all verbs, it’s all processes, but they aren’t individual processes. One gets this huge, giant picture of, I guess you could say, unfolding.

Not “the unfolding,” because that makes it a noun, a thing – there’s just unfolding. Can you experience the world like that? Can you

experience the inconstant, unsatisfactory, empty nature of phenomena, without resorting to dualities or even signs? Then your

consciousness is signless, limitless, and all-illuminating. That’s where earth, water, fire and air no footing find. There long and short,

small and great, beautiful and ugly; there name-and-form all come to an end.

The last line is really puzzling. “With the cessation of consciousness, all this comes to an end.” Does that mean you have to become

unconscious? The usual explanation is that, at a path moment – a momentary experience of Nibbāna – there’s a cessation experience

where everything stops, then it starts up again, only it’s really different on the other side. That turns out not to be what’s being talked

about here, because the idea of “path moments” is from the later commentaries and this is a sutta.

The word viññāṇa which we translate as “consciousness” literally means “divided knowing.” When divided knowing comes to an end,

all these dualities come to an end. When we stop chopping up the holistic unfolding into bits and pieces, then all this comes to an end.

As Ud 8.1 says, “Just this is the end of dukkha.”

This required holistic experience is expressed so very eloquently by Kitaro Nishida in his work The Nothingness Beyond God:

Pure experience is the beginning of Zen. It is awareness stripped of all thought, all conceptualization, all categorization, and all

distinctions between subject-as-having-an-experience and experience-as-having-been-had-by-a-subject. It is prior to all judgment.

Pure experience is without all distinction; it is pure no-thingness, pure no-this-or-that. It is empty of any and all distinctions. It is

absolutely no-thing at all. Yet its emptiness and nothingness is a chock-a-block fullness, for it is all experience-to-come. It is rose,

child, river, anger, death, pain, rocks, and cicada sounds. We carve these discrete events and entities out of a richer-yet-non-

distinct manifold of pure experience."

.....

Continue reading at https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../what-is...

What is Consciousness Without Feature (Viññanam anidassanam)

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

What is Consciousness Without Feature (Viññanam anidassanam)

What is Consciousness Without Feature (Viññanam anidassanam)

22m

Reply

Remove Preview

Soh Wei Yu

Author

Admin

Now, it is true that the Buddha didn't come here to teach us only the radiance clarity aspect of mind/consciousness. That is already taught in the Vedas and Upanishads but then reified into an ultimate Self:

Excerpt from https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2022/10/buddha-nature-vs-brahman.html

"“The Pristine awareness is often mistaken as the 'Self'. It is especially difficult for one that has intuitively experience the 'Self' to accept 'No-Self'. As I have told you many times that there will come a time when you will intuitively perceive the 'I' -- the pure sense of Existence but you must be strong enough to go beyond this experience until the true meaning of Emptiness becomes clear and thorough. The Pristine Awareness is the so-called True-Self' but why we do not call it a 'Self' and why Buddhism has placed so much emphasis on the Emptiness nature? This then is the true essence of Buddhism. It is needless to stress anything about 'Self' in Buddhism; there are enough of 'Logies' of the 'I" in Indian Philosophies. If one wants to know about the experience of 'I AM', go for the Vedas and Bhagavad Gita. We will not know what Buddha truly taught 2500 years ago if we buried ourselves in words. Have no doubt that The Dharma Seal is authentic and not to be confused.

When you have experienced the 'Self' and know that its nature is empty, you will know why to include this idea of a 'Self' into Buddha-Nature is truly unnecessary and meaningless. True Buddhism is not about eliminating the 'small Self' but cleansing this so called 'True Self' (Atman) with the wisdom of Emptiness.” - John Tan, 2005

"What you are suggesting is already found in Samkhya system. I.e. the twenty four tattvas are not the self aka purusha. Since this system was well known to the Buddha, if that's all his insight was, then his insight is pretty trivial. But Buddha's teachings were novel. Why where they novel? They were novel in the fifth century BCE because of his teaching of dependent origination and emptiness. The refutation of an ultimate self is just collateral damage." - Lopon Malcolm

In January 2005, John Tan wrote:

“[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.”"

And probably you agree with this, with what's being said above, luminosity is still important and is not neglected even in the Pali canon.

As John Tan also said before when the topic of the lack of emphasis in luminosity is brought up regarding the Pali canon, "I have told you that authenticating clarity and radiance is nothing new in ancient time and in awareness teaching, but whatever is authenticated will be misunderstood and conditioned to be "self/Self"."

The Buddha was 'raised' in an environment where the contemplatives were in search of the ultimate luminous Self. And in fact he learnt from such teachers prior to his full awakening. As I mentioned in another post, "Buddha realized the ultimate goal, attainment and mastered the samadhis of his two Samkhya teachers (Samkhya teachings is based on an ultimate self) but left unsatisfied and later on attained his final awakening which differed from his previous teachers."

Bötrül’s teacher and Mipam’s student, Khenpo Künpel, states as follows in his commentary on Mipam’s Beacon of Certainty:

"In general, if the essence of Buddha-nature were not empty, it would not be different from the permanent Self of the non-Buddhists; therefore, the nature of the three gates of liberation was taught. Also, if the wisdom of luminous clarity did not exist, being an utterly void emptiness like space, there would be no difference from the Nirgrantha; therefore, the unconditioned wisdom of luminous clarity was taught. Thus, the definitive scriptures of the middle and last Word of the teacher show the empty essence and the natural clarity.66"

As for what is the definitive meaning of Buddha-Nature, the Dzogchen teacher Acarya Malcolm Smith wrote:

https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=77&t=15368...

The term bdag nyid, atman, just means, in this case, "nature", i.e. referring to the nature of reality free from extremes as being permanent, blissful, pure and self. The luminosity of the mind is understood to be this.

There are various ways to interpret the Uttaratantra and tathāgatagarbha doctrine, one way is definitive in meaning, the other is provisional, according to Gorampa Sonam Senge, thus the tathāgatagarbha sutras become definitive or provisional depending on how they are understood. He states:

In the context of showing the faults of a literal [interpretation] – it's equivalence with the Non-Buddhist Self is that the assertion of unique eternal all pervading cognizing awareness of the Saṃkhya, the unique eternal pristine clarity of the Pashupattis, the unique all pervading intellect of the Vaiśnavas, the impermanent condition, the measure of one’s body, in the permanent self-nature of the Jains, and the white, brilliant, shining pellet the size of an atom, existing in each individual’s heart of the Vedantins are the same.

The definitive interpretation he renders as follows:

Therefor, the Sugatagarbha is defined as the union of clarity and emptiness but not simply emptiness without clarity, because that [kind of emptiness] is not suitable to be a basis for bondage and liberation. Also it is not simple clarity without emptiness, that is the conditioned part, because the Sugatagarbha is taught as unconditioned.

Khyentse Wangpo, often cited as a gzhan stong pa, basically says that the treatises of Maitreya elucidate the luminosity of the mind, i.e. its purity, whereas Nāgarjuna's treatises illustrate the empty nature of the mind, and that these two together, luminosity and emptiness free from extremes are to be understood as noncontradictory, which we can understand from the famous Prajñāpāramita citation "There is no mind in the mind, the nature of the mind is luminosity".

11m

Reply

Edited

Soh Wei Yu

Author

Admin

So a very pervasive problem in spirituality is that they realised the Radiance of Mind or pristine Consciousness but reified it as an ultimate Self. So they just get stuck at the I AM/One Mind stage with no pointers on how to deepen one's insights.

On the other hand, it is also a pervasive problem with many that a lot of people is that they realise only certain aspects of no-self with no realization of radiance at all.

I just shared the following with someone:

"[24/12/23, 9:29:05 PM] Yin Ling: I just finish reading a book by a practitioner using the “ten fetters” method by Kevin something..

everyone in that system assume they are arahants 😅 but all the writings seems to be pointing to the initial insight of no self only.

[24/12/23, 9:29:41 PM] Soh Wei Yu: yeah just initial anatta

[24/12/23, 9:29:45 PM] Soh Wei Yu: he's like dharma dan like that lol

[24/12/23, 9:29:53 PM] Soh Wei Yu: put initial anatta as arahant

[24/12/23, 9:29:54 PM] Yin Ling: It is mad the level of fabrications that can happen amongst modern ppl who wants to be better than the Buddha omg read until abit painful.

[24/12/23, 9:30:15 PM] Soh Wei Yu: the difference is dharma dan's 1st and 2nd path are cessation fruitions, for kevin, 1st and 2nd path are impersonality/non doership only, 3rd path is nondual (like daniel), 4th is anatta

[24/12/23, 9:30:29 PM] John Tan: Kelvin the author of which book?

[24/12/23, 9:30:39 PM] Soh Wei Yu: kevin shanilec

[24/12/23, 9:30:50 PM] Soh Wei Yu: https://www.simplytheseen.com/

‎[24/12/23, 9:31:44 PM] Yin Ling: ‎image omitted

[24/12/23, 9:32:05 PM] Yin Ling: I was reading this. She’s a retired physician that’s why I was interested hahaha

[24/12/23, 9:34:22 PM] John Tan: Oh I saw some of her posts in fb b4

[24/12/23, 9:35:04 PM] Yin Ling: I think their teaching also veer towards only the negative of “no self” until the practitioner becomes so scared to “come out to engage”.. due to not seeing the radiance. I read until abit scared lol

[24/12/23, 9:35:16 PM] Yin Ling: Then meditate for awhile. It’s not like that 😅"

"

[24/10/23, 7:11:49 PM] John Tan: That is the ontological substance. Second idea of substance is entity not dependent on anything else.

[24/10/23, 7:13:38 PM] John Tan: Essence on the other hand means the essential characteristic that made thing as itself. Means without that essential characteristic, "thing" ceases to be that "thing".

[24/10/23, 7:14:45 PM] John Tan: Like "heat" is the essential characteristic of "fire". Wetness make water "water".

[24/10/23, 7:17:35 PM] Yin Ling: I see

[24/10/23, 7:18:07 PM] John Tan: It is this essential characteristic that made the "essence" of a given phenomenon. When we talk about "essential causality", we r referring to "thing" possessing this characteristic to "cause" an effect.

[24/10/23, 7:18:38 PM] Yin Ling: Sort of get it

[24/10/23, 7:19:55 PM] John Tan: Like knife has an essential characteristic of cutting. We actually sort of think like that...lol

[24/10/23, 7:20:03 PM] Yin Ling: Like when I feel cold wind, I feel a sensation coming on by itself yet it is through and through, that is substance or essence ?

[24/10/23, 7:20:43 PM] John Tan: Or the eyes sees...so Nagarjuna would say why doesn't the knife cut itself, y doesn't the eyes see itself.

[24/10/23, 7:20:56 PM] Yin Ling: Ok

[24/10/23, 7:22:11 PM] John Tan: svabhava can refer to these few meanings.

[24/10/23, 7:22:36 PM] Yin Ling: Yeah it’s a deep deep process of deconstruction haha

[24/10/23, 7:22:43 PM] John Tan: Yeah

[24/10/23, 7:24:07 PM] Yin Ling: Looking back, “Anatta “ seems so far away

[24/10/23, 7:24:29 PM] Yin Ling: Like one toe dip in water

[24/10/23, 7:24:30 PM] John Tan: Yeah...that is simplified version of de-construction

[24/10/23, 7:24:31 PM] John Tan: Lol

[24/10/23, 7:24:39 PM] Yin Ling: The front path .. becomes so long 🤣

[24/10/23, 7:24:45 PM] John Tan: Lol

[24/10/23, 8:23:15 PM] John Tan: But atr anatta is not just de-construction, it authenticate radiance directly and make us realized that appearances are radiance. This part is not pointed out in mmk.

[24/10/23, 8:26:33 PM] Yin Ling: Ya

[24/10/23, 8:32:56 PM] Yin Ling: Because the IAm is introduce at the start

[24/10/23, 8:35:28 PM] John Tan: Yes and for a practitioner that authenticate that from start, de-construction is not just dry analysis. However each level of de-construction opens up mind radiance that can be tasted.

[24/10/23, 8:36:48 PM] Yin Ling: yup

"

Such people will only skew towards the non doership aspect of no self and miss out the pellucid nondual luminosity, radiance of Mind and Mind as vivid appearances.

https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/06/pellucid-no-self-non-doership.html

Simply The Seen

SIMPLYTHESEEN.COM

Simply The Seen

Simply The Seen

1m

Reply

Remove Preview

Edited