Awakening to Reality

I always want to ground scholastic debates in actual lived awakening, so I wonder, if a person gets non-dual (stage 4) and also actually perceives their mindstream as impermanent and momentary, would that automatically get them stage 5? If so that would mean all harisplitting debate about whether non-dual consciousness "inherently exists" in Yogcara would be unnecessary.

Reply
11h
Edited

IMO it should. Cittamatra is considered a step from Anatta to Emptiness of Phenomena. Its somewhat between Anatta and full Emptiness. Self is deconstructed by seeing the momentary nature of consciousness. In other words there is no lasting self but stream of moments.

- Reply
- 10h

Author

https://old.reddit.com/.../madhyamaka_cittama%CC%84tra.../

I do not think Yogacara is stage 4 kind of one mind.

Kyle shared months ago,

John Tan said,

This article is very well written and yogacara never really explicitly said that mind is ultimate. This idea privileging mind as ultimate over the relative phenomena was a later devleopment.

OLD.REDDIT.COM

Madhyamaka, Cittamātra, and the true intent of Maitreya and Asaṅga

- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 10h

Author

That being said...

- Reply
- 10h

Author

John Tan did not consider the differences and distinctions as mere hairsplitting. (Maybe I'll write more later on)

- Reply
- 10h

however the debate would be more around wether we could consider this Stage 6. It would seem to be 5.5 xD

- Reply
- 10h

Author

Even Hinayana accepts consciousness as merely momentary stream of moments without Self. But unlike Hinayana, Yogacara refutes external phenomena (which Madhyamika may or may not conventionally refute depending on which type of Madhyamika). It talks about twofold emptiness as well.

- Reply
- 10h
- Edited

Cittamatra to me is Anatta with extra "form is empty cause it has the same nature as mental objects". Actually if we ground the discussion in Skandhas then the only difference between Anatta of the Pali Canon and Cittamatra is that Cittamatra says that the Skandha of Form is not substantially different from the mental Skandhas. Or we could say that all the objects of senses are mental objects.

speaks about how Anatta on its own can have a taste of physicality. Cittamatra dissolves that. However the emptiness of mental objects and moments of consciousness is not fully realised in Cittamatra.

- Reply
- 10h

Author

[1:08 AM, 8/4/2020] Soh Wei Yu: https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=30336&start=20 - malcolm seems to say here that yogacara does not lead to 1st bhumi

[1:53 AM, 8/4/2020] John Tan: It depends. Yogacara doesn't really claim mind is real ontologically from Dan Lusthaus if I rem correctly, it is cittamatra that says that...but u better double check ... It is a later devleopment from what I read

DHARMAWHEEL.NET

What is the nature of mind? - Page 2 - Dharma Wheel

- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 10h

Sure Sravakas see no self. They however see moments of consciousness and smallest particles of matter as ultimate. Pratyekabuddhas and Cittamatrins realise the emptiness of particles but not of moments. Svatantrika Madhyamaka realises the emptiness of all phenomena and Prasangika empties the emptiness itself.

Cittamatra explains the relative as mind-stuff while Madhyamaka does not take that stance.

At least thats how I understand it.

Now Shentongpas of Dolpopa sort backtrack to Thusness stage 4 while those like Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso seem to say Shentong is just there to remind that experiental presence/luminosity aspect is important and should not be denied.

- Reply
- 10h

same as Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso. According to him too Cittamatra doesnt lead to 1st Bodhisattva Bhumi.

- Reply
- 10h
- Edited

Robert

sure that's how it should work "according to the books", but who ever really directly realized anatman and momentariness per Shravaka Abhidharma and then when on realize that form is mind per Cittamatra and then realize moments and emptiness itself are empty per Madhyamaka? I strongly suspect the answer is no one, and the idea of ordering tenet systems like this is purely doxographical.

- Reply
- 10h

you're right but to me the above makes sense based on my experiences when related to how different views can alter realisations and experience.

- Reply
- 10h

also my friend went through the 5 stages of meditation on emptiness program based on the teachings of Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso. He relates that at each level his experience perfectly matched what the program was pointing to. His conclusion was that this shows how view and experience are connected.

- Reply
- 10h
- Edited

IIRC KTGR's stages are based on doxographical categories, so are you saying your friend got full on anatta realization as the first stage?

- Reply
- 10h

That would really be something.

- Reply
- 10h

some of the earliest Yogacara texts explicitly accuse the Madhyamaka view of nihilism, that's something you don't see brought up much when people try to say that what the early Yogacarins really meant was the same as Madhyamaka. See Eckel's "Undigested pride: Bhaviveka on the dispute between Madhyamaka and Yogacara"

- Reply
- 9h
- Edited

Author

[8:31 PM, 6/2/2020] John Tan: The more vivid, more clear, more blissful, more convincing of effortless, non-dual luminosity, the more yogacara-like u become...lol

[8:32 PM, 6/2/2020] John Tan: Since u send me so many articles about madhyamaka...lol

[8:32 PM, 6/2/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Lol

[8:32 PM, 6/2/2020] John Tan: Madhyamaka, emptiness is to get rid of that.

[8:33 PM, 6/2/2020] John Tan: To uproot from that.

[8:33 PM, 6/2/2020] John Tan: Get it?

[8:33 PM, 6/2/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Get rid of what.. seeing the luminous display as real?

[8:34 PM, 6/2/2020] John Tan: That emphasis...

[8:34 PM, 6/2/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..

[8:36 PM, 6/2/2020] John Tan: Because of that uprooting, everything is an illusion despite vivid appearances.

[8:37 PM, 6/2/2020] John Tan: So presence is also empty.

[9:30 AM, 6/3/2020] John Tan: If u say it is not intrinsic essence, u r saying it conditioned.

[9:30 AM, 6/3/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Yeah clarity is conditioned, manifestation only

[9:30 AM, 6/3/2020] John Tan: U need to know what is conditioned...

[9:31 AM, 6/3/2020] John Tan: Mahamudra, zen, Dzogchen....direct pointing is to directly authenticate this unconditioned that is unmade.

[9:42 AM, 6/3/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Not sure what do u mean by unconditioned.. to me clarity is always manifestation and conditioned, but is unfabricated

[9:42 AM, 6/3/2020] John Tan: Unconditioned means unmade...

[9:43 AM, 6/3/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..

[9:43 AM, 6/3/2020] John Tan: So u must sort out all these issues when studying

[9:44 AM, 6/3/2020] John Tan: Now what exactly is mmk trying to cure...

[9:44 AM, 6/3/2020] John Tan: Otherwise one might err towards over negation

[9:45 AM, 6/3/2020] John Tan: That is y yogacara mmk and yogacara svatantrika mmk.

[9:45 AM, 6/3/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Its a bit like taoism.. tao is spontaneous and unfabricated, but at the same time not an ontological essence more like flow.. i see luminosity/manifestation/dharma as likewise. But in terms of D.O and emptiness

[9:45 AM, 6/3/2020] John Tan: When u say not an ontological essence, what do u mean?

[9:46 AM, 6/3/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Not an unconditioned undying Self or intrinsic essence

[9:46 AM, 6/3/2020] John Tan: When we use terms like this, we r using it loosely. But when studying mmk, we can't.

[9:47 AM, 6/3/2020] John Tan: So there r two schools of thoughts, one is the gelug and the rest.

[9:47 AM, 6/3/2020] John Tan: Means the purpose of mmk is to free one from conceptualities...or?

- Reply
- 9h

hard to say. He had breakthrough to Anatta while studying in Shedra with the Gelugpas. What trigger the insight for him was the hint that there is no self that will reincarnate.

- Reply
- 9h
- Edited

Doxographical but they reflect and meditate on each level for months. I've led an online retreat/course on emptiness and witnessed first hand that experience meditators can be brought to Anatta in the matter of weeks (not with 100% efficiency meaning but most of the group) provided they get the right tools and are dilligent. Of course that's nothing compared to Pali Canon where we have people bigger achievements like full Arhatship in similar or shorter spans of time.

- Reply
- 9h

Interesting

- Reply
- 9h

Myriad Objects

https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=10653

Just to contribute to the discussion of “splitting hairs” about what realizations are achieved by different traditions & views:

here’s an interesting thread where Geoff Shatz and a few others discuss commentarial ideas on radical momentariness, mostly pointing towards not being able to justify such a “momentariness” teaching on the basis of the early Pāli texts in the first place...

DHAMMAWHEEL.COM

Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really? - Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

- Reply
- 7h
- Edited

André A. Pais

Cittamatra doesn't lead to the bhumis, but its founder Asanga is traditionally claimed to had been on the 3rd bhumi. The 3rd Karmapa used both approaches (and apparently not hierarchically). Mahamudra is filled with "mind-only" pointers. Tenets are spiritual techniques reified into systems.

Svatantrika and prasangika are supposed to have the exact same ultimate view (freedom from extremes), only different approaches to both ultimate and conventional. All this mapping and staging may keep people away from very valid instructions.

- Reply
- 4h

Since I used the term "splitting hairs" in the first place, I'll clarify that what I meant was focusing on using just the right language to describe things rather than the realization that is pointed to. Actually, the Mipham quote on reddit

Comments about Robert Saltzman

shared addresses exactly what I was thinking about: Yogacara texts say the dependent nature "exists" and Madhyamikas immediately cry "eternalism"! But there are two ways to interpret this, and one actually doesn't contradict the intent of Madhyamaka.

Reply
4h
- Reply
- 1m

Labels: Yogacara 0 comments | |

Soh

In the AtR group https://www.facebook.com/groups/AwakeningToReality/permalink/4911472082227516/?__cft__[0]=AZVycLqK9QyLOhF_W5ZwjTd9fAl2wa4Vnwyd-hIuv-t_EIkif6Saes8tVWOC-zbk9_Ff0Djm3ISuACVFX3EbyYANp4KNCqnvMNLpWHnO2gXphCe6P7DCr-cJn0DDS2sez5dKrUglhXIMeIqdXLD4cgMqBIIWMb_K3vVCwAYwp1s3u9cY09ncqUqUVwnPNAxrcOs&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R some people commented about Robert Saltzman, about 'not knowing', some people think Robert Saltzman only talked about non-doership and not further insights, etc.

Robert Saltzman does talk a lot on non doership. Although, his insight is more than just non-doership. I have read his stuff and listened to some of his talks before, in one of his talks (or was it a facebook post) he did say that he personally went through the I AM/Eternal Witness phase as an initial kensho, before that too collapsed. His final realization is non-dual anatta, it is anatta. But so much into two-fold emptiness.

John Tan commented before on Robert Saltzman and the 'not knowing' part.

In response to some of the Robert Saltzman images I sent him (which were sent to me by Hale Oh):

(Click to view)

- Reply
- 3h
- Edited

- Reply
- 3h

- Reply
- 3h

- Reply
- 3h

John Tan responded to the above:

I think it is very well articulated. However that is only into the first step and taste of anatta.

After this initial anatta insight and no-mind experience, practitioners must also understand how the language that breaks experiences into subject/action/object paradigm creates confusions abt:

1. The idea of coming, going, arising, ceasing in relation entity and characteristics. If there is no entities, what do all these mean?

2. What is meant by "physical"? We r so used to and being so deeply hypnotized into seeing a world that is "objective"...and if we deconstruct the "objective and physical world", does it means pure subjectivity?

So what is DO? To me, we cannot really understand DO and emptiness without deeply looking into questions...

- Reply
- 3h

Hale Oh then sent me these which I sent JT:

- Reply
- 3h

- Reply
- 3h

- Reply
- 3h

- Reply
- 3h