Posts
This is damn good... cutting straight at the root.
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- Reply
- Reply
- Edited
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- Reply
- Edited
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- Reply
- Edited
- Reply
- Edited
- Reply
I would like to thank everyone in this group, the admins, the people who worked on the many different versions of the AtR guide, the Buddhas and Sages of the past, present, future, the teachers who are patient enough to point the way.3 years ago, I learned about this business of waking up. At first I didn’t know where to begin. I had this deep desire to escape from my suffering and from myself and I can’t seem to find a way out. But late last year Soh reached out to me, perhaps out of pity, in one of the reddit forums. I was probably so lost and SO OFF THE MARK back then!But now I see it clearly. The only way is here. There is no fancy way. It’s simple, direct, honest. This process of elimination is the greatest endeavor I will be doing in this lifetime.
3 comments
Soh Wei YuAdminTop contributor“The only way is here”I know you are saying this as a general statement to the effect of “the only way is insight into our true nature” etc.. but just like to add:What AtR presents is one way to insight but there are many approaches.. and even after attaining insight, it is still important to continue practicing, studying the dharma, learning from qualified dharma teachers, etc. I started to attend Acarya Malcolm Smith’s Dzogchen teachings online since 2021 and still do. I also watch youtube videos of dharma teachers by venerable masters, etcMr. KMAuthorSoh Wei Yu oh definitely that's what I meant! I also like that there are references to different teachers and techniques to insight in the AtR. As for teachers, I am not actively looking at the moment! But I am casually looking haha. I checked Acarya Malcolm Smith and am waiting if there will be an opening soon. Would definitely want to attend! Thanks so much Soh!Soh Wei YuAdminTop contributorSim Pern Chong John Tan said: "Because the nature is empty, rebirth is possible. Parts r possible, designations are possible. Parts, designations, cause and effect cannot function if they inherently exist.If we analyse with essential view, then it seems untenable and impossible.""So we must examine thoroughly whether we r seeing from a substantialist pov."Reply43mSoh Wei YuAdminTop contributorSim Pern Chong There's a message I wrote this year in Chinese to someone, that John Tan and Yin Ling liked:据我所知，金刚经都在讲空无自性。当然，需要明白空性不是断灭，不是什么都没有。比如：有小乘修者问龙树菩萨，你说诸法皆空，那不是断见吗？若是如此，怎么有苦集灭道、佛、阿罗汉、等等。龙树菩萨的解释简单是：不是诸法有自性才能苦集灭道，而是precisely/因为诸法空无自性，才有可能苦集灭道。诸法性空不代表一切不存在。（就如有提过，若是实有又如何幻化）诸法性空不是断灭见，就是因为一切缘起无自性才可能运作，若一切法有自性，就不是缘起（因缘聚合的假相）的，而是有自体性存在的。无自性才能缘起，才可能谈因果，不然一切皆有定性，若无明和苦是有定性的，那么修行又怎么能有效，就不可能有苦集灭道、佛、菩萨、阿罗汉等等。这里不是说苦集灭道、佛、菩萨、等等是真实存在的（心经：无苦集灭道），而是一切法，苦集灭道、佛、菩萨、等等都是缘起空无自性，空无自性才能妙有，一切如幻，苦集灭道，六度，八正道，菩萨道、阿罗汉道、等等才会有它的作用。一切法不真实存在（本无自性）但不是说一切不存在，如果说一切法不存在就是断见，如果说一切真实存在那么可能又落入常见，而是说一切法都是缘起性空、众缘和合的假名假相，”自缘起而生的法，只不过是依靠其自身的设施处而安立的假名而已，如同马车一样。所谓缘起性，也就是远离常断有无等边戏的中观道之真实大义。“所以是从这个角度，金刚经说，”如来说世界，非世界，是名世界。“，X 非 X， 是名 X。一切法缘起性空，不落两边（常、断，存在、不存在等等）的边见。对我来说，这其实也是在讲心性。一切相本空明，缘起无自性，如梦幻泡影，不落两边（存在/不存在等）。龙树菩萨：“若汝见诸法，决定有性者。即为见诸法，无因亦无缘。””若一切不空，则无有生灭。如是则无有，四圣谛之法。苦不从缘生，云何当有苦？无常是苦义，定性无无常。若苦有定性，何故从集生？是故无有集，以破空义故。苦若有定性，则不应有灭。汝著定性故，即破于灭谛。道若有定性，则无有修道。若道可修习，即无有定性。若无有苦谛，及无集灭谛。所可灭苦道，竟为何所至？若苦定有性，先来所不见。于今云何见？其性不异故。如见苦不然，断集及证灭，修道及四果，是亦皆不然。是四道果性，先来不可得。诸法性若定，今云何可得？若无有四果，则无得向者。以无八圣故，则无有僧宝。“”汝破一切法，诸因缘空义，则破于世俗，诸余所有法。“- https://mingguang.im/reading/中观根本慧论释/二十四 观四谛品Reply40mEditedSoh Wei YuAdminTop contributorAlso..."The Mādhyamika therefore has to explain how we can account for an object changing and persisting through time without having to assume that there is some unchanging aspect of the object which underlies all change. Nāgārjuna claims that this can indeed be done. Understanding how this can be the case becomes particularly important in the context of the Buddhist conception of the self when the temporal continuity of persons has to be explained without reference to the concept of a persisting subjective core (ātman)."Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka Pg 126 by Westerhoff....Malcolm:"One, whoever told you rig pa is not part of the five aggregates? Rig pa is knowledge of your own state. In its impure form one's own state manifests as the five aggregates; in its pure form, it manifests as the five buddha families.Nagārjuna resolves this issue through using the eight examples. There is no substantial transmission, but there is serial continuity, like lighting a fire from another fire, impressing a seal on a document and so on. See his verses on dependent origination:All migrating beings are causes and results.but here there are no sentient beings at all;just empty phenomena entirely producedfrom phenomena that are only empty,phenomena without a self and what belongs to a self,[like] utterances, lamps, mirrors, seals,lenses, seeds, sourness and echoes.Although the aggregates are serially connected,the wise are understand that nothing transfers.Also, the one who imputes annihilationupon extremely subtle existents,is not wise,and will not see the meaning of ‘arising from conditions’."Reply36mSoh Wei YuAdminTop contributorFor the benefit of English readers:Here's the translation of my Chinese text into English from ChatGPT, unpolished so it is not a good translation but you can sort of get some of its meaning from it, although I replaced a part of the Nagarjuna passage with Garfield's translation:To my understanding, the Diamond Sutra speaks about the emptiness of inherent nature. Of course, it's important to understand that emptiness is not annihilation, it's not about there being nothing at all.For instance: A Theravada practitioner asked Bodhisattva Nagarjuna, "You say all phenomena are empty, isn't that a view of annihilation? If so, how can there be the Four Noble Truths, Buddha, Arhats, etc.?"Bodhisattva Nagarjuna simply explained: It's not that phenomena need inherent nature to give rise to the Four Noble Truths, but precisely/because all phenomena are empty of inherent nature, that the Four Noble Truths are possible. The emptiness of phenomena doesn't mean everything doesn't exist. (As mentioned before, if things truly existed, how could there be illusory appearances?)The emptiness of phenomena is not a view of annihilation, it's because all things arise dependently without inherent nature that they can function. If all phenomena had inherent nature, they wouldn't be dependently originated (based on conditional assemblies), but would exist with their own essence. Without inherent nature, dependent origination can take place, and causality can be discussed. Otherwise, everything would have fixed essences. If ignorance and suffering were fixed, then how could practice be effective? There wouldn't be the Four Noble Truths, Buddha, Bodhisattvas, Arhats, etc.This isn't saying that the Four Noble Truths, Buddha, Bodhisattvas, etc. truly exist (Heart Sutra: no suffering, cause, cessation and path), but that all phenomena, including the Four Noble Truths, Buddha, Bodhisattvas, etc. are dependently originated and empty of inherent nature. Only with this emptiness can there be marvelous existence, everything is like an illusion, the Four Noble Truths, the Six Perfections, the Eightfold Path, the Bodhisattva Path, the Arhat Path, etc. have their function. All phenomena don't truly exist (they lack inherent nature), but this doesn't mean they don't exist at all. To say all phenomena don't exist is a view of annihilation, to say all truly exist might fall into eternalism, but all phenomena are empty due to dependent origination, they are mere names and appearances due to the convergence of conditions, "Phenomena that arise from conditions are just conventionally designated based on their own parts/characteristics, like a chariot. The so-called nature of dependent origination is the true meaning of the middle way, which is free from the extremes of existence and non-existence."From this perspective, the Diamond Sutra says, "The Tathagata speaks of the world, is not the world, and thus is called the world.", X is not X, is called X. All phenomena are empty of inherent nature due to dependent origination, not falling into extremes (eternalism, annihilation, existence, non-existence, etc.).For me, this is also talking about the nature of mind. All forms are inherently clear and empty, arising dependently without inherent nature, like dreams, illusions, bubbles, shadows, not falling into extremes (existence/non-existence, etc.).Bodhisattva Nagarjuna:"If you perceive the existence of all thingsIn terms of svabhava,Then this perception of all thingsWill be without the perception of causes and conditions.Effects and causesAnd agent and actionAnd conditions and arising and ceasingAnd effects will be rendered impossible.(Garfield 1995, p.69)""If everything is not empty, then there is no birth and cessation.Thus, there is no Four Noble Truths.Suffering does not arise from conditions, how can there be suffering?Impermanence is the definition of suffering; a fixed [inherent] nature doesn't have impermanence.If suffering is of a fixed nature, why does it arise from aggregation?Therefore, there is no aggregation, because it breaks the meaning of emptiness.If suffering has a fixed nature, it shouldn't cease.You adhere to a fixed nature, refuting the truth of cessation.If the path has a fixed nature, there's no practice of the path.If the path can be practiced, it doesn't have a fixed nature.If there's no truth of suffering, and no truth of origination or cessation,Then what is the path that can end suffering aiming at?If suffering has a fixed nature, it wasn't seen before.How can it be seen now? Its nature isn't different.If suffering is seen differently, the origination and realization of cessation,The practice of the path and the Four Fruits, these too are not different.The nature of these four paths and fruits was not attainable before.If the nature of all phenomena is fixed, how can it be attained now?If the Four Fruits are not there, then there's no attainment.Because there are no Eight Noble Ones, there's no Sangha Jewel."..."If dependent arising is denied,Emptiness itself is rejected.This would contradictAll of the worldly conventions.If emptiness is rejected,No action will be appropriate.There would be action which did not begin,And there would be agent without action.If there is svabhava, the whole worldWill be unarising, unceasing,And static. The entire phenomenal worldWould be immutable.If it (the world) were not empty,Then action would be without profit.The act of ending suffering andAbandoning misery and defilement would not exist.(Garfield 1995, p.72)- https://mingguang.im/reading/中观根本慧论释/二十四 观四谛品(Note: The translation tries to maintain the original meaning of the Chinese text, but some adjustments had to be made for clarity and fluidity in English.)Reply14mEditedSoh Wei YuAdminTop contributorUpdated Nagarjuna text slightly aboveReply4m
Comments
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Top contributor
Malcolm's
teachings are very clear. So I recommend those who wish to learn and
practice Dzogchen to sign up and attend his teachings. www.zangthal.com
ZANGTHAL.COM
Zangthal
Sim Pern Chong
Author
Top contributor
Soh Wei Yu Thanks for the link... I just bought the ebook version.
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Top contributor
His
entire talk series in videos commenting on each chapter of the book are
also available online, but have to sign up to join the forum first
before you can purchase it. I think need to receive direct introduction
from him first also
William Lim
So why when phenomenon is empty (has no inherent existence) = phenomenon doesn't arise
* Note to Soh Wei Yu aka Anatta Bot, kindly summarize (instead of cut and paste) like the way your rival Chat GPT does 
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Top contributor
William Lim as Kyle Dixon wrote two weeks ago:
Nāgārjuna states the following:
That
which comes into being from a cause, and does not endure without
conditions, it disappears as well when conditions are absent - how can
this be understood to exist?
Going on to say:
Since it comes to and end when ignorance ceases; why does it not become clear then that it was conjured by ignorance?
This
is the actual meaning, and the heart of dependent origination, which is
nonarising [anutpāda]. For an object to inherently exist it must exist
outright, independent of causes and conditions, independent of
attributes, characteristics and constituent parts. However, we cannot
find an inherent object independent of these factors, and the
implications of this fact is that we likewise cannot find an inherent
object within those factors either.
The
object itself, as the core entity which possesses characteristics, is
ultimately unfindable. We instead only find a designated collection of
pieces, which do not in fact create any discrete object. In the absence
of an object the pieces are likewise rendered as incapable of being
"pieces" or "parts" and therefore they are also nothing more than
arbitrary designations that amount to nothing more than inferences.
This
means that all entities, selves, and so on are merely useful
conventional designations, their provisional validity is only measured
by their efficacy, and apart from that conventional imputation, there is
no underlying object that can be ascertained or found.
Dependent
origination is the apparent origination of entities that seem to
manifest in dependence on causes and conditions. But as Nāgārjuna states
above, those causes and conditions are actually the ignorance which
afflicts the mindstream, and the conditions of grasping, mine-making and
I-making which are the drivers of karmic activity that serve to reify
the delusion of a self, or a self in objects, and so on.
This
is why many adepts are explicitly clear that dependent origination is
synonymous with a lack of origination [anutpāda], because phenomena that
originate in dependence on ignorance as a cause, never actually
originate at all, for example, Candrakīrti states:
The perfectly awakened buddhas proclaimed, "What is dependently originated is non-arisen.”
Or Mañjuśrī:
Whatever is dependently originated does not truly arise.
Nāgārjuna once again:
What originates dependently is non-arisen!
Thus
dependent origination is incapable of producing existence of any sort,
because dependent origination is incapable of producing entities.
Entities and existence only appear because of the ignorance which
afflicts your mind. When that ignorance is removed, all perceptions of
existence are removed, all perceptions of selves are removed and all
perceptions of origination are removed.
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Top contributor
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
My Favourite Sutra, Non-Arising and Dependent Origination of Sound
Sim Pern Chong
Author
Top contributor
Just my opinion only. This is how i understand it... and its very simple and direct.
I use an analogy.
If
there is just 'space' -originally-.. can any 'thing' be produced out of
space? If for anything to be produced out of space, there will need to
be a secondary medium. But can 'voidness' have a secondary medium? It
cannot.
Hence,
there can be no arising at all. To imply arising is to have some
'thing' distinct that is separated from another thing. But it is not
possible.
Hence, even at this very experience now.. it is non dual.
Since
it is non-dual, any kind of grasping, implies that there is duality
hence needing the correction. So, we just leave it as it is..
'Perfection' is the approximation of this..
Soh Wei Yu[10:10 PM, 4/12/2021] John Tan: The DO part is really good.
[10:11 PM, 4/12/2021] John Tan: When did malcom say that? Recently or in the past?
[10:11 PM, 4/12/2021] Soh Wei Yu: oic..
[10:11 PM, 4/12/2021] Soh Wei Yu: https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=36315&p=577078#p577078
[10:11 PM, 4/12/2021] Soh Wei Yu: from above
[10:12 PM, 4/12/2021] Soh Wei Yu: the others from here https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=36283&p=577115#p577115
[10:30 PM, 4/12/2021] John Tan: Many misunderstand that oh ultimately it is empty and DO is conventional therefore conceptual so ultimately empty non-existence.
We must understand what is meant by empty ultimately but conventionally valid. Nominal constructs are of two types, those that are valid and those that r invalid like "rabbit horns". Even mere appearances free from all elaborations and conceptualities, they inadvertently manifest therefore the term "appearances". They do not manifest randomly or haphazardly, they are valid mode of arising and that is dependent arising. When it is "valid" means it is the acceptable way of explanation and not "rabbit horn" which is non-existence. This part I mentioned in my reply to Andre.
So when we clearly see how essence = true existence = independence of causes and conditions are untenable for anything to arise, we see dependent arising.
Admin
Top contributor
Yes
indeed everything is nondual and equal to space.. although it is also
good to stress that non-arising is to be understood from dependent
origination, for luminous appearances continue to manifest in nondual
and not in a haphazard nor random manner, and dependent origination and
non arising is understood as the nature of this empty clarity. Nondual
unbounded spontaneous presence ultimately and dependently originating
when expressed relatively, the two truths are a union.
John tan expresses nicely:
The Only Way to the Ultimate Truth
[10:11 PM, 4/12/2021] John Tan: When did malcom say that? Recently or in the past?
[10:11 PM, 4/12/2021] Soh Wei Yu: oic..
[10:11 PM, 4/12/2021] Soh Wei Yu: https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=36315&p=577078#p577078
[10:11 PM, 4/12/2021] Soh Wei Yu: from above
[10:12 PM, 4/12/2021] Soh Wei Yu: the others from here https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=36283&p=577115#p577115
[10:30 PM, 4/12/2021] John Tan: Many misunderstand that oh ultimately it is empty and DO is conventional therefore conceptual so ultimately empty non-existence.
We must understand what is meant by empty ultimately but conventionally valid. Nominal constructs are of two types, those that are valid and those that r invalid like "rabbit horns". Even mere appearances free from all elaborations and conceptualities, they inadvertently manifest therefore the term "appearances". They do not manifest randomly or haphazardly, they are valid mode of arising and that is dependent arising. When it is "valid" means it is the acceptable way of explanation and not "rabbit horn" which is non-existence. This part I mentioned in my reply to Andre.
[10:36 PM, 4/12/2021] John Tan: Do you get what I meant?
What
it means is there is still a "right" or "acceptable" or "valid" way to
express it conventionally. Take freedom from all elaborations for
example, it doesn't mean "blankness" or "anything goes". There is right
understanding of "freedom from all elaborations" that is why Mipham has
to qualify that it is not "blankness", it does not reject "mere
appearance", it must be understood from the perspective of
"coalescence"...and so on and so forth. Similarly, there is right
understanding of "arising" conventionally and that is DO.
So when we clearly see how essence = true existence = independence of causes and conditions are untenable for anything to arise, we see dependent arising.
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
www.awakeningtoreality.com
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Top contributor
�.....
“Pursuant to the middle view, Tson-kha-pa cites Nagarjuna's Yuk-tisastika and Candrakirti's Yuktisastika-vrtti.
Nagarjuna:
What arises in dependence is not born;
That is proclaimed by the supreme knower of reality 
Buddha).
Buddha).Candrakirti:
(The
realist opponent says): If (as you say) whatever thing arises in
dependence is not even born, then why does (the Madhyamika) say it is
not born? But if you (Madhyamika) have a reason for saying (this thing)
is not born, then you should not say it "arises in dependence."
Therefore, because of mutual inconsistency, (what you have said) is not
valid.)
(The Madhyamika replies with compassionate interjection:)
Alas!
Because you are without ears or heart you have thrown a challenge that
is severe on us! When we say that anything arising in dependence, in the
manner of a reflected image, does not arise by reason of self-existence
- at that time where is the possibility of disputing (us)!” - excerpt
from Calming the Mind and Discerning the Real: Buddhist Meditation and
the Middle View
——-
Ultimate and Relative
"If
asked what I am most drawn to (in Tsongkhapa's teachings), I am most
drawn to Prasangika's "mere imputation". The quintessence of "mere
imputation" is IMO the essence of Buddhism. It is the whole of 2 truths;
the whole of 2 folds. How the masters present and how it is being
taught is entirely another matter. It is because in non-conceptuality,
the whole of the structure of "mere imputation" is totally exerted into
an instantaneous appearance that we r unable to see the truth of it. In
conceptuality, it is expanded and realized to be in that structure. A
structure that awakens us the living truth of emptiness and dependent
arising that is difficult to see in dimensionless appearance."
"In
ultimate (empty dimensionless appearance), there is no trace of causes
and conditions, just a single sphere of suchness. In relative, there is
dependent arising. Therefore distinct in relative when expressed
conventionally but seamlessly non-dual in ultimate."
"When
suchness is expressed relatively, it is dependent arising. Dependent
designation in addition to causal dependency is to bring out a deeper
aspect when one sees thoroughly that if phenomena is profoundly without
essence then it is always only dependent designations."
- Thusness, 2015
Labels: Dependent Designation, Dependent Origination, Emptiness, Madhyamaka |
Excerpt:
Equation between Emptiness and Dependent Origination
Yin Ling
·
Tsongkhapa short verse on his profound enlightenment to the truth.
***
In a short verse work composed as a letter to his first attendant, Tsakho Ngawang Drakpa, Tsongkhapa would
articulate this crucial point about the equation between emptiness and dependent origination:
When, with respect to all phenomena of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa,
You see that cause and effect never transgress their laws,
And when you have dismantled the focus of objectification,
At that point, you have entered the path that pleases the buddhas.
As long as the two understandings—
Of appearance, the regulated world of dependent origination,
And of emptiness, the absence of all standpoints—remain separate,
You have not realized the intent of the Sage.
However, at some point when, without alteration and at once,
The instant you see that dependent origination is undeceiving
If the entire object of grasping at certitude is dismantled,
At that point your analysis of the view is complete.
Furthermore, when appearance dispels the extreme of existence, And when emptiness dispels the extreme of nonexistence,
And you understand how emptiness arises as cause and effect, You will never be swayed by views grasping at extremes.
14
You, John Tan, William Lim and 11 others
18 Comments
1 Share
Like
Comment
Share
18 Comments
Most relevant
*
John Tan
This is perhaps the most important point for me post anatta insight. So profound and deep.🙏
4
Like
Reply2d
Hide 14 Replies
Active
Yin Ling
John Tan yes and you emphasise this repetitively so thank you.
Like
Reply2d
John Tan
Yin
Ling yes. Tsongkhapa is familiar with emptiness free from all
elaborations in traditional tibetan schools and in fact in his earlier
days, he accepted this view. But many in the traditional schools see the
ultimate that lacks sameness or difference, i.e, non-arisen of
"sameness" of "difference" as literally "no" sameness or difference
thinking that "oh ultimately they r just conceptual notions". Instead,
Tsongkhapa pointed out that this "unestablished" free from elaborations
means dependent arising, dependent on conditons, "this is, that is".
4
Like
Reply2dEdited
Active
Yin Ling
John
Tan not sure I get it. soteriologically does it mean one don’t say all
is ultimate just conceptual notions, and immobilise and say all is
ultimately conceptual,
but understand because of DO there is strong sense of causality and functionality?
Like
Reply2d
John Tan
Yin
Ling sort of but not easy to articulate for it involves a very very
fine and profound insight that Tsongkhapa is trying point out that is
difficult to put into words.
Just
like when we say non-dual, there is a difference between a non-dual
experience that subsumes object into an ultimate pure subject and the
non-dual experience that recognize the non-arisen of "subject" and
"object", aka, freedom from extremes in buddhism.
Similarly,
seeing through conceptual elaborations, is also not just a blanket
elimination of conceptual symbols nor should we jump into hasty and
careless conclusion too quickly asif "nothing happens" ultimately or a
rejection of cause and effect. It may appear to be so and easy to jump
into that conclusion.
It
involves several finer insights that include how conceptual notions and
it's linguistic structure confuse the mind and how we can validly
understand the nature of what appears after we understand these issues
of conceptual elaborations for although they r conceptual elaborations,
they r not elaborating "nonsense" as appearances inadvertently appear.
And
when u see that, u see the ultimate free from elaborations does not
contradict "dependent arising", "arising" through cause and conditions.
But not within my capacity to put into words. 🤦🤪
Like
Continue reading from link
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Equation between Emptiness and Dependent Origination
Sim Pern Chong
Author
Top contributor
Soh Wei Yu Ah I see.. thanks so much. This is the part that often confuses me. Perhaps, i am not investigating it well enough.
Perhaps
adding to the confusion is that from my experience, what i meant by
non-conceptual is not a blankness or cessation. that is (to me) the edge
of the conceptual mind .. but a different 'realm' beyond the conceptual
mind that perceives directly. Here is where the formation of thoughts
and 'physicality' is seen. It is similar to what Ryan Burton has
described as the spinning disk. And then able to experience via first
person view of other lives or simultaneous life. It was via this 'realm'
beyond the conceptual thoughts.. that the causes and effects were
directly percieved.
I
think here is where I do not quite understand what is being described.
because (in my experience) the dynamic of rebirths is directly perceived
in the state of all times or no time.
