Also See: A Practitioner's Reflection on the Kōmyōzō Zanmai (Treasury of Light)

请参阅：《光明藏三昧》白话版

《光明藏三昧修行反思》译稿 （0.4 实验版）

导言：光之四重道

《光明藏三昧》乃禅宗至为明灿、至为直捷之法脉傳承之一。此典由永平道元之嫡传法嗣怀奘孤云所著，非仅为哲学论辩，更是直指实相本质之明证。于此反思中，我辈将探究怀奘所示之精妙路径。证悟之展露，诚然为一动态历程，非僵硬、线性之序列，然此反思仍将循四重普遍共历之境地，以明此道。

一、 纯粹临在之根本证悟（“我-在”）： 此乃初次之突破，始于脱离心念之内容，而直认那无时、无相、恒在之觉知。此觉知乃一切经验之基石。此步虽至要，亦或暗藏将此“基”执为实体，误认为一终极、不变之“真我”的风险。

二、 初步不二洞见（实体论之不二 / “一心”）： 证悟万法皆为一心所现之光明朗耀。主客之隔顿然崩塌，融摄于一终极之主体或“一心”。此种“万物即我”之体悟，虽为契入“无我”之深刻初见，然其理解仍植根于“万法实有”及一种微妙主客对立之范式，不免将形而上之本体执为实有，实已偏离佛教之究竟正道。

三、 证入无我（人无我）： 此为一关键且解脱之证悟，深透心体与主宰（补特伽罗）空寂、无我之本性。至此，即便是那单一、朗耀之心，亦被彻见为空无任何恒常、独立之自性。此“能知”并非一实体；毋宁说，此知性本身，即是自知、动态、无我、无主宰之进程，离于能知之心，自行展露、自行了知。

四、 智慧熟成（二空）： 洞见愈深，终能彻见万法（色、声、想等）空寂、如梦、非实之本性（法无我）。此乃证悟非唯“我”是空，万法亦皆无自性，如幻、如阳焰般显现。此即净化微细“所知障”、如实彻见实相之道——万象历历分明，其性却毕竟空寂。

于此反思中，我辈非仅探讨怀奘之直指，亦将论及各种实用之参究法门。虽吾等不知怀奘用何种权巧方便之法门教导其学人，然此处所论之法，皆源于广大佛法传承，可为利器，助人直证实相之深奥真理。

序言：敬仰之传承

光云与面授之历史序言，将此典籍定义为一神圣之遗物，而非普通书册——此乃直通觉悟祖师心意之管道。其重见天日之时，二人喜悦之情溢于言表，足证其重要。于彼等而言，此中文字非仅为关于光明之教诲，更是光明本身之活态传承。序言确立了从古佛至怀奘之一脉相承，昭示其后内容乃佛法真实、未曾稀释之核心。

第一部分：定义光明藏——实相之光明觉心

怀奘以其核心譬喻开篇：光明藏。关键在于，此非冰冷、空洞之虚空，而是一“有心”之宇宙。（参见：《有情宇宙有寸心》 https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2019/02/the-transient-universe-has-heart.html）怀奘之光，非物理学中毫无生命之光子；此乃一种活泼、智能、神圣之灵光。此“光辉”即是实相之质地，等同于其他传承所言之本初意识或纯粹知性。此乃心之本俱清明与觉醒。禅宗大师论及灵知，所指亦为此同一法则——一种非以眼所见，而是视觉、听觉、知觉背后那觉照、能知之力用。此乃令经验得以可能之觉性、感知之特质。

证悟本源：万物之前之“我-在”：

怀奘确立此“光”为“诸佛之本源，众生之本性，万物之全体”。此乃直指修行道上首次关键突破：证悟无相之本源或存在之基。此即证入亚伯拉罕之前即已存在之“我-在”，亦是“父母未生前本来面目”。此乃于一切感官、概念经验之前——于见、闻、嗅、尝、触、思之前——对“心”之直接、非概念性之证悟。

禅宗及其他直指法门中，自我参究之目的，即在于引导心识回归此一本源。诸如“思绪不起时，试言汝当下一念心为何物？”之类问题，非为寻求如“空”或“虚”等概念性答案，此类答案皆为思维心之产物。此问乃一工具，旨在穷尽理智，为直截了当之体认创造契机。诚如罗摩那·马哈希所释，参究“我是谁？”如搅动火葬柴堆之木棒——其摧毁所有其他念头，最终亦自我焚毁，显露出那毋庸置疑、恒常存在之真我。

此证悟未必经由感官停息之甚深禅定方能达成，虽则此类定境能加深定力。如诸多大师所指，此事关乎证悟那早已、无可否认之临在。你存在，且你觉知到你的存在。此非仅为“哦，我存在”之模糊或心智上之留意，而是一种对“存在之真理”无可动摇、毋庸置疑之证悟。此种对自身“存在性”（Beingness）之直接确信，此种无对象之“临在-觉知”（Presence-Awareness），即是根本之证悟。此乃在心着五蕴之衣、被思维心贴上标签之前，对自身本质之简单、直接之体味。

“万法唯心”之洞见（作为后续之权巧法门）：

于根本证悟无相本源之后，道途常引向一种独特而深入之洞见，此洞见与瑜伽行派（唯识宗）“三界唯心”之教诲直接相应。此即证悟一切外境无非是自心之光明显现，从而将内在自我与外在世界之素朴二元对立，消解于一心之统一场域。

然则，理解此教诲之真意至关重要。如大学者蒋贡·米庞仁波切所释，中观大师所破者，仅为被误解之唯识见。其谬误在于将心执为实有之体。如米庞所言：

“自称唯识宗者，论及唯心时，谓无外境而心识实有——犹如一绳，虽无蛇性，然非无绳性……彼等信不二之识于胜义中真实存在。此正是中观师所破斥之宗义。”

被正确理解之唯识宗，并非对一超越、终极之心（如梵）之形而上断言。毋宁说，此乃一权巧方便之法门，旨在破除我等对外界事物真实性之执着。如无著菩萨所规划、布鲁兹霍尔所呼应之次第道，其进程如下：

1. 行者首先理解万法唯心所现。

2. 其后，行者体验到心中实无所执之境。

3. 进而，行者证悟既无所执之境，亦无能执之主（能认知之心）。

4. 紧接着，行者直证实相，远离主客二元之对立。

蒋贡·米庞仁波切对此微细之处作了完美澄清。他解释道，中观大师虽破斥实有之心，却不否定“自明智”作为一种有效、常规之证悟。米庞言：

“反之，若此识被理解为本初即不生（即‘空’），由自证分直接体验，且为离于主客之自明智，则此乃应予肯立者。”

此“自明智”即是不二光辉之甚深基石——道途上一种直接、有效之体验。米庞所作之关键论点在于，此“智”乃于世俗中被确立为一种有效证悟，同时于胜义中被理解为毕竟空、本初不生。道元及所有佛教大师所破斥之实体论谬误，在于将此有效之证悟误认为究竟真理，赋予其独立于所认知之生动、无我、自知/自明之显现外之自性。更深层之无我洞见，甚至将此光明之基解构，揭示其离于自身之显现外，别无任何实有自性。

证悟无所得与不生：

怀奘对无所得之强调，乃开启整条道路之钥匙。此原则由经典禅宗辩证法所支持，例如他引述道，谓“道”非由“有心”或“无心”可得，直指心体本身不可把捉、不可寻觅、空寂之本性。无我之洞见揭示，并无一静态、背景式之意识或“本源”可得，唯有动态、朗耀之显现前景。如John Tan所释，此“背景”乃二元心所造作之幻相，用以寻求攀缘之物。（请务−−读John Tan之文：《Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment》。可访其网站：https://atr-passerby.com/）证悟无所得，即是直截了当看穿此幻相。此非仅谓“心”本已在此；而是谓离于生灭之法相本身，并无一“心”可作为分离、可得之实体。怀奘更深论之，将其与“无自性”及不生之根本原则相连。他引言云：“心主安闲，悟自心之本不生。”因心无自性，故其从本以来未曾真实“生”或“被造”。是故，证悟非获取之行，而是止息一切寻求，当实相根本无所得、本自不生之性被直接、无可辩驳地彻见之时，此证悟便油然而生。

第二部分：根本证悟——发现“我-在”之基

此初步突破，乃是从认同经验之内容，转向认同经验显现之背景——那寂静、恒在之觉性空间本身。此即灵知。于《光明藏三昧》中，怀奘引述禅宗祖师之数则公案，旨在将注意力从所缘之境转向能缘之心，以触发此洞见。

临济之直指： “如今且道，说法人、听法人，是甚么？”

生命之享受者： “如今且道：尔即今便溺之时……毕竟是谁之享受？”

于此，区分对“我-在”临在之瞥见或体认，与其圆满、安住之证悟，至关重要。多有行者或曾体验过体认无相见证者之短暂片刻。此乃关键之第一步。然，自我证悟之本义，乃是对自身存在性（Beingness）直接、无可动摇之确信，一种超越一切疑虑、了悟自身本质或存在之基的“我找到了！”（Eureka!）之彻悟。持续自我参究之目的，即在于深化此等初步体认，直至其熟成为一安住、不动之实相。

扩展实践参究：

寻觅听者（“我-在”）

此非为理智所设之问，乃直截根源之勘验工具，意在将瞥见化为确信。

法一：公案与直指（禅宗法门）

1. 安坐发问： 择一舒适姿势静坐。令身心安顿。觉知室内周遭之声响。

2. 内转问题： 此刻，以真实之好奇心，将注意力转向内，问临济之问：“听闻此声者，究竟为何物？”

3. 直接、不懈地勘验： 你的概念心会立即试图以标签作答。弃之。指令是找出听者是谁，或何者在听闻此声。

4. 证悟无对象之临在： 当你以持续、非概念性之勤勉去探寻时，一种深刻之体认将会升起：你无法找到听者作为一个对象。然而，它无可否认地临在——显然，有某物在觉知那声音，此觉知与临在无可否认——但它是无相、无界、无对象的。它无中心亦无边缘——它是一种遍在之纯粹临在。此非证悟虚无，而是一种对存在性之直接确信，只是此存在性并无对象。此种对无相、恒在之能知者直接、非概念性之体认，即是初步之洞见。安住于此开放、了知之存在空间。

法二：自我参究与“非此、非此”（吠檀多法门）

1. 系统性否定： 问：“我为斯身否？”感受身体之感觉。你是此等感觉之觉知者。坚定结论：“非此。”观察一念。问：“我为斯念否？”你是此念之见证者。“非此。”

2. 何者存留？ 在你否定了一切可感知之物后，所余者，乃是那不可消减、无可否认、主观之临在感、知觉感、存在感——即“我-在”。亦可参见：《Self Enquiry, Neti Neti and the Process of Elimination》 https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2024/05/self-enquiry-neti-neti-and-process-of.html。

关于唤醒临在之其他法门之说明

金刚歌与神圣之声

以声息妄、以显临在之理，见于诸多传承。除一般持咒外，尚有更为甚深之修法。《金刚歌》非仅为一咒语，于大圆满传承中被尊为无上之心之指引（semdzin）。

如法王南开诺布所释：

“《金刚歌》如一把钥匙，能开启我等于大圆满教法中所能学到之一切法门……我等可以三种不同方式学习《金刚歌》：通过声音，每种声音代表我等脉轮之不同功能；通过言词之义，此义不易理解，因每词皆如一象征；及通过我等之真实状态。此《金刚歌》之三重性，与我等存在之三方面（身、语、意）相关。”

每一音节皆关乎特定能量点与功能，于深层次运作，引领行者直入本觉（明体，rigpa）之境。（参见：https://melong.com/song-vajra-webcast-talk-adriano-clemente/）鉴于其甚深，此修法需具格大圆满上师之亲传与灌顶。有志者可向上师如阿阇黎马尔科姆·史密斯求取此类教导与传承。（参见：https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2024/01/finding-awakened-spiritual-teacher-and.html）

有记载言，行者于接受传承后，仅凭专心修持《金刚歌》，辅以轻松、非概念性之参究，即得顿悟“当下临在”。

一位法友之建议

以下章节基于法友沈炳聪之建议，他曾亲历类似之证悟阶段（从“我-在”到不二、无我及空性洞见），此处作为自我参究法门之实用补充。可访沈炳聪之网站：https://innerjourneylog.weebly.com/

正念禅修练习

沈炳聪对正式禅修，如专注于鼻端呼吸，提供以下指导：

• 放下“禅修者”： 勿执“我正在禅修”之念。放下有一个“人”在行持一“事”之感。

• 不费力之觉知： 仅如其所是地觉知呼吸。勿控制或刻意改变其自然节律。

• 姿势是关键： 保持脊柱与颈部挺直，无所依靠。使用坐垫将臀部垫高，略高于交叉之腿，可助成此姿，有利于心之明晰。

• 安住于当下： 此等技术之目的，在于使心与当下瞬间合一。“我-在”之体验，发生于心不攀缘过去未来之念，而完全安住于“当下”之时。任何能斩断此攀缘之法，皆可揭示其下之临在。

• 开眼练习： 此临在亦可于正式禅修之外，开眼体验。仅需直视前方一开放空间，放松焦点。开阔之视野，如一片田野，常更具助益。

音频引导与脑波技术

一种现代教学方法，涉及使用技术诱导一种有助于洞见之禅定状态。沈炳聪推荐类似于Hemi-Sync之技术，其使用双耳节拍。

其运作原理： 通过向双耳输入略有不同之声频，大脑会产生第三种“差频”，可引导其电活动进入特定脑波模式（如低α波或θ波）。

当你聆听时，尤其是在静默期间，轻轻将注意力转向内。问一简单问题，“我是谁？”或“何者在觉知？”勿在言词或概念中寻找答案。答案即是那当下、非语言之觉性本身。安住于那简单、开放之存在感。

神经生理效应： 研究表明，此可导致“大脑半球同步”，平息大脑之“默认模式网络”（DMN），此网络负责自我参照性思维与“我之故事”。当此内在叙事平息时，那原始、无言之“我-在”感便会愈加显明。

催化剂，非保证： 须视此技术为一强力催化剂，可为觉醒创造有利之生理状态，而非保证。个人意向与实践仍为根本。例如，埃克哈特·托利乃自发觉醒，但后来与门罗研究所合作，使用Hemi-Sync作为其学生之辅助工具。

第三部分：深透无我之洞见：从不二光辉到无我之“光辉即生灭”

“我-在”之证悟虽为深刻且稳固之基石，然非佛教道途之终点。此或可成为一微细之陷阱——一个被实体化之“真我”或“宇宙意识”，此见解正是道元所直斥之外道宗义。佛教之无我洞见则更进一步。它将参究之光转向觉性与诸法现象本身，揭示其空无任何恒常、独立或实有之自性。此从实体论不二观到非实体论不二观之演进，至关重要。

（无我前阶）阶段3a：初步不二洞见

此首次不二突破，由“第二类公案”所指，如长沙景岑禅师之言：

长沙和尚示众云：“尽十方世界是沙门眼……尽十方世界是自己光明。”

此公案引导行者证悟整个世界乃一心之无缝、光明之展现。此乃“心相一如”之洞见。此为一种深刻之不二体验。然，如John Tan所澄清，此初步洞见常以一种“超真实”之鲜明性为特征。世界以一种神奇、清晰之面貌显现，但未必已被视为“不实”或“空”。人或能证悟“万法唯心所现之光辉”，却仍微细执着于“心”或“光辉”为一真实、潜在之实体——此乃实体论之见解。

阶段3b：无我洞见——证悟心之非实体性与无主宰性

圆满之无我洞见，需更进一步：深透心与主宰之空寂、无我、生灭之本性，即便万法之空性尚未被完全证悟。《巴希耶经》为此提供了究竟之教导，其两首偈颂之思维修，即是此智慧之直接、实用之运用。于此需作一重要警示。此阶段虽瓦解了主宰或实体心之幻相，然若空性之洞见未扩展至所有现象（五蕴），一微细之陷阱依然存在。

若未见形色、声音、念想等本身之非实体性，此等现象或显得“超真实”。初步之“我/真我”之空，未必导致对实相如幻之体验。然，它确能令经验变得鲜明、光明、直接且不二。此初步之空，亦或令行者执着于一“客观”世界，或视其为物质，直至智慧熟成，将无我扩展为二重空性（我空与法空）。即便诸法现象不再被视作一实体心之展现（心被证悟为空无实有自性），它们仍可被视为自有其刹那之存在——被视为真实生起、真实，乃至物理上之坚固。此乃对诸法实有之微细执着，唯待智慧进一步熟成（如第七部分所论），方得完全解构。

扩展实践参究：基于《巴希耶经》之无我统一修法

协同作用： 《巴希耶经》之核心教导——“见时，唯有被见者”——涵摄了两首偈颂。

偈颂一： 有思无思者， 有闻无闻者， 有见无见者。

偈颂二： 思时，唯有诸念， 闻时，唯有诸声， 见时，唯有形色光影。（强烈推荐阅读：https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2009/03/on-anatta-emptiness-and-spontaneous.html）

如John Tan所强调，此二方面须同时证悟，方为真正之无我洞见。

修法：

1. 始于单一感知： 安住心神，专注于一持续之感官经验。譬如，观看桌上之杯。

2. 运用《巴希耶经》教导解构经验：

   • 剥离标签： 观看此杯。“杯”之一词乃习得之概念。于此标签之前，汝之直接、经验性之体验为何？乃一系列颜色、形状、阴影与反光。仅此而已。回归此原始、前概念之资料。

   • 思维修第一偈（无主宰性）： 此刻，引入第一偈：“有见无见者。” 当你观看此等颜色与形状时，寻觅那正在观看之独立“见者”。汝能觅得否？汝将仅觅得“见”之无人称过程本身。并无主宰。

   • 思维修第二偈（不二光辉）： 此刻，引入第二偈，以《巴希耶经》之彻底直捷为框架：“见时，唯有被见者。”此“唯”字乃关键。意为此处别无他物。此修法在于看穿此幻相，即视觉由两分离部分构成之幻相：1）见者与见之行为，及2）被见之物。

3. 深入勘验： 彻见“见”与“觉”并非离于颜色而自有其性之物；能知之光辉即是颜色，颜色即是能知之光辉，万法非惰性之客体，而是心之自明、自知之光辉本身。同理，“被见者”（原始之颜色与形状）非“外在”被一“内在”之“见”所感知之分离客体。视觉对象即是颜色与形状，此等颜色与形状即是见。汝从未经验过一“未被见之颜色”；彼等乃一单一、不可分之过程。整个视域非汝心之对象；它即是心之能动、能知之光辉本身。

Kyle Dixon写道：“于诸佛而言，现象场非作为一外在之既定物而显现，而是作为其自身之展现。此本质上意味着能知与所知并无不同。所知即是能知之活动本身。” 荣索姆(Rongzom)云：“诸佛菩萨为能知之主，无谬之真实为所知之境。故经云，主客不二。” 空海(Kūkai)云：“心与色虽异，其体则同。色即是心，心即是色。二者交融无碍。是故，能知即所知，所知即能知。能知即实相，实相即能知。”

“不与之同在”之解脱洞见： 《巴希耶经》之教导于解脱中达至顶峰：“然则，巴希耶，汝既不因此而在，汝亦不将在此中。汝既不在此中，汝将明了无此、无彼、亦无其中。此，唯此，乃苦之终结。”此指向小乘道之最终果位，阿罗汉果。此道上关键、不可逆转之一大步，乃是直截根源之无我洞见。当直接证悟“见者”与“见”并非离于“视觉”与“颜色”而自有其物，“颜色”即是“见”，且无有“见者”时，我见（萨迦耶见）之全部基础便崩塌了。此种对“我/真我”幻相之直接看穿，标志着入流（须陀洹）之达成（参见文章《入流之义》及Reddit帖子：[insight] [buddhism] A reconsideration of the meaning of "Stream-Entry" considering the data points of both pragmatic Dharma and traditional Buddhism），其后，当戒、定、慧之修行圆满、果实完全成熟时，佛陀所描述之苦之最终止息便确定无疑。

究竟之崩塌： 于无我中，证悟“闻时，无闻者”（拆解主宰之幻相）至关重要。但如Thusness/John Tan所指，最终之解构甚至超越了仅仅“有闻无闻者”。“闻时，唯有声。无闻。” 最终，即便动词“闻”或“见”亦为一微细之概念覆罩。最终之洞见将整个结构崩塌。甚至无“见之发生”，因“见”亦无任何自性。仅有（自见/自觉/自知之）光辉之色。仅有声。原始之现象资料，无主宰地生起，作为“无心之心”之光明。

无我作为法印之证悟： 当此修法成熟，两偈之洞见便融为一体。此非达成某种新奇、超凡之顶峰状态，而是直证实相之澄明无我，此即是随顺法印而见——事物本来如是之道。此证悟有二关键面向：

1. 无主宰之展露： 通过思维修“无见者”、“无闻者”，你直接证悟经验之展露并无一中心协调之主宰或“作者”。行为发生，思绪思维，感官感知，然无一者创作之。此即实相之无我本性，本来如是。

2. 不二光辉： 通过思维修“见时唯有被见者”、“闻时唯有被闻者”，你证悟并无“觉”、“见”或“闻”离于颜色；颜色即是能知之光辉，万法非惰性之客体，而是心之自明、自知之光辉本身。此即实相之不二本性，本来如是。

当二者合一，此洞见揭示实相为一无缝、无主宰、动态之过程。此乃一动词之世界，而非名词。无“见者”见“场景”，唯有见之发生，最终消解为仅有景色。万物皆零距离，无隙亲密，自见自闻，无有二元，作为“无心之心”之光辉知性。此洞见虽深，然非究竟佛果之最终达成，而是一种对事物真实本性关键、不可逆转之彻见。关于证悟后生命体验之阐述，可见于https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/04/why-awakening-is-so-worth-it.html

此证悟之性质（道元之见）： 此无主宰、无我之过程，非冰冷、机械或死寂之展露。此正是佛性本身之动态展现。此见解乃怀奘所属之曹洞宗之核心。如其师道元所教：

道元：“是故，草木、丛林之无常，即是佛性……无上正等正觉，因其无常，故为佛性。”

《光明藏三昧》之“光”，非永恒不变之基之光。此乃刹那生灭之灿烂、光辉之光。最终之见地，非静态安住于一不受扰动之不变觉性；而是动态、不费力、慈悲地作为此生灭、光辉之实相而活。

佛性 于道元而言，佛性或busshō (佛性)即是全部实相，“万物”（悉有）。于《正法眼藏》中，道元写道“全存在即佛性”，乃至无情之物（岩石、沙、水）亦为佛性之表达。他拒斥任何视佛性为一永恒、实体之内在自我或基之见解。道元描述佛性为“广大空寂”、“生灭变异之世界”，并写道“无常本身即佛性”。据道元言：

“是故，草木、丛林之无常，即是佛性。人与物、身与心之无常，即是佛性。国土、山河，因其为佛性，故为无常。无上正等正觉，因其无常，故为佛性。”

幸寺孝 James Kodera写道，道元对佛性理解之主要来源，乃《涅槃经》之一段，此段被广泛理解为宣说一切有情皆有佛性。然，道元对此段之解释不同，将其译为：一切（一切）是众生（众生），万物是（悉有）佛性（佛性）；如来（如来）恒常安住（常住），是无（无）而有（有），且是变易（变易）。

Kodera解释道，“传统解读中，佛性被理解为一切有情众生所固有之永恒本质，而道元则主张万物皆是佛性。于前者之解读中，佛性是一种不变之潜能，然于后者，佛性则是世间万物永恒生灭之现实。”因此，于道元而言，佛性涵摄一切，即“万物”之总体，包括草、木、土地等无情之物（于道元而言，此等亦为“心”）。- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dōgen#Buddha-nature

第四部分：粉碎道途之障

以此三阶段证悟模型为参照，怀奘关于修行陷阱之警示便愈加清晰。此等谬误正是阻碍此进程之障碍。

寻求外在之光： 此乃最常见之陷阱之一，怀奘再三警示，即将“光”概念化为一感官对象或具特定特征之现象。他言此光明“非青、黄、赤、白、黑”。继而描述“愚人”闻“光”字，即觅“萤火、灯烛、日月、金玉之光”。此种将光对象化之行为，乃根本谬误。它使行者滞留于“觅者”寻“所觅”之境，反固其所欲超越之主客二元。因寻觅外在可感知之光辉，而错失关键：真光乃无相、恒在之能知者本身。是故，看穿此陷阱乃根本之第一步，需弃绝寻求任何特殊显现，转而将觉性之能力反观自身，直证“我-在”之临在。

静止之陷阱（“境界”与“理体”之误）： 误认一静默之心境为证悟，乃常见之陷阱。此常混淆一沉闷、无概念之状态与那活泼、清明之本初觉性之光。 “我-在”非沉闷之空白；此乃明亮、光明之知性与纯粹之临在。

意识之实体化： 此乃一微细之陷阱，从根本之“我-在”证悟，至初步之不二洞见（无我前之实体论不二阶段），皆无可避免地生起。行者或感已觅得“真心”或宇宙意识，并将其执为一新而微细之身份。此即何以更深之无我参究为必需——旨在解构此最终、微细之“我”，非小我之我，乃大写之“真我”。

第五部分：火焰之喻——实相即不二、全体之光辉

怀奘所援引之大火聚譬喻，乃一强大而直接之指针，指向不二光辉作为显现之本性。

一全体、沉浸式之场域： 大火乃一包罗万象之实相。它非一可置身事外观察之对象。趋近之，即为其热与光所吞没。此明示并无一立足点可供人观察实相。无我之更深真理在于，既无一“人”可分离，亦无一“物”可分离。

显现之光辉与直接性： 此为云门之著名答案提供了完美之背景。当被问及“如何是汝之光明？”时，他未指向一神秘本源，亦未提供一哲学概念。他直指那“大火聚”，即是眼前原始、生动之现象世界：“僧堂、佛殿。厨库、山门。” 厨房即是火。山门即是火。光明非隐藏于此等显现背后；显现本身，以其直接、无可否认之临在，即是光明。“大火聚”非任何他物之象征；它直指那光辉现象场之全体性与当下性。此即那不可逃避、包罗万象之光明藏。

第六部分：证悟后之生活——“旧时人”

旧时人，即是依此整合、无我之理解而活之人。实体心与世界之分别已然消失。

无为而作： 此人“如大死人”，因那分离、奋斗之小我主宰已死。然其全然活泼、应物。其行非经决断；乃自情境之全体中自然流露。此即当无一“人”置身事外盘算或造作时，所生起之不费力之行为。

世界作为无我、光辉之过程： 于此人而言，世界不再是一外在客体被一内在主体所感知。山间之色彩、四季之更迭、呼吸之感觉——皆为那单一、动态、光辉实相之直接、当下、无我之表达。再无一“我”见一“花”。唯有那有情、无我之动词——“花开-见”。

第七部分：无我之后之道途——修证一如与二翼

无我之深奥洞见非最终之终点，而是一关键之门户。于某种意义上，它标志着寻求者与刻意“如何修”之实践之路的终结，然于另一意义上，它是一不同、更深层次修行模式之开端。若因无我而断言无事可为，乃严重之谬误。正确之理解恰恰相反：因为无固定之我，故唯有持续流动之无明与烦恼活动需要被处理。无我之洞见，成为持续、正向修行之根本动力。

修证一如： 此处，道元之核心教诲成为行者之生活现实。无我之洞见揭示，修行与证悟之间本无分离。修行非为达至一目的（未来之证悟）之手段。毋宁说，每一刻正向之修行，如只管打坐，即是觉醒与佛性之直接表达与实现。此即道元之师如净所谓之“身心脱落”——此非待达成之目标，而是坐禅之行为本身，离于欲望与妄想之障蔽。（据维基百科）：学佛道者，即学自己。学自己者，即忘自己。忘自己者，为万法所证。为万法所证者，令自己身心，及他己身心，一时脱落。有脱落迹，亦脱落，脱落、脱落。

智慧（般若）与慈悲（悲）之二翼： 无我后之道途，常被描述为培育鸟之二翼，二者须平衡方能飞翔。

智慧之熟成： 初步无我洞见后，修行之焦点从获得一证悟，转向智慧（般若）之自然运作与熟成。此非被动之过程，而是在每一刻中对真理持续、动态之验证。此熟成涉及深化对二重空性——人无我与法无我——之理解。此可通过“-a”与“+a”空性之互补维度来理解。亦可参见https://atr-passerby.com/ 与 https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2023/08/compilation-of-post-anatta-advise.html 以获 experiential 触发此类洞见之指引。

1. -a：对诸法空性之解构性洞见

此乃直见一切实相非实体、如幻之本性。此为甚深之智慧，解构一切缘起法之本性。此“离戏论”乃由彻见凡缘起者皆具此性而达成：无自性；不生性；如幻性；及离八戏论边（生/灭，常/断，来/去，一/异）。当直见万法以此深奥方式为空时，心增益概念虚构（戏论）之倾向便崩塌了。佛果不障概念；如阿阇黎马尔科姆·史密斯所注，大圆满根本续典言，佛仍用概念指称，然决不误认为其为本有或独立存在之物。此与龙树之著名偈颂（《中论》24.18）“众缘所生法，我说即是空，亦为是假名，亦是中道义”相合。当代导师John Tan在其评注中呼应同一点，强调概念性仍运作，但被认为是假名与不生（空而离于诸边）。我所遇之当代禅师亦重申类似观点。

怀奘引大乘经文，完美阐释此“-a”洞见，指出万物空寂、无相、如幻之性：

“秘密主，一切诸法无有相，所谓虚空相……大乘行者发无为乘心，诸法无自性。所以者何？如昔行者，观于诸蕴及阿赖耶，自性如幻、如焰、如影、如火轮、如乾闼婆城。”

2. +a：缘起作用之功能性洞见

“-a”洞见解构实相以显其空性，而“+a”洞见则见此空性如何作为世界活泼、表现、光辉之展露而运作。此即“全机大用”：证悟于每一刹那，整个缘起之网皆全然临在，并作为那单一显现而发挥其作用。

关键在于，如John Tan与所引文献所警示，此绝不可误认为将一“全体”实体化。 “部分与全体”之范式本身即为一概念陷阱，全机大用超越之。此非谓一部分（一朵花）被包含于一更大、静态之全体中。毋宁说，此花即是整个缘起之网于彼刻功能性地自我表达。并无一“全体”作为名词或真实存在之实体；仅有“一切”之无我、动态之运作，无任何潜在之实体或容器。

道元《现成公案》中之段落，巧妙地阐释了此“+a”之功能性洞见。他先以舟喻解释对固定自我之错觉，继而扩展之，以示空寂之舟子、舟与世界如何作为一不可分之全机大用活动而运作：

“人乘舟船而行，移目看岸，则误谓岸行。若正视舟船，则知船行。若以身心散乱，凡事随宜，分别诸法，则误谓自心自性是常。若亲密行持，归到这里，则万法无我之道理，分明。 人生恰如乘舟。汝扬帆、汝摇橹。汝虽摇橹，舟载汝行，无舟则无人能乘。然汝乘于舟中，汝之乘坐使舟成其为舟。 究此之时节。于此之时节，唯有舟之世界。天、水、岸，皆为舟之时节，与非舟之时节不同。汝乘舟时，汝之身心与环境，共为舟之不可分之活动。全地与全天，皆为舟之不可分之活动。”

综合智慧：见生动实相之如梦本性

智慧之究竟熟成，在于将此二洞见——事物之空寂如幻性（-a）与其生动、功能性之显现（+a）——作为一不可分之统一体而持守。此正是道元描述万物如梦之相对性时所指。其《山水经》中，他阐明并无一绝对、独立存在之实相：

道元：“非所有众生皆以同一方式见山水……饿鬼见水为猛火……龙鱼见水为宫殿……人见水为水……无有本来之水。”

无有客观上“真实”之水，唯有依境而缘生之“见水”经验。此生动而空寂之临在如梦。如道元进一步澄清，此梦非沉闷或昏睡之境：“整个世界，处处晶莹剔透，皆是一梦；而一梦即是万草（万物）清澈明亮……然切莫误认为此乃梦寐之境。”

如John Tan所澄清，智慧之熟成需整合此二交织之洞见：

“体味显现之‘真实性’与‘显现之物并无实性’乃两种不同之洞见……此非仅证悟‘单纯之显现’即是自身之光明显现，而是那空明如虹。美而清晰显现，然无一物‘在彼’。此二方面至关重要：1. 极‘生动’、澄明，及2. 无实性。仅体味其一，不能触发‘啊哈’之彻悟。”

此整个熟成过程，相应于大乘道之净化“所知障”。怀奘总结此点时警示，误认任何见解为究竟实相皆为陷阱：“当知无为光明藏中，无自性、无诸见。我、见异名，皆是魔现。” John Tan十余年前写道：“嗨，大卫，我见你所表达者，即我所谓之‘空’之+A与–A。(+A) 当你烹饪时，无烹饪之我，唯有烹饪之活动。手动，器用，水沸，土豆削皮……此处无简单或复杂之余地，‘厨房’超越其自身之假名，消融于烹饪的活动中，宇宙全然投入此烹饪。(–A) 三十年修行，二十三年厨房生涯，如一念而过。此念几何重？此念何所往？体味此念之性。它从未真实生起。”

大悲之生起： 此智慧之深化，乃是真实、大慈悲（摩诃迦罗那）生起之源。如如净向道元澄清，佛之坐禅异于阿罗汉者，因其立足于大悲与救度一切众生之誓愿。此慈悲非道德主义之选择或感伤之情，而是智慧于行动中自发、无碍、自然之表达。当自他之界限被真实看破为幻时，他人之福祉便不再与自身分离。此能动之慈悲，乃是干枯、贫瘠之“空病”之解药，使人能于世间活出不二之真义。

此持续之道途，即是此二翼之不可分之合一，一动态之展露，其中修行成为证悟本身不费力之表达。

结论：修行证悟之活态光明

孤云怀奘之《光明藏三昧》，非仅提供一至目的地之地图；它描绘了整个解脱之疆域。此道途引导行者经历一深刻之解构序列：从发现临在之根本基石，到见世界为心之光辉展现，终至关键之无我洞见，此洞见甚至将那基石亦消解为一无我、无主宰、光辉而无常之过程。

然，如怀奘与其师道元所明示，此究竟洞见非一贫瘠之终点，而是一重要之门户。此乃寻求者之终结，却是修证一如之真正开端，其中每一行动皆成为觉醒之活态表达。“光明藏”之全然实现，非在于一静态之安住，而在于智慧与慈悲二翼之动态飞翔。智慧熟成，于生动、澄明之实相展现中见如梦之空性，而大悲则作为不二之自发、功能性表达而生起。如是，光明非仅被证悟；它被活出。与此典籍相应，非仅为寻光，而是被邀请成为此光于世间无尽、慈悲、智慧之展露。

Also See: Samādhi of the Treasury of Luminosity

Chinese Version of this Article:《光明藏三昧》的修行者反思 

Last Updated 18/06/2025

A Practitioner's Reflection on the Kōmyōzō Zanmai (Version 0.4)

Introduction: The Four-Fold Path of Light

The Kōmyōzō Zanmai is one of the most luminous and direct transmissions in the Zen tradition. Authored by Koun Ejō, the direct Dharma successor of Eihei Dōgen, this text is not a mere philosophical argument. It is a direct pointing to the nature of reality. In this reflection, we will explore the meticulous path to which Ejō points. While the unfolding of insight is a dynamic process and not a rigid, linear sequence, this reflection will articulate the journey through a framework of four major phases that are commonly experienced:

1. The Foundational Realization of Pure Presence ("I AM"): The initial breakthrough of dis-identifying from the contents of mind and recognizing the timeless, formless, ever-present awareness that is the ground of all experience. While a crucial step, this can also lead to the subtle reification of this 'ground' as an ultimate, changeless Self.
2. The Initial Non-Dual Insight (Substantialist Nonduality / "One Mind"): The realization that all phenomena are the luminous, radiant display of a single Mind. The subject-object divide collapses and is often subsumed into an ultimate Subject or 'One Mind'. While this experience of 'All as Self' is a profound initial insight into 'No-Self', it subtly reifies a metaphysical essence, as understanding is still oriented from a view based on a paradigm of inherent existence and a subtle subject-object dichotomy. This is a deviation from the ultimate Buddhist path.
3. The Insight into Anātman (Emptiness of Self): A crucial and liberating realization that penetrates the empty, selfless nature of Mind and the agent (pudgala-nairātmya). Here, even the single, radiant Mind is seen to be empty of any inherent, independent self-nature (svabhāva). It is not a substance; rather, the knowingness is the self-knowing, dynamic, selfless, and agentless process itself, which unfolds and knows itself by itself without a knower.
4. The Maturation of Wisdom (Twofold Emptiness): The deepening of insight to perceive the empty, dream-like, and insubstantial nature of all phenomena (dharma-nairātmya). This is the realization that not only is the self empty, but all dharmas (sights, sounds, thoughts) are also without any inherent existence, arising like illusions or mirages. This is the path of purifying the subtle "obstruction of knowledge" (jñeya-āvaraṇa) and seeing reality as it truly is—vividly apparent, yet utterly empty.

In this reflection, we will explore not only Ejō's pointing but also practical methods of self-enquiry. While we do not know the exact pedagogical tools Ejō used with his students, the methods discussed here, drawn from the broader Dharma tradition, can serve as potent tools to directly realize the profound truths to which he points.

The Prefaces: A Lineage of Reverence

The historical prefaces by Mitsuun and Menpō frame the text not as a mere book, but as a sacred relic—a direct conduit to the mind of the enlightened ancestors. Their palpable joy at its rediscovery underscores its importance. For them, these words were not just teachings about the light; they were the living transmission of the light. They establish an unbroken lineage from the ancient Buddhas to Ejō, asserting that what follows is the authentic, undiluted heart of the Dharma.

Part 1: Defining the Treasury of Light - The Luminous, Sentient Heart of Reality

Ejō begins by defining his central metaphor: the Treasury of Light (光明藏, kōmyōzō). Critically, this is not a cold, empty void. This is a universe that "has a Heart." (See: The Transient Universe has a Heart https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2019/02/the-transient-universe-has-heart.html) Ejō’s light is not the lifeless photon of physics; it is a vibrant, intelligent, and numinous luminosity (靈光, líng guāng). This "radiance" is the very texture of reality itself, synonymous with what other traditions might call pristine consciousness or pure knowingness. It is the intrinsic clarity and wakefulness of Mind. When Zen masters speak of numinous awareness (靈知, líng zhī), they are pointing to this very same principle—an intelligent light that is not seen with the eyes, but is the very aware, noetic capacity behind seeing, hearing, and knowing. It is the sentient, aware quality that makes experience possible.

Realizing the Source: The 'I AM' Before All Things:

Ejō establishes that this Light is the "source of all Buddhas, the inherent nature of all beings, the total body of all things." This is a direct pointing towards the first crucial breakthrough on the path: the realization of the formless Source or Ground of Being. This is the insight into the "I AM" that was present before Abraham, the "Original Face before your parents were born." It is the direct, non-conceptual realization of the Mind that is prior to all sensory and conceptual experience—prior to seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and thinking.

The purpose of self-enquiry, as taught in Zen and other direct paths, is to guide the mind back to this very Source. Questions like, "Without thoughts, tell me what is your very mind right now?" are not seeking a conceptual answer like "void" or "hollow." Such answers are products of the thinking mind. The question is a tool to exhaust the intellect and create an opening for direct recognition. As Ramana Maharshi explained, the enquiry "Who am I?" is like the stick used to stir a funeral pyre—it destroys all other thoughts and is finally destroyed itself, revealing the doubtless Self that remains.

This realization is not necessarily achieved by entering deep meditative states where the senses shut down, though such states can intensify the absorption. As many masters have pointed out, it is a matter of realizing what is already, undeniably present. You exist, and you are aware that you exist. This is not just a vague or mental noticing of “Oh, I exist” but a unshakeable, doubtless realization of the Truth of Being. This dawning of a direct certainty of your own Beingness, this objectless Presence-Awareness, is the foundational realization. It is the simple, direct taste of your own essence before it is clothed in the five senses or labeled by the thinking mind.

The "All is Mind-Only" Insight (As a Subsequent, Pedagogic Tool):

After the foundational realization of the formless Source, the path often leads to a distinct, further insight that directly corresponds to the Yogācāra (Cittamātra) teaching that "the three realms are mind-only" (三界唯心). This is the realization that all external objects are nothing but luminous manifestations of one's own mind, collapsing the naive dualism of an inner self and an outer world into a single, unified field of Mind.

However, it is absolutely essential to understand the true intent of this teaching. As explained by Jamgön Mipham Rinpoche, the great Mādhyamika masters refute the Cittamātra system only when it is misunderstood. The error lies in reifying the mind as a truly existing substance. As Mipham says:

"self-styled proponents of the Cittamātra tenets, when speaking of mind-only, say that there are no external objects but that the mind exists substantially—like a rope that is devoid of snakeness, but not devoid of ropeness... they believe the nondual consciousness to be truly existent on the ultimate level. It is this tenet that the Mādhyamikas repudiate."

Cittamātra, correctly understood, is not a metaphysical assertion of a transcendental, ultimate Mind (like Brahman). Rather, it is an expedient pedagogic tool designed to break our attachment to the reality of external objects. The progressive path, as outlined by Asaṅga and echoed by Brunnhölzl, is as follows:

1. One first understands that all phenomena are simply the mind.
2. Subsequently, one has the experience that there is no object to be apprehended in the mind.
3. Then, one realizes that because there is no object, neither is there a subject (a mind cognizing them).
4. Immediately after, one attains the direct realization of Suchness, devoid of the duality of subject and object.

Jamgön Mipham Rinpoche clarifies this subtle point perfectly. He explains that while Mādhyamika masters refute a substantially existing mind, they do not refute the valid, conventional realization of a non-dual "self-illuminating gnosis." Mipham states:

"If, on the other hand, that consciousness is understood to be unborn from the very beginning (i.e. empty), to be directly experienced by reflexive awareness, and to be self-illuminating gnosis without subject or object, it is something to be established."

This "self-illuminating gnosis" is the profound ground of non-dual radiance—a direct, valid experience on the path. The critical point Mipham makes is that this gnosis is established conventionally as a valid realization while being understood as ultimately empty and unborn from the very beginning. The substantialist error, which Dōgen and all Buddhist masters refute, is to mistake this valid realization for a final truth by granting it its own independent essence, separate from the vivid, selfless self-knowing/self-luminous appearances cognized. The deeper insight into anātman deconstructs even this luminous ground, revealing that it has no inherent existence apart from its own manifestations.

The Realization of No-Attainment and Non-Arising (Mushotoku & Fushō):

Ejō’s emphasis on "no-attainment" (无所得, mushotoku) is the key that unlocks the entire path. This principle is supported by classic Zen dialectics, such as his reference to the Way being unobtainable by either 'a mind of existence' or a 'mind of non-existence' (mushin, 无心), pointing directly to the ungraspable, unfindable, and empty nature of Mind itself. The anātman insight reveals that there is no static, background consciousness or "Source" to be attained, only the dynamic, radiant foreground of appearances. As John Tan explains, this "background" is an illusion fabricated by a dualistic mind seeking something to hold on to. (Do read John Tan's article: Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment. You can visit John Tan's website at https://atr-passerby.com/) The realization of mushotoku is the direct seeing-through of this illusion. It is not just that Mind is already here; it is that there is no "Mind" as a separate, attainable entity apart from the transient phenomena themselves. Ejō deepens this by linking it to the lack of self-nature and the fundamental principle of non-arising (不生, fushō). He quotes, "The master of mind, at ease, awakens to the fundamental non-arising of one's own mind." Because Mind is without self-nature, it was never truly "born" or "created" in the first place. Realization, therefore, is not an act of acquisition but the cessation of all seeking, which dawns when the fundamentally unobtainable and non-arisen nature of reality is directly and irrefutably seen.

Part 2: The Foundational Realization - Discovering the Ground of "I AM"

This initial breakthrough is the shift from identifying with the contents of experience to identifying with the context in which they appear—the silent, ever-present space of awareness itself. This is the numinous awareness (靈知, líng zhī). In the Kōmyōzō Zanmai, Ejō raises several points from classic Zen masters to trigger this insight by turning attention away from the object of perception and back towards the perceiver itself.

• Linji's Pointing: "Now tell me, what is it that knows how to preach the Dharma and listen to the Dharma?"
• The Enjoyer of Life: "Now tell me: when you piss and shit right now... whose enjoyment is this, ultimately?"

It is crucial here to distinguish between a mere glimpse or recognition of this "I AM" Presence, and its full, abiding realization. Many practitioners may experience fleeting moments of recognizing the formless witness. This is a vital first step. However, Self-Realization proper is the direct, unshakeable certainty of this Beingness, a Eureka! realization beyond all doubt of what one’s Essence or Ground of Being is. The purpose of sustained self-enquiry is to deepen these initial recognitions until they mature into an abiding, unshakable realization of Reality.

Expanded Practical Enquiry:

Finding the Listener ("I AM")

These are not questions for the intellect, but tools for direct investigation designed to transform glimpses into certainty.

Method 1: Koan and Direct Pointing (The Zen Method)

1. Settle and Ask: Sit quietly in a comfortable posture. Allow your body and mind to settle. Become aware of the ambient sounds in the room.
2. Turn the Question Inward: Now, with genuine curiosity, turn your attention inward and ask Linji's question: "What is it that is hearing these sounds right now?"
3. Investigate Directly and Relentlessly: Your conceptual mind will immediately try to answer with labels. Discard them. The instruction is to find out who is the listener, or what is listening to the sound.
4. The Realization of Objectless Presence: As you search with sustained, non-conceptual diligence, a profound recognition will dawn: you cannot find the listener as an object, however, It is undeniably present—clearly, something is aware of that sound, that awareness and presence is undeniable—but it is formless, boundless, and objectless. It has no center and no edge—it is an all-pervading pure Presence. This is not a realization of nothingness, but a direct certainty of Beingness that is simply without object. This direct, non-conceptual recognition of the formless, ever-present knower is the initial insight. Rest in this open, knowing space of Being.

Method 2: Self-Inquiry and Neti-Neti (The Vedantic Method)

1. Systematic Negation: Ask, "Am I this body?" Feel the sensations of the body. You are the awareness of them. Conclude firmly: "Not this." Observe a thought. Ask, "Am I this thought?" You are the witness of it. "Not this."
2. What Remains? After you have negated everything perceivable, what is left is the irreducible, undeniable, subjective sense of presence, of knowing, of being—the "I AM." Also see: Self Enquiry, Neti Neti and the Process of Elimination https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2024/05/self-enquiry-neti-neti-and-process-of.html

A Note on Other Methods for Awakening Presence

The Song of Vajra and Sacred Sound

The principle of using sound to quiet the discursive mind and reveal presence is found in many traditions. Beyond general mantra recitation, there are more profound practices. The Song of Vajra is not merely a mantra but is revered in the Dzogchen tradition as a supreme semdzin (mind instruction).

As Chögyal Namkhai Norbu explained:

"The Song of the Vajra is like a key for all of the methods we can learn in the Dzogchen teachings... We can learn the Song of the Vajra in three different ways: through sound, where each sound represents the different functions of our chakras; through the meaning of the words, which are not easy to understand because each word is like a symbol; and through our real condition. This threefold nature of the Song of the Vajra is related to the three aspects of our existence (body, speech, and mind)."

Each syllable relates to specific energy points and functions, working on a deep level to bring the practitioner directly into the state of knowledge (rigpa). (See: https://melong.com/song-vajra-webcast-talk-adriano-clemente/) Given its profundity, this practice requires direct transmission and initiation from a qualified Dzogchen teacher. For those interested, such instructions and transmissions can be sought from teachers like Acarya Malcolm Smith (See: https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2024/01/finding-awakened-spiritual-teacher-and.html).

There are accounts of practitioners who, after receiving the transmission, awakened to Instant Presence simply through the dedicated practice of the Song of Vajra combined with a light, non-conceptual inquiry.

Recommendations from a Dharma Friend

The following sections are based on the advice of Sim Pern Chong, a Dharma friend who has traversed similar phases of realization (from "I AM" to nonduality, anātman, and the insight into emptiness), and is offered here as a practical supplement to the self-enquiry methods. You can visit Sim Pern Chong's website at https://innerjourneylog.weebly.com/

Mindful Meditation Practice

Sim Pern Chong offers the following guidance for formal meditation, such as focusing on the breath at the tip of the nose:

• Let go of the 'Meditator': Do not hold the thought that "I am meditating." Release the sense of a person performing an action.
• Effortless Awareness: Simply be aware of the breath as it is. Do not control or deliberately alter its natural rhythm.
• Posture is Key: Maintain a straight spine  (preferably unsupported by wall) and neck. Using a cushion to elevate the buttocks slightly higher than the crossed legs can facilitate this posture, which is conducive to mental clarity.
• Abiding in the Present: The goal of these techniques is to align the mind with the immediate present moment. The 'I AM' is experienced when the mind is not grasping at thoughts of the past or future, but is abiding fully in the now. Any method that cuts off this grasping can reveal the underlying presence.
• Eyes-Open Practice: This presence can also be experienced outside of formal meditation with eyes open. Simply look straight ahead into an open space and relax the focus. An expansive view, such as an open field, is often more conducive.

Audio-Entrainment and Brainwave Technology

A modern pedagogical approach involves using technology to induce a meditative state conducive to insight. Sim Pern Chong recommends technologies similar to Hemi-Sync, which use binaural beats.

• How it Works: By feeding slightly different sound frequencies to each ear, the brain generates a third 'difference-tone' that can entrain its electrical activity into specific brainwave patterns (e.g., low-alpha or theta).
• As you listen, especially during periods of silence, gently turn your focus inward. Ask the simple question, “who am I?” or "what is aware?" Don't search for an answer in words or concepts. The answer is the immediate, non-verbal knowing of awareness itself. Rest in that simple, open feeling of Being.
• Neuro-physiological Effects: Studies suggest this can lead to 'hemispheric synchronization,' quieting the brain's Default Mode Network (DMN), which is responsible for self-referential thought and the "me-story." When this inner narrative subsides, the raw, wordless sense of 'I AM' can become more apparent.
• A Catalyst, Not a Guarantee: It is important to view this technology as a powerful catalyst that can create a favorable physiological state for awakening, but not a guarantee. Personal intention and practice remain essential. Eckhart Tolle, for example, awakened spontaneously but later partnered with the Monroe Institute to use Hemi-Sync as an aid for his students.

Part 3: The Profound Insight into Anātman: From Non-Dual Radiance to Selfless Radiance-As-Transience

The realization of "I AM" is a profound and stable ground, but it is not the end of the Buddhist path. It can become a subtle trap—a reified "True Self" or Universal Consciousness, a view Dōgen directly refuted as the Senika heresy. The Buddhist insight into anātman goes deeper. It involves turning the light of enquiry onto Awareness and phenomena themselves, revealing them as empty of any permanent, independent, or substantial self-nature. This progression from a substantialist to an insubstantialist non-dual view is absolutely critical.

(A Pre-Anātman stage) Stage 3a: The Initial Non-Dual Insight

This first non-dual breakthrough is pointed to by "Class 2 Kōans" like Changsha's:

"Zen Master Changsha said to the assembly, 'The entire ten-direction world is the eye of a monk... the entire ten-direction world is one's own light.'"

This kōan directs the practitioner to the realization that the entire world is a seamless, luminous display of Mind. It is the insight that all appearances ARE the radiance of consciousness (心相一如). This is a profound experience of non-duality. However, as John Tan clarifies, this initial insight is often characterized by a "hyperreal" vividness. The world appears with a magical, stark clarity, but it may not yet be seen as "unreal" or empty. One can realize that "all is Mind's radiance" and still subtly cling to "Mind" or "Radiance" as a real, underlying substance—a substantialist view.

Stage 3b: The Anātman Insight - Realizing Insubstantiality of Mind and Agentlessness

The full insight into anātman requires a further step: penetrating the empty, selfless, and transient nature of Mind and the agent, even if the emptiness of all phenomena has not yet been fully realized. The Bahiya Sutta provides the ultimate instruction for this, and the two stanzas of contemplation are a direct, practical application of its wisdom. A critical warning is needed here. While this stage dismantles the illusion of an agent or a substantial Mind, if the insight into emptiness is not extended to all phenomena (the five aggregates), a subtle trap remains.

Without seeing the insubstantiality of forms, sounds, and thoughts themselves, these phenomena can appear 'hyperreal'. The initial emptying of self/Self does not necessarily lead to an illusion-like experience of reality. It does, however, allow experience to become vivid, luminous, direct, and non-dual. This first emptying may also lead a practitioner to become attached to an 'objective' world or to perceive it as physical, before the maturity of insight extends anātman into twofold emptiness (the emptiness of both self and phenomena). Even though phenomena are no longer seen as expressions of a substantial Mind (Mind is realised to be empty of an inherently existing substance), they can still be perceived as having their own inherent, momentary existence—as being truly arisen, real, or even physically solid. This is a subtle clinging to the reality of dharmas, which is only fully deconstructed as wisdom matures further (as discussed in Part 7).

Expanded Practical Enquiry: A Unified Practice for Anātman based on the Bahiya Sutta

• The Synergy: The Bahiya Sutta's core instruction—"In the seeing, just the seen"—encapsulates both stanzas.
• Stanza 1: There is thinking, no thinker

There is hearing, no hearer

There is seeing, no seer

• Stanza 2: In thinking, just thoughts

In hearing, just sounds

As John Tan emphasized, these two aspects must be realized together for it to be a genuine insight into Anātman.

• The Practice:
1. Begin with a Single Perception: Settle your mind and focus on one continuous sensory experience. For example, look at a cup on a table.
2. Apply the Bahiya Sutta's Instruction to Deconstruct the Experience:
• Strip Away the Label: Look at the cup. The word "cup" is a learned concept. Before that label, what is your direct, empirical experience? It is a collection of colors, shapes, shadows, and reflections. That is all. Return to this raw, pre-conceptual data.
• Contemplate the First Stanza (Agentlessness): Now, bring in the first stanza: "There is seeing, no seer." As you look at these colors and shapes, search for the independent "seer" who is doing the looking. Can you find it? You will only find the impersonal process of seeing itself. There is no agent.
• Contemplate the Second Stanza (Non-Dual Radiance): Now, bring in the second stanza, framed by the Bahiya Sutta's radical directness: "In the seeing, just the seen." The word "just" is the key. It means there is nothing else there. The practice is to see through the illusion that there are two separate parts to vision: 1) the seer, and the act of seeing and 2) the object seen.
• Investigate deeply: See that the “seeing” and "awareness" do not exist as something inherent or with its own essence apart from the colors; the knowing radiance IS the colors, the colors ARE the knowing radiance, and that all phenomena are not inert objects but are the self-luminous, self-knowing radiance of Mind itself. Likewise, the "seen" (the raw colors and shapes) is not a separate object "out there" being perceived by a "seeing" "in here." The visual objects ARE the colors and shapes, and these colors and shapes ARE the seeing. You never experience an "unseen color"; they are one single, indivisible process. The entire visual field is not an object to your mind; it IS the active, knowing radiance of Mind itself.

Kyle Dixon writes: "For the Buddhas, the phenomenal field does not show up as an external given, but as their very own display. This essentially means that knowing and known are not different. The known is the activity of knowing itself." Rongzom: "The buddhas and bodhisattvas are the subject, and the unmistaken authentic reality is the object. Thus, it is said in the sūtras that the subject and object are not two." Kūkai: "Though mind and color are different, their essence is the same. Color is mind; mind is color. They blend with one another without obstruction. Therefore, the knower is the known, and the known is the knower. The knower is reality, and reality is the knower."

• The Liberating Insight of "Not Being 'With That'": The Bahiya Sutta's instruction culminates in liberation: "Then, Bahiya, as you are not thereby, you will not be therein. As you are not therein, it will be clear to you that there is no here or there or in between. This, just this, is the end of suffering." This points to the final fruit of the Hinayana path, Arhatship. The crucial, irreversible step on this path is the direct insight into anātman. When it is directly realized that seer and seeing are not anything in and of themselves apart from vision and colors, and the colors ARE the seeing, and that there is no seer, the entire foundation for a self-view (sakkāya-diṭṭhi) collapses. This direct seeing-through of the illusion of a self/Self marks the attainment of Stream-entry (Sotāpanna: See articles Meaning of Stream-Entry and Reddit post: [insight] [buddhism] A reconsideration of the meaning of "Stream-Entry" considering the data points of both pragmatic Dharma and traditional Buddhism), after which the final cessation of suffering described by the Buddha is certain when the practice of sila, samadhi, prajna is perfected and comes to complete fruition.
• The Ultimate Collapse: It is crucial to realize in Anatman, "In hearing, no hearer" (dismantling the illusion of an agent). But as Thusness/John Tan pointed out, the final deconstruction goes even further than merely “hearing without hearer”. "In hearing, only sound. No hearing." Ultimately, even the verb "hearing" or "seeing" is a subtle conceptual overlay. The final insight collapses the entire structure. There is not even "seeing happening." as "seeing" too is without any inherent existence of its own. There is simply (self-seen/self-aware/self-knowing) radiant color. There is simply sound. The raw phenomenal datum arises agentlessly as the luminosity of Mind that is No-Mind.
• The Realization of Anātman as Dharma Seal: When this practice matures, the insights from the two stanzas merge. This is not the achievement of some new, extraordinary peak state, but the direct realization of the Pellucid No-Self, which is simply seeing in accordance with the Dharma Seal—the way things have always already been. This realization has two key facets:
1. Agentless Unfolding: Through contemplating "no seer," "no hearer," you directly realize that experience unfolds without a central coordinating agent or "doer." Actions happen, thoughts think, and senses sense, but no one is authoring them. This is the selfless nature of reality, always already so.
2. Non-Dual Radiance: Through contemplating "in seeing just the seen," "in hearing just the heard," you realize that there is no "awareness", "seeing", or "hearing" apart from the colors; the colors ARE the knowing radiance, and that all phenomena are not inert objects but are the self-luminous, self-knowing radiance of Mind itself. This is the non-dual nature of reality, always already so.
• When unified, this insight reveals reality as a seamless, agentless, and dynamic process. It is a world of verbs, not nouns. There is no "Seer" seeing a "scene," only seeing-happening, which ultimately resolves into just scenery. Everything is at zero distance, gaplessly intimate, self-seen and self-heard without duality, as the radiant knowingness of Mind that is No-Mind. This insight is profound, yet it is not the final attainment of ultimate Buddhahood but a crucial, irreversible seeing of the true nature of things. An elaboration of how life is experienced after the realization can be found in https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/04/why-awakening-is-so-worth-it.html
• The Nature of This Realization (Dōgen's View): This agentless, selfless process is not a cold, mechanical, or dead unfolding. It is the very Buddha-Nature itself in dynamic expression. This view is central to the Sōtō lineage to which Ejō was the direct successor. As Dōgen, his master, taught:

Dōgen: "Therefore, the very impermanency of grass and tree, thicket and forest is the Buddha nature... Supreme and complete enlightenment, because it is impermanent, is the Buddha nature."

The "light" of the Kōmyōzō Zanmai is not the light of a permanent, unchanging ground. It is the brilliant, radiant light of moment-to-moment arising and ceasing. The final view is not a static abiding in an unperturbed changeless Awareness; it is the dynamic, effortless, and compassionate living as this transient, radiant reality.

“Buddha-nature

For Dōgen, buddha-nature or busshō (佛性) is all of reality, "all things" (悉有).[41] In the Shōbōgenzō, Dōgen writes that "whole-being is the Buddha-nature" and that even inanimate objects (rocks, sand, water) are an expression of Buddha-nature. He rejected any view that saw buddha-nature as a permanent, substantial inner self or ground. Dōgen describes buddha-nature as "vast emptiness", "the world of becoming" and writes that "impermanence is in itself Buddha-nature".[42] According to Dōgen:

Therefore, the very impermanency of grass and tree, thicket and forest is the Buddha nature. The very impermanency of men and things, body and mind, is the Buddha nature. Nature and lands, mountains and rivers, are impermanent because they are the Buddha nature. Supreme and complete enlightenment, because it is impermanent, is the Buddha nature.[43]

Takashi James Kodera writes that the main source of Dōgen's understanding of buddha-nature is a passage from the Nirvana sutra which was widely understood as stating that all sentient beings possess buddha-nature.[41] However, Dōgen interpreted the passage differently, rendering it as follows: All are (一 切) sentient beings, (衆生) all things are (悉有) the Buddha-nature (佛性); the Tathagata (如来) abides constantly (常住), is non-existent (無) yet existent (有), and is change (變易).[41]

Kodera explains that "whereas in the conventional reading the Buddha-nature is understood as a permanent essence inherent in all sentient beings, Dōgen contends that all things are the Buddha-nature. In the former reading, the Buddha-nature is a change less potential, but in the latter, it is the eternally arising and perishing actuality of all things in the world."[41] Thus for Dōgen buddha-nature includes everything, the totality of "all things", including inanimate objects like grass, trees and land (which are also "mind" for Dōgen).[41] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dōgen#Buddha-nature “

Part 4: Shattering the Obstacles on the Path

With this three-phase model of realization in mind, Ejō’s warnings about the pitfalls of practice become even clearer. They are precisely the errors that prevent this progression.

• Seeking an External Light: One of the most common pitfalls, which Ejō warns against repeatedly, is to conceptualize "light" as a sensory object or a phenomenon with specific characteristics. He states that this luminosity "is not blue, yellow, red, white, or black." He then describes how "foolish people," upon hearing the word "light," immediately begin to search for something akin to "the glow of a firefly, like lamplight, like the luminosity of the sun, moon, gold, or jade." This act of objectifying the light is a fundamental error. It keeps the practitioner trapped as a "seeker" looking for a "sought" object, reinforcing the very subject-object duality they are trying to transcend. By looking for a radiance "out there" to be perceived, one misses the crucial point: the true light is the formless, ever-present knower itself. Therefore, seeing through this trap is the essential first step, requiring one to abandon the search for any special appearance and instead turn the faculty of awareness back upon itself to realize the "I AM" presence directly.
• The Trap of Stillness (The "State" vs. "Principle" Error): Mistaking a quiet mental state for realization is a common pitfall. This is often confusing a dull, non-conceptual state for the vibrant, clear light of pristine awareness. The "I AM" is not a dull blankness; it is bright, luminous knowingness and pure Presence.
• The Reification of Consciousness: This is a subtle trap that inevitably arises, beginning with the foundational "I AM" realization up to the initial non-dual insight (pre-anatta, substantialist nondual phase of realisation). The practitioner may feel they have found the "True Mind" or Universal Consciousness and reify it into a new, subtle identity. This is why the deeper anātman enquiry is necessary—to deconstruct this final, subtle "Self," not the egoic self but the Great Self with a capital ‘S’.

Part 5: The Flame Sermon - Reality as Non-Dual, Total Radiance

The metaphor of the "great mass of fire" (大火聚, daikaju), which Ejō invokes, is a powerful and direct pointer to the nature of non-dual radiance as appearance.

• A Total, Immersive Field: A great fire is an all-encompassing reality. It is not an object that one can stand apart from and observe. To approach it is to be enveloped by its heat and light. This illustrates that there is no standpoint from which one can observe reality. The deeper truth of anātman is that there is no "one" to be apart, nor an "it" to be apart from.
• The Radiance and Directness of Appearance: This provides the perfect context for Yunmen's famous answer. When asked, "What is this luminosity of yours?", he doesn't point to a mystical source or offer a philosophical concept. He points directly at the "great mass of fire" that is the raw, vivid, phenomenal world right in front of everyone: "The monks' hall, the Buddha hall. The kitchen, the storehouse, the temple gate." The kitchen is the fire. The temple gate is the fire. The luminosity is not hidden behind these appearances; the appearances themselves, in their direct and undeniable presence, ARE the luminosity. The "great mass of fire" is not a symbol for anything else; it is a direct pointer to the totality and immediacy of the radiant phenomenal field itself. It is the inescapable, all-encompassing Treasury of Light.

Part 6: The Life of Realization - "The Person of Old"

The "person of old" (旧时人, kyūjinin) is the one who lives from this integrated, anātman understanding. The distinction between a substantial Mind and the world has vanished.

• Effortless Functioning (无为, wúwéi): This person is "like a great dead man" because the separate, striving ego-agent is dead. Yet they are fully alive and responsive. Their actions are not decided upon; they flow spontaneously from the totality of the situation. This is the effortless action that arises when there is no "one" standing apart to calculate or contrive.
• The World as Selfless, Radiant Process: For this person, the world is no longer an external object being perceived by an internal subject. The colors on the mountains, the changing of seasons, the feeling of the breath—all are direct, immediate, and selfless expressions of the one, dynamic, radiant reality. There is no longer a "me" seeing a "flower." There is only the sentient, selfless verb of flowering-seeing.

Part 7: The Path After Anātman - Practice-Enlightenment and the Two Wings

The profound insight into anātman is not a final endpoint, but a crucial gateway. It marks the end of the seeker and the path of deliberate "how-to" practice in one sense, but it is the beginning of a different, deeper mode of practice in another. It is a grave error to conclude that because there is no-self, there is nothing to do. The correct understanding is the opposite: because there is no fixed self, there is only the ongoing flow of ignorance and afflicted activities that need to be addressed. The insight into anātman becomes the very motivation for continued, correctly-oriented practice.

Practice-Enlightenment (修証一如, shushō-ittō): This is where Dōgen's core teaching becomes the living reality of the practitioner. The insight into anātman reveals that there was never a separation between practice and enlightenment to begin with. Practice is not a means to an end (a future enlightenment). Rather, every moment of rightly-oriented practice, such as shikantaza (just sitting), IS the direct expression and actualization of awakening and Buddha-nature. This is what Dōgen's teacher Rujing meant by "dropping off body and mind"—it is not a goal to be achieved, but the very act of zazen itself, free from the coverings of desire and delusion. (As per Wikipedia): To study the Buddha Way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be actualized by myriad things. When actualized by myriad things, your body and mind as well as the bodies and minds of others drop away. No trace of enlightenment remains, and this no-trace continues endlessly.

The Two Wings of Wisdom (Prajñā) and Compassion (Karuṇā): The post-anātman path is often described as the cultivation of the two wings of a bird, which must be in balance for flight.

• The Maturation of Wisdom: The focus of practice after the initial anātman insight shifts from acquiring a realization to the natural functioning and maturation of wisdom (prajñā). This is not a passive process but an ongoing, dynamic authentication of the truth in every moment. This maturation involves deepening the understanding of twofold emptiness—the emptiness of both person (pudgala-nairātmya) and all phenomena (dharma-nairātmya). This can be understood through the complementary dimensions of "-a" and "+a" emptiness.
  
  Also see https://atr-passerby.com/ and https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2023/08/compilation-of-post-anatta-advise.html for pointers to trigger such insights experientially.

1. -a: The Deconstructive Insight into the Emptiness of Phenomena

This is the direct seeing into the insubstantial and illusory nature of all reality. It is the profound wisdom that deconstructs the nature of whatever dependently originates. This "Freedom from Elaborations" (niṣprapañca) is achieved by seeing that whatever dependently originates has such a nature: a lack of self-nature (svabhāva); a non-arisen nature (anutpāda); an illusoriness (māyā); and freedom from the eight conceptual extremes (Arising/Ceasing, Permanent/Annihilation, Coming/Going, One/Many). When it is directly seen that all phenomena are empty in this profound way, the mind's tendency to proliferate conceptual fabrications (prapañca) collapses. Buddhahood does not block conceptuality; as Ācārya Malcolm Smith notes, Dzogchen root texts state that a Buddha still employs conceptual designations yet never mistakes them for intrinsically or independently existent things. This accords with Nāgārjuna’s famous verse (MMK 24.18) that ‘whatever is dependently arisen is emptiness—that, being a dependent designation, is itself the Middle Way.’ John Tan echoes the same point in his commentaries, emphasising that conceptuality continues to function but are recognised as dependent designations and non-arisen (empty and free from extremes). Contemporary Zen masters I’ve met have reiterated similar points.

Ejō illustrates this "-a" insight perfectly by drawing on Mahayana sutras, pointing to the empty, signless, and illusory nature of all things:

"Secret Master, all dharmas are signless, meaning they are of the characteristic of empty space... the Mahāyāna practitioner gives rise to the mind of the unconditioned vehicle; dharmas are without self-nature. Why is that? Just as those practitioners of old, observing the skandhas and ālaya[-vijñāna], knew their self-nature to be like an illusion, a mirage, a reflection, a spinning wheel of fire, a gandharva's city."

2. +a: The Functional Insight of Dependent Arising in Action

While the "-a" insight deconstructs reality to reveal its empty nature, the "+a" insight sees how that very emptiness functions as the living, expressive, and radiant unfolding of the world. This is "Total Exertion": the realization that in each moment, the entire web of interdependent existence is fully present and exerting itself as that single appearance.

Critically, as John Tan and the provided texts caution, this must not be mistaken for the reification of a "Whole" as a substantial entity. The very paradigm of 'parts and wholes' is a conceptual trap that total exertion transcends. It does not mean a part (a flower) is contained within a larger, static Whole. Rather, the flower is the entire web of interdependent conditions functionally expressing itself in that moment. There is no 'Whole' as a noun or truly existing entity; there is only the selfless, dynamic functioning of the all, without any underlying substance or container.

Dōgen's passage from the Genjōkōan masterfully illustrates this "+a" functional insight. He begins by using the boat analogy to explain the mistaken perception of a fixed self, then expands it to show how the empty rower, boat, and world function as one undivided activity of total exertion:

"If one riding in a boat watches the coast, one mistakenly perceives the coast as moving. If one watches the boat [in relation to the surface of the water], then one notices that the boat is moving. Similarly, when we perceive the body and mind in a confused way and grasp all things with a discriminating mind, we mistakenly think that the self-nature of the mind is permanent. When we intimately practice and return right here, it is clear that all things have no [fixed] self.

Life is just like riding in a boat. You raise the sails and you row with the oar. Although you row, the boat gives you a ride and without the boat no one could ride. But you ride in the boat and your riding makes the boat what it is.

Investigate a moment such as this. At just such a moment, there is nothing but the world of the boat. The sky, the water, and the shore all are the boat's moment, which is not the same as a moment that is not the boat's. When you ride in a boat, your body and mind and the environs together are the undivided activity of the boat. The entire earth and the entire sky are the undivided activity of the boat."

Synthesizing Wisdom: Seeing the Dream-Like Nature of Vivid Reality

The ultimate maturation of wisdom involves holding these two insights—the empty, illusory nature of things (-a) and their vivid, functional appearance (+a)—as an inseparable unity. This is precisely what Dōgen pointed to when describing the dream-like relativity of all things. In his Mountains and Waters Sutra, he illustrates that there is no absolute, independently existing reality:

Dōgen: "Not all beings see mountains and waters in the same way... Hungry ghosts see water as raging fire... Dragons and fish see water as a palace... Human beings see water as water... There is no original water."

There is no objectively "real" water, only the contextual, dependently arisen experience of "water-seeing." This vivid yet empty presence is like a dream. As Dōgen further clarifies, this dream is not a dull or sleepy state: “The entire world, crystal-clear everywhere, is a dream; and a dream is all grasses [things] clear and bright... Never mistake this, however, for a dreamy state.”

As John Tan clarifies, the maturation of wisdom requires integrating these two intertwined insights:

"Tasting the 'realness' of what appears and what appears is nothing real are two different insights... It is not only realizing mere appearances are just one's radiance clarity but that empty clarity is like a rainbow. Beautiful and clearly appears, but nothing 'there' at all. These two aspects are very important: 1. Very 'vivid', pellucid, and 2. Nothing real. Tasting either one will not trigger the 'aha' realization."

This entire process of maturation corresponds to the Mahayana path of purifying the "obstruction of knowledge" (jñeya-āvaraṇa). Ejō concludes this point by warning that mistaking any view for a final reality is a trap: “Clearly know that within the Treasury of Luminosity of the unconditioned vehicle, there is no self-nature and no views. Self and views are different names for demonic apparitions.”

John Tan wrote over a decade ago,

”Hi David, I see that you are expressing what I called the +A and –A of emptying.

(+A)

When you cook, there is no self that cooks, only the activity of cooking. The hands moves, the utensils act, the water boils, the potatoes peels… here there is no room for simplicity or complications, the “kitchen” went beyond it’s own imputation and dissolved into the activity of cooking and the universe is fully engaged in this cooking.

(-A)

30 years of practice and 23 years of kitchen life is like a passing thought.
How heavy is this thought?
The whereabouts of this thought?
Taste the nature of this thought.
It never truly arises.”

• The Arising of Great Compassion: This deepening of wisdom is what gives rise to true, great compassion (mahākaruṇā). As Rujing clarified to Dōgen, the zazen of a Buddha is different from that of an arhat because it is grounded in great compassion and the vow to save all beings. This compassion is not a moralistic choice or a sentimental feeling, but the spontaneous, unobstructed, and natural expression of wisdom in action. When the boundary between self and other is truly seen as illusory, the well-being of another is no longer separate from one's own. This active compassion is the antidote to the pitfall of a dry, sterile "emptiness sickness," allowing one to live out the implications of non-separation in the world.

This continued path is the inseparable union of these two wings, a dynamic unfolding where practice becomes the effortless expression of enlightenment itself.

Conclusion: The Living Light of Practice-Enlightenment

Koun Ejō's Kōmyōzō Zanmai provides more than a map to a destination; it charts the entire territory of liberation. The path guides the practitioner through a profound sequence of deconstruction: from discovering the foundational ground of Presence, to seeing the world as Mind's radiant display, and finally, to the crucial insight into anātman which dissolves even that ground into a selfless, agentless, and radiantly impermanent process.

Yet, as Ejō and his master Dōgen make clear, this ultimate insight is not a sterile endpoint but a vital gateway. It is the end of the seeker, but the true beginning of practice-enlightenment (shushō-ittō), where every action becomes the living expression of awakening. The "Treasury of Light" is fully realized not in a static abiding, but in the dynamic flight of the two wings of wisdom and compassion. Wisdom matures to see the dream-like emptiness within the vivid, pellucid display of reality, while great compassion arises as the spontaneous, functional expression of non-separation. Thus, the light is not merely realized; it is lived. To engage with this text is to be invited not just to find the light, but to become its ceaseless, compassionate, and wise unfolding in the world.

The Taiwanese friend 顏宏安 (Yán Hóng’ān) said:

I wrote this article solely to ask you both to confirm whether my understanding of dependent arising is correct. I'm concerned that I might have misunderstood the real meaning of dependent origination once more. Thank you both again, by the way. I really don't want to disrupt your lives, so please take your time and respond whenever it's convenient for you.

Recognizing that phenomena lack an inherent core or essence merely deconstructs them. Yet, viewing emptiness through the lens of dependent arising helps us reconstruct our cognitive orientation. First, we dismantle the notion of intrinsic existence. Then, we utilize the understanding of dependent arising and mere conventional designation to replace the view that causes and effects exist in and of themselves. In this way, without undermining conventional truth, we can simultaneously discern dependent arising and emptiness—or, from within conventional truth, gain insight into emptiness.

The relationality of dependently arisen phenomena means that a sound relies on other sounds to manifest, and a tactile sensation relies on other tactile sensations; every phenomenon appears through relativity or relationality. This relativity does not refer to one intrinsically existent phenomenon being relative to another intrinsically existent phenomenon—such as intrinsically existent black standing in contrast to intrinsically existent white. Rather, relativity here means that “black” is merely a nominal designation imputed in dependence on white, and “white” is likewise a nominal designation imputed in dependence on black.

Let me offer another example of dependent arising: the bark of a dog relies on the dog, on vibrating air (sound waves), on my ear faculty, and on consciousness. The bark does not truly arise from these conditions; it is a mere conventional designation established in dependence on conditions that, at the level of conventional truth, function causally. Those conditions, in turn, depend on the bark: if they could not bring the bark about, they would not be conditions for the bark and thus would not be functional. Therefore, there are no inherently existent causes and no inherently existent effects.

If every phenomenon can appear only in dependence upon conditions, the characteristics that emerge at the moment of manifestation are not ultimately real characteristics. These characteristics are not inherent to the phenomena themselves; there are no absolutely real characteristics—only characteristics posited through conventional agreement. A phenomenon cannot appear apart from its conditions; no phenomenon exists independently, nor does any phenomenon exist ultimately. Dependent arising and emptiness are the nature of all experience; realizing this renders every experience dream-like and illusory.

Where I live, the temperature sometimes reaches nearly 40°C, so while I work, I often feel very hot. As I allow my insight into dependent arising and emptiness to permeate the six sense bases, I find that it fundamentally changes the way I perceive phenomena and, to some extent, lessens bodily discomfort. Since the feeling of discomfort is dependently arisen rather than intrinsically existent, it is like an illusion. The crucial point is to completely uproot the tendency to reify phenomena; only when this tendency is utterly eliminated can we fully engage with the conventional world without being troubled by events or things within it. Having recognized that phenomena lack essence, we must then explore deeply how phenomena appear. Ultimately, we will see that phenomena manifest through dependency, relationality, conditions, and conventional designations. From this perspective of dependent arising, I have also begun to contemplate the interpenetrating nature of all dharmas.

I have discovered that only by realizing the full import of dependent arising can one truly understand the indivisibility of appearance and emptiness. Formerly, I regarded emptiness as a tool for dismantling the intrinsic nature of things, which led me to see that phenomena are unborn. Now, however, emptiness enables me to recognize that the properties of things are not possessed from their own side; thus, I understand that although phenomena lack inherent existence, they nevertheless appear through dependent origination.

When I am under the sway of karmic predispositions, I take the objects I perceive to have actually arisen on the strength of conditions. When, even briefly, I am free of those karmic tendencies, I know that the scene before my eyes does not exist as a real entity; it is only posited through dependent imputation. This experience carries with it a sense of the unreality of things, and it occurs without any analytical deconstruction. These two modes of cognition reveal a striking contrast.

John Tan said:

It is not easy to understand dependent arising and emptiness, but in general, I can say a practitioner will undergo several phases of understanding (including me). I can't say which is the correct view; I can only tell him what I think.

The most common understanding is a materialistic and realist view that phenomena are dependent on a host of conditions for them to arise. They see fundamental "things" in interactions, from which new phenomena are produced and cease.

The second is the non-Gelug (Nyingma, Kagyu, and Sakya schools) view. Things don't exist; they are reified conventions mistaken as "real." They are functional and valid conventionally but are empty conventions. Purged of the conventional is the ultimate, free from all elaborations, spontaneously present, and primordially free.

Third is the Gelug view of seeing through inherent existence and allowing conventional reality to function validly without denying it. Tsongkhapa initially accepted freedom from all elaborations, but later he thought it was incomplete after his dreams (if I remember correctly). He realized the key lies in the emptiness of "inherent existence" via dependent arising. But his way is too analytical, complex, and lacks a direct taste of spontaneous presence.

For me, I see Tsongkhapa brought out the key insight, and in my opinion, he is correct to emphasize that emptiness and dependent arising must go hand in hand, but a practitioner must be able to relate such an insight to spontaneous presence. In other words, dependent arising and emptiness must be integrated and point back to spontaneous presence, and spontaneous presence should be understood from a non-substantialist, dependent, and relational perspective (in contrast to a substantialist view).

Emptiness is not just about saying, "Oh, all these phenomena are just names; they don't have real existence." This leads to the question I always ask: why "dependent" arising and dependent designations? If it is just about mistaking reified constructs and conventions, then there is no need to teach about dependencies at all, or the sevenfold reasonings. Just the emptiness of the conventional would suffice.

The key does, in fact, point to the intimate relationship between dependent arising and emptiness. Much like the video I sent you about Carlo Rovelli's understanding, which is the key insight, though he is somewhat of a realist. Send him the video and see whether he understands.

It is really not easy to open up our minds and see emptiness via dependent arising because our entire framework is, by default, inherent and dualistic; unpacking it requires a lot of time.

If you hear the sound of a bell being struck, we ask: does it come from the stick, the bell, air vibration, the ear, the eardrum, or even the mind? It does not reside in any single one, nor all of them. Why? Why must it be asked this way?

If we ask, "Is coldness an inherent characteristic of ice, and heat an inherent property of fire?" what sort of problems is our mind facing? Can we understand our own problem of analysis and what we are missing?

Don't be too quick to answer anything. Understand what a phenomenon is; don't just say it is a "convention" and that, other than the convention, it does not exist. See how we have been mistaken, see what experience is like, and see what mistakes we have made in relation to our experience. For example, when we say "fire," what do we mean? When we say "heat," what do we mean? What do all these phenomena involve?

From these questions, we then look at cause and effect issues, object and property issues, past and future issues, and subject and object issues, etc., much like how Nagarjuna asked in his MMK (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā).

We must understand it is not just about freedom from all elaborations. We taste the natural state, primordially free and luminous. Although it is important to have this direct authentication, it has to be realized from a non-substantialist view resting on dependencies and emptiness.