John Tan: If seen is just seen, then there is no movement.
Soh: Movement?
John Tan: In the seen only the seen is also no seer, no seeing and nothing seen.  There is no changing nor unchanging.
Soh: Ic..
Soh: The nancy also said the same.. nothing changing or unchanging

[10:15 pm, 05/10/2021] John Tan: That is ultimate view.
[10:16 pm, 05/10/2021] John Tan: Conventionally, there is changes and impermanence and origination in dependence as the right way of expression.

Soh: https://nancyspoems.blogspot.com/
Nancy:


We are infinite reflections without a source
Echoes spinning
Fleeting images
Flowing thought dreams
Without sides or a middle
Dancing without movement or non movement
without direction or non direction
There are no colors or rainbows without us
Without an imaginary persona there is no imaginary heart
Beating
Loving all this
That is not this
Or that
Or both
Or neither

There is no one to be free or bound
Or gaze as infinite awe painting the dream scape with colors that cannot be seen
Only felt
No one to fall into your unutterable beauty
Or fall endlessly in love with you


….



At first this felt like, 'I am all this!"



Then it felt like, 'All this!'



Later it was .... 'Not even nothing...'


….

no eyes apart from the seeing....
no ears apart from the hearing
no sound separate from the listening...
no wind separate from your cheek
no love separate from your heart
no inside
no outside
the horizon that held the sky apart from the sea
untied itself
the timeline from birth to death collapsed
as well as the time walker
and left this knowing and feeling that there are no things
simply an atemporal seamless flow without movement or non movement....
no things to be permeant or changing ...
feels like the first and last kiss ....
a constant union of what was never apart...



Soh: Sounds like she went through the stages

John Tan: 👍

.................

“The next understanding you must have after anatta and emptiness is to know that all qualities similar to those that are described and sounded ontological are always manifesting presently, spontaneously and effortlessly after the purification of anatta and emptiness insights. That is, spontaneous arising is not just saying responding automatically. It is the manifestation of these blissful characteristics of nature spontaneously. Non-arising, unmoving, unchanging, pristiness, clarity... spontaneously present” – John Tan, 2009


“Mr. T: I cannot find a ground a base, to identify with, everything is changing constantly. Arising and passing away. All of experience, where do I stand?

Kyle Dixon: Arising and passing away are characteristics of conditioned phenomena. As practitioners of the buddhadharma, our aim is to fully realize the unconditioned nature of phenomena, free of arising and cessation. That natural and perfect nature, is the true refuge.

Upon realizing that nature, the Buddha stated the following:

I have obtained the ambrosia of Dharma,
 profound, peaceful, immaculate, luminous and unconditioned. 
Even though I explain it, no one will understand, 
I think I will remain in the forest without speaking. 
Free from words, untrained by speech,
 suchness, the nature of Dharma, is like space
 free from the movements of mind and intellect, 
supreme, amazing, the sublime knowledge. 
Always like space, 
nonconceptual, luminous, 
the teaching without periphery or center 
is expressed in this Dharmawheel. 
Free from existence and nonexistence,
 beyond self and nonself, 
the teaching of natural nonarising 
is expressed in this Dharmawheel.

— The Ārya-lalitavistara-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra” – Kyle Dixon, 2021

"This is correct.  "Permanent" is not referring to something not undergoing change, it refers to the absence of causing of arising." - John Tan, 2021

"To conclude, in the expanse of phenomena, there is no dual nature of appearance and emptiness, and no twofold division. Therefore, by a mere expression of language—through words—it is also said that the relative truth and ultimate truth are “indivisible.” Although the expanse is like this, separate categories are made merely in terms of the conventional, based on the way things appear. In this way, all phenomena included within samsara—all that is comprised by distorted perceptions and all that appears through the power of dualistic thought—are not real when analyzed. They are fluctuating and impermanent; therefore, these deceptive phenomena are the relative truth. And all phenomena comprised by great nirvana—which is difficult to realize and thus profound, free from constructs, and which is the luminous clarity of wisdom’s knowing, relinquished from all suffering—are beyond material and momentary phenomena. Therefore, they are free from the misery of change. Having the nature of immutability, they are the ultimate truth."

- Mipham

Duckworth, Douglas; Mipam, Jamgon. Jamgon Mipam: His Life and Teachings (p. 159). Shambhala. Kindle Edition.

John Tan: He goes on to point out that self-occuring primordial
knowing lacks most of the qualities associated with the Yogacara svasaf!1vedana - its
alleged reality, internality, reflexivity, self-evidence, and accessibility to introspection - but
then cautions that "should one become attached to these [rDzogs chen gnoseological] terms
as denoting something real, you won 't find any difference from the Cittamatra conception of
svasaf!1vedana, that is, the cognition which is devoid of subject-object duality and which is
simply auto-illumination.,,247 In highlighting the many drawbacks of reifying the mental,
Klong chen pa rules out any basis for confusing the gnoseological and mentalist conceptions
of self-awareness : for the idealist, self-awareness is a real entity having real characteristics,
whereas for the rDzogs chen pa, it is simply a vivid auto-manifestation, a process lacking
any reality whatsoever.

Soh: What book is this?

John Tan: The Philosophical Foundations of
Classical rDzogs chen in Tibet
Investigating the Distinction Between Dualistic Mind
(sems) and Primordial knowing (ye shes)
David Higgins

( Soh: https://app.box.com/s/1xps30kdq31p0ljfmjvdlh5oiutzc6a8 )

John Tan:I like this book.  Clarifies most of the dzogchen terms and clear lystates that longchenpa rejects self-reflective awareness distinguishing dzogchen from yogacara.  And in line with anatta insight.  To longchenpa self-awareness "is simply a vivid auto-manifestation, a process lacking any reality whatsoever".
Soh: Oh wow
John Tan:Finally found one book that aligns anatta insight and dzogchen clearly.
Soh: yeah i wonder why all (Correction: most of those I've read) the other books on dzogchen (Except malcolm's) including on longchenpa is always about mirror and reflection 🤣
[12:05 am, 04/10/2021] John Tan: If I din read this chapter, I too would have mistaken it as another awareness teaching.🤣
[12:07 am, 04/10/2021] John Tan: Yeah.  I also agree with what longchenpa said how it is different and y "intellect" is not involved in just vivid manifestation.

Soh: oic..

John Tan: According to the viewpoint of this system, he says, all phenomena
are self-luminous in the state of great primordial knowing like light in the sky, having
always been the very essence of this self-occuring primorial knowing which remains
naturally free from causes and conditions .263


John Tan:

I believe his "Buddha Nature Reconsidered" will be interesting too.

Soh:
found buddha nature reconsidered: https://app.box.com/s/gzlz7xv8b1jwifcohgt09wj3hg1fiipr
 

John Tan: Now all the terms and phrases seem so clear to me when they use it.


......

• • Soh Wei Yu
    Another passage that John Tan quoted is Longchenpa's blanket rejection of Yogacara.
    John Tan: Read it. Longchenpa reject yogacara view in toto and accept prasangika.
    ...
    From the book:
    Klong chen pa' s blanket rejection of the Yogacara
    svasaYflvedana . Of course, the main target of his sweeping critique, as he makes clear in his
    Yid bzhin mdzod 'grel, is the Y ogacara proclivity to treat consciousness as a real entity with
    real characteristics and to presuppose it in justifications of idealism: "It is eminently
    reasonable to claim that any objects that appear are unreal, but we refute the claim that mind
    is ultimately real.,,240 Klong chen pa is also patently opposed to allowing self-awareness a
    conventional existence so that it can then be used to buttress representational epistemologies
    that assume we can only know external objects (if indeed such are held to exist) through our
    internal representations of them. Interestingly, his thoroughgoing rejection of Y ogacara
    epistemology and his wholehearted endorsement of the *PrasaIigika stratagems · for
    undermining any and all forms of realism (from substance ontologies to subjective idealism)
    make his stance on svasaf!lvedana appear, for all intents and purposes, quite similar to the
    dGe lugs pa position that Mi pham was criticizing.
    What, then, are we left with when it comes to the rDzogs chen self-awareness? It
    must be acknowledged that the rDzogs chen conception of rang rig does concur with some
    elements of Santarak􀁶ita' s self-awareness, particularily its nondual and luminous character.
     · Reply
     · 2m · Edited

   

  
  ......
   

   [8:56 pm, 08/10/2021] John Tan: Read the foundation of dzogchen philosophy
  [9:13 pm, 08/10/2021] John Tan: It is in the book
  
  The book "foundation" goes in extensively to define what is zhi and kun zhi, their histories and development...etc...both r termed as "ground" which I do not think it as appropriate for a praxis that rest entirely on abolishing "ground" even when talking abt "zhi".  Malcolm is more cautious on this aspect.
  
  Soh:
  
  Oic..
  Malcolm translate it as basis
  malcolm:
  
  And this so-called "god" aka basis [gzhi] is just a nonexistent mere appearance, that is, our primordial potentiality also has no real existence, which is stated over and over again in countless Dzogchen tantras.
  
  For those whom emptiness is possible, everything is possible.
  For those whom emptiness is not possible, nothing is possible.
  
  -- Nāgārjuna.

  
  John Tan:
  
  Although David Higgins used the word "ground", he qualifies it as "insubstantial and unestablished in any sense".

   ...............

   

  Also see: Clarifications on Dharmakaya and Basis by Loppön Namdrol/Malcolm

   

   

  ..................
  
  
  [9/10/21, 4:35:37 PM] John Tan: I wonder y there is a need for Dzogchen to emphasize so much on gzhi and kun gzhi.  I do not see any real help in actual practice.  In fact seeing through self-nature is sufficient.  Direct and simple and straight forward🤣.  Although there r some important points in the praxis of dzogchen.
  [9/10/21, 4:39:30 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
  [9/10/21, 4:48:35 PM] John Tan: Also in early texts of Dzogchen and Nyingma scholars actually do not differentiate between gzhi and kun gzhi.

  
  [9/10/21, 5:20:19 PM] Soh Wei Yu: I see
  [9/10/21, 7:23:42 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Mahamudra also talk about “ground” but dunno what term they use
  
  
  http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/search/label/Karmapa%20Rangjung%20Dorje?m=1
  
  The ground of purification is the mind itself,
  indivisible cognitive clarity and emptiness.
  That which purifies is the great vajra yoga of mahamudra.
  What is to be purified are the adventitious,
  temporary contaminations of confusion,
  May the fruit of purification, the stainless dharmakaya, be manifest.
  Resolving doubts about the ground brings conviction in the view.
  Then keeping one's awareness unwavering in accordance with the view,
  is the subtle pith of meditation.
  Putting all aspects of meditation into practice is the supreme action.
  The view, the meditation, the action--may there be confidence in these.
  All phenomena are illusory displays of mind.
  Mind is no mind--the mind's nature is empty of any entity that is mind
  Being empty, it is unceasing and unimpeded,
  manifesting as everything whatsoever.
  Examining well, may all doubts about the ground be discerned and cut.
  [9/10/21, 7:23:53 PM] Soh Wei Yu: I suppose dzogchen and mahamudra should be the same view
  [9/10/21, 7:57:53 PM] John Tan: Dzogchen is the path that starts from taking the view that anatta is a seal, always and already so.
  [9/10/21, 7:59:38 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic.. mahamudra is the same?
  [9/10/21, 8:09:09 PM] John Tan: I guessed so but I don't want to comment on this.
  
  
  [9/10/21, 9:23:43 PM] John Tan: Original face means to realize that appearances has always been one's radiance clarity, primordially luminous and naturallly free.
  [9/10/21, 9:23:56 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
  [9/10/21, 9:31:32 PM] John Tan: Problem is most ppl that engaged in the so called highest teachings r having a dualistic and substantialist view.  If we do not recognize the nature of appearances and kept emphasizing on primordial knowing, taking the non-progressive is imo a great disservice than help.
  [9/10/21, 9:33:28 PM] John Tan: Just like when u r at I M, u already like to talk about spontaneous presence which I caution u don't talk about that until at least mature non-dual.
  [9/10/21, 9:37:43 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic.. lol yeah
  [10/10/21, 10:26:04 AM] John Tan: ‎
  "It is possible, Klong chen pa suggests, to simply recognize this nondual self­occuring primordial knowing in its pristine nakedness (rjen pa sang nge ba) - both as it
  abides in its naked clarity and as it continuously manifests as myriad objects - without hypostatizing it.273 For so long as "one thinks of the abiding and manifesting of cognition as  two different things and talks about [the experience of] 'settling in the nonconceptual essence' [but also of] 'preserving the expressive energy as being free in its arising' , one's practice goes in two directions and one fails to understand the key point."
  
  [10/10/21, 10:36:16 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Oh.. nice
  [10/10/21, 10:43:29 AM] John Tan: Reading it second time and still found many phrases that I like.
  [10/10/21, 10:43:43 AM] John Tan: Really a treasure
  ‎[10/10/21, 11:10:56 AM] Soh Wei Yu: ‎"That is interesting that it distinguishes what would be anatta and no mind
  I’m going to have to re-read the text"
  - Kyle Dixon
  [10/10/21, 11:16:44 AM] John Tan: Also in the very beginning
  [10/10/21, 11:18:58 AM] Soh Wei Yu: In the beginning it talked about anatta?
  ‎[10/10/21, 11:20:14 AM] John Tan: ""In this sense, primordial knowing is both a vision of things as they are undistorted by reifications and a mode of being and living that is commensurate with this vision.""
  
  
  Primodial Knowing is not defined as an entity like an ultimate awareness but rather a vision of things undistorted by reifications and a lived experienced of perfection of anatta insight.
  [10/10/21, 12:07:14 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
  ‎[10/10/21, 1:12:07 PM] Soh Wei Yu: ‎‎Kyle Dixon:
  
  Is primordial knowing a gloss of ye shes?
  I assume so
  Dzogchen will even go as far as to say Buddhas do not even have ye shes
  Some Mahāyāna texts say this too
  Because if they really had jñāna it could be misconstrued as a subjective reference point
  [10/10/21, 1:13:22 PM] Soh Wei Yu: This reminds me of bodhidharma
  
  
  [The questioner] continued asking: "What is 'taishang,' the supreme?
  "Tai signifies 'great,' and shang 'lofty.' It is called 'supreme' because it is the highest wondrous principle. Tai also signifies the primordial stage. Though there are longlived ones of Yankang in the heavens of the three realms, their luck runs out, which is why they end up again transmigrating in the six spheres of existence. That 'ultimate' (tai) is not yet sufficient. And the bodhisattvas of the ten stages, though having escaped life-and-death, have not yet plumbed the depths of this wondrous principle. Their ultimate is also not yet [the one I am talking about]. Cultivation of mind in the ten stages gets rid of being in order to enter nonbeing; this is again not yet the ultimate since it does not get rid of both being and nonbeing and sticks to a middle path. But even if one has thoroughly discarded that middle path and the three locations [of inside, outside, and in between], and any place is that of wondrous awakening - and even if a bodhisattva gets rid of these three locations - one remains unable to free oneself of the wondrous. This again is not yet the ultimate.
  Now if one discards the wondrous, then even the very essence of the Buddha Way has no place to abide; since no though is left, no discriminative thinking takes place. Both the deluded mind and wisdom have forever expired, and perceptions and reflections are at an end - calm and without ado. This is called tai; it means the ultimate of the principle. And shang means 'without peer.' Hence it is called taishang, the ultimate. This is simply another designation for Buddha, the Tathagata."
  [End of] Treatise on No-Mind in one fascicle.
  
  http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/11/the-doctrine-of-no-mind-by-bodhidharma.html
  [10/10/21, 1:24:08 PM] John Tan: The point Dzogchen wants to make is "primordial" -- has always been the case before beginning, always and already so. In order words in ATR context, anatta is a seal, always and already so thus differentiating it from effortful and progressive stage or even transformation taking result as the path, familiarizing one's basis rather than seeing it as the result of cause and effect.
  [10/10/21, 1:34:38 PM] John Tan: What I find lacking in the book is pointing out the nature of "appearances".  When the notion of "existence" is being stripped (deconstructed) from phenomena, the nature of what appears.
  [10/10/21, 1:57:14 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
  ‎[10/10/21, 1:57:18 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Kyle Dixon: Longchenpa:
  
  From the [ultimate] perspective the meditative equipoise of the realised (sa thob) and awakened beings (sangs rgyas), there exists neither object of knowledge (shes bya) nor knowing cognitive process (shes byed) and so forth, for there is neither object to apprehend nor the subject that does the apprehending. Even the exalted cognitive process (yeshes) as a subject ceases (zhi ba) to operate.
  [10/10/21, 1:59:33 PM] John Tan: 👍