11 comments

• Anurag Jain

  Lol. That is why Awareness or Consciousness is a better word than Emptiness 

  • Like
  • Reply
  • 43m
  • Active

    Soh Wei Yu

    Anurag Jain

    Emptiness is more crucial.

    “If we look for a perceiver, we won’t find one. We do think, but if we look into the thinker, trying to find that which thinks, we do not find it. Yet, at the same time, we do see and we do think. The reality is that seeing occurs without a seer and thinking without a thinker. This is just how it is; this is the nature of the mind. The Heart Sutra sums this up by saying that “form is emptiness,” because whatever we look at is, by nature, devoid of true existence. At the same time, emptiness is also form, because the form only occurs as emptiness. Emptiness is no other than form and form is no other than emptiness. This may appear to apply only to other things, but when applied to the mind, the perceiver, one can also see that the perceiver is emptiness and emptiness is also the perceiver. Mind is no other than emptiness; emptiness is no other than mind. This is not just a concept; it is our basic state.

    The reality of our mind may seem very deep and difficult to understand, but it may also be something very simple and easy because this mind is not somewhere else. It is not somebody else’s mind. It is your own mind. It is right here; therefore, it is something that you can know. When you look into it, you can see that not only is mind empty, it also knows; it is cognizant. All the Buddhist scriptures, their commentaries and the songs of realization by the great siddhas express this as the “indivisible unity of emptiness and cognizance,” or “undivided empty perceiving,” or “unity of empty cognizance.” No matter how it is described, this is how our basic nature really is. It is not our making. It is not the result of practice. It is simply the way it has always been.

    Source: Crystal Clear, Thrangu Rinpoche

    

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 38m
  • Active

    Soh Wei Yu

    Anurag Jain more excerpts from thrangu rinpoche at https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../thrangu-rinpoche...

    

    AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

    Thrangu Rinpoche on Nature of Mind

    Thrangu Rinpoche on Nature of Mind

    • Like
    • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 38m
  • Anurag Jain

    Soh Wei Yu I was not talking about the concept. I was talking about the word. The word "Awareness" or "Consciousness" conveys more about luminosity than emptiness. The word emptiness can be easily mistaken to mean a void.

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 36m
  • Active

    Soh Wei Yu

    Anurag Jain

    Awareness or consciousness is ok as long as its nature is realised as empty. The word awareness or consciousness is unable to convey its nature. Even the word “luminosity”, although in mahayana sutras that word is also sometimes used to refer to emptiness.

    Just realising awareness is usually only the beginning step, no different from the I AM realization.

    

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 30m
  • Anurag Jain

    Soh Wei Yu Yes.... Awareness is empty of any inherence. Well it's just about words. I was responding to the quote where it was describing luminosity as cognizance and therefore Awareness or Consciousness is a better match.

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 22m
  • Active

    Soh Wei Yu

    Yes.

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 13m
  • Active

    Soh Wei Yu

    Empty clarity is termed pristine consciousness (ye shes) in Dzogchen.

    [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."

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 12m
  • Active

    Soh Wei Yu

    Also by Kyle: "Clarity (gsal ba) and clear light (od gsal) are two different things. There is also relative clarity related to the mind (sems) and the clarity of the basis (gzhi) which is zang thal. Zang thal is essentially od gsal, we say it is the clarity of the basis, but it is really related to the emptiness aspect, ka dag. These three jñānas are just characteristics of that nature, so there is no contradiction. Zang thal is like a purified clarity which penetrates. Zang thal means “pellucid” or “penetrating.”"

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 8m
  • Active

    Soh Wei Yu

    Also the term luminosity depends on the teacher. In Mahayana scriptures, luminosity is the term for emptiness or empty clarity. For some, like Thrangu Rinpoche, it refers specifically to the clarity aspect.

    This is why Thrangu Rinpoche said luminosity can be blinding and misleading by itself, it leads to obscuration. I think Sim Pern Chong was just speaking about this recently.

    https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../bewildered-by...

    Bewildered by Luminosity

    Thusness, 2005 "A “True experience” is better than a thousand words but it is also the very “true experience” of the Brilliance Bright that has blinded Mystics of all ages. The Brilliance Bright is more vivid then we can imagine. In All IT is seen and In All IT is experienced. Being vividly bright it also serves as the “condition” that obscures its very own Emptiness nature."

    Below are excerpts from Thrangu Rinpoche's teaching.

    http://www.rinpoche.com/q&a.htm

    Q: If the nature of mind is this all-pervading, brilliant union of luminosity and emptiness, ungraspable, how is it that it could be obscured, even for a moment, let alone for lifetime after lifetime?

    {Tibetan translation}

    A: Because it's too brilliant, that's the short answer. {laughter} It's like this. Luminous, brilliant emptiness, is the nature of mind. And it's been there with us inseparably for beginningless time. But the brilliance is a bit too strong. If you take the two, the factor of luminosity and the factor of emptiness, the former one, the factor of luminosity is a bit strong. A bit stronger. And because it's so strong, we don't see the empty factor. We don't see the factor of emptiness. Because of the brilliance of the mind, all these things appear, and they look so real, and we get so fascinated with it. {laughter} We're really stuck. We're really stuck on them, and we're confused, and becoming bewildered and confused by them, then we don't realize the nature of our minds. We become completely intoxicated with the brilliance and the luminosity, and what all of what it displays to us, and we don't see the emptiness.

    Now when Buddhists talk about ignorance, they don't mean some sort of black darkness, just shrouded... they actually mean it's so brilliant. It's so vivid, that we become confused by it. So we have to turn inwards and look, and see the emptiness that we've not been seeing, because we've been following after the luminosity for so long. Good example is a movie, movie comes on, we know it's just a movie, pretty soon {laughter}. We know it's somebody... picture, you know. There's human beings, and there's mountains, and there's rivers, and these wild life and plains, and we're completely drawn to it. And it's just because its brilliance is too strong, that's why we have to turn and look at the emptiness.

    {Questioner: Wow. Laugher}

    p.s. For those wondering what 'Luminosity' mean, here's a glossary definition by Lama Tony Duff:

    Luminosity or illumination, Skt. prabhåsvara, Tib. ’od gsal ba: The core of mind has two aspects: an emptiness factor and a knowing factor. The Buddha and many Indian religious teachers used “luminosity” as a metaphor for the knowing quality of the core of mind. If in English we would say “Mind has a knowing quality”, the teachers of ancient India would say, “Mind has an illuminative quality; it is like a source of light which illuminates what it knows”.

    This term been translated as “clear light” but that is a mistake that comes from not understanding the etymology of the word. It does not refer to a light that has the quality of clearness (something that makes no sense, actually!) but to the illuminative property which is the nature of the empty mind.

    Note also that in both Sanskrit and Tibetan Buddhist litera- ture, this term is frequently abbreviated just to Skt. “vara” and Tib. “gsal ba” with no change of meaning. Unfortu- nately, this has been thought to be another word and it has then been translated with “clarity”, when in fact it is just this term in abbreviation.

    Labels: Emptiness, Luminosity, Thrangu Rinpoche 2 comments | |

    

    AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

    Bewildered by Luminosity

    Bewildered by Luminosity

    • Like
    • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 5m
    • Edited
  • Active

    Soh Wei Yu

    Sim's recent post from last week: "Sim Pern Chong

    Top Contributor

    William Lim Yo William, imo, this brilliance at death is blinding.. Imo, the insight of anatta n emptiness will/shld prevent overly 'enchantment' by that awesomeness. For that enchantment is also a kind of ignorance, the imprints can drive compulsive rebirth again.

    Technically, speaking the nature of reality is the same 'taste' in all situations... even right here and now. But that intensity will be much much stronger at the time of death.

    Just my opinion."

    "

    I hope i understood why he say the brilliance of the Citta is also the ultimate danger. Could it be similar to my experience of the alaya consciousness brilliance and vastness... 'overriding' the inclination to propel rebirths. I see that very exalted state as the core state that is actually generating rebirths due to residue imprints of regrets/dissatisfactions/trauma/desires and hence subject/object splits into a big self (at the level). The exaltedness of the experience overshadows the dynamics or rebirths. In my experience, the imprints were not recognised as defilements.. but were instead used as the driving force of rebirth.. in the seek for resolution. This is how i see it.

    In a way, not recognising that nature of anatta and emptiness, even at the level of the vastness/exaltedness.. is driving the rebirth.. For from the level of the 'citta' (prior to awakening).. there is the focus of deathlessness.. but not the recognition of suffering..

    At that level, the lower gross thoughts, physical sensations all are cut off.. and the 'citta' is in all brilliance, vastness. I was confused and blinded by that exaltedness. In NDEs, people are talking about the awesomeness and brilliance of that experience.. its blinded them.. into thinking that all that matters is that .. while the pain of their physical existence is insignificant. I don't know how to explain this well. But switching back and forth from that brilliance and 'physical attention'.. helps to confirm that the dichotomy and the subsequent amnesia (of both that exalted state and the 'physical') is a problem."

    As for NDE light, John Tan wrote before, “That light is just alaya, not the nature of mind (imo). There is no form whatsoever that can be grasped. Signlessness therefore appearances are possible.”

    John wrote in 2008,

    Originally posted by longchen [Sim Pern Chong]:

    Watched the video .. a bit. Desteni is quite popular in the new age scene.

    Just my opinion...

    When we die, the thoughts and emotions can be dissolve in the death process... and what is left is the non-dual , all pervading experience of Presence. Here is usually when a 'being' discovered that it is not just the thought and emotion. But, the understanding is not clear here.

    For those on an enlightenment path, we sort of 'experience death' before physical death. This experience of death happens many many times while still physically alive. And with gradual experiences, we understand the nature of the reality better.

    In another word, we become more efficient and discard those ways of dealings that are not very helpful... Something like that...

    Thusness / John Tan replied:

    Hi Longchen,

    Must be having a challenging time sustaining the vivid presence of non-dual experience. Just to share with you some of my thoughts:

    When we die, the thoughts and emotions that are karmically linked to the body are temporarily suspended. The contrast in experience that resulted from the dissolution of the ‘bond of a body’ gives rise to a more vivid experience of Presence; although the experience of Presence is there, the insight into its non-dual essence and emptiness nature isn’t there. This is similar to the experience of “I AM”. Thoughts and emotions will continue to arise and subside with the bond of ‘I’ and ‘Mine’ after death.

    Awareness is always non-dual and all pervading; obscured but not lost. In essence all manifestation, transient (emotions, thoughts or feelings) is really the manifold of Presence. They have the same non-dual essence and empty nature. All problems lie not at the manifestation level but at the fundamental level. Deep in us we see things inherently and dualistically. How the experience of Presence can be distorted with the ‘bond’ of dualistic and inherent seeing maybe loosely categorized as:

    1. There is a mirror reflecting dust. (“I AM”)

    Mirror bright is experienced but distorted. Dualistic and Inherent seeing.

    2. Dust is required for the mirror to see itself.

    Non-Dualistic but Inherent seeing. (Beginning of non-dual insight)

    3. Dust has always been the mirror ( The mirror here is seen as a whole)

    Non-Dualistic and non- inherent insight.

    In 3, whatever comes and goes is the Rigpa itself. There is no Rigpa other than that. All along there is no dust really, only when a particular speck of dust claims that it is the purest and truest state then immediately all other arising which from beginning are self- mirroring become dust.

    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1m
    • Edited