Great Doubt
Something I always say when you are doing self enquiry or any other contemplations and meditations, this is crucial:


"We think it's all about like, again, because of our modern mind, we almost think everything can be solved through some sort of technology. Right, oh, I just need to do it different, there must be some secret trick to inquiry, that's our technological mind-set. Sometimes that's a mindset that is very useful to us. But, we don't want to let that dominate our spirituality. Because as I witnessed, the intensity of the living inquiry that's more important than all the techniques. 

 

When somebody Just Has To Know. Even if that's kind of driving them half crazy for a while. And, that attitude is as important or more important than all the ways we work with that attitude, you know, the spiritual practices, the meditations and various inquiries and various different things, sort of practices. If we engage in the practices because they are practices, you know like, ok I just do these because this is what I'm told to do, and hopefully it will have some good effect. That's different than being engaged, when you're actually being deeply interested in what you're inquiring about, and what you're actually meditating upon. It's that quality of real, actual interest, something even more than interest. It is a kind of compulsion, I know I was saying earlier don't get taken in by compulsion, but there is/can be a kind of compulsion. And that's as valuable as anything else going on in you, actually."

- Adyashanti

This is related to Zen's great doubt, great faith and great perseverance. Especially the aspect of Great Doubt.

1 comments | | edit post
Ven Hui Lu's Early Videos (慧律法师 )
Was going through some old Ven Hui Lu videos. Seems like he realised anatta, maha total exertion and emptiness way back, like even in 1990 and 1991 and probably even before. His view and realisation is clearly free from extremes of eternalism and nihilism, subject and object, etc, and penetrates into the emptiness of all phenomena... and most importantly the authentication of one's nature/the nature of all appearances as empty clarity.

所以禅不是坐。所谓坐，不动不名为坐，心无所著名为真坐。那个才是我们真正的坐，是禅。禅是动态里面的解脱，不是静态里面的休息。它很活跃的，有无量的妙用，在瞬息万变里面它悟到空性，而当下就可以运用六根、六尘、六识转为自性的东西，那个才是本来的面目。
所以今天听这个禅，诸位要稍微用心一点。禅是法界的实相，生命的共相，不二法门的体现，也是法的现量。

佛法有比量跟现量。所谓比量，是理性的认知，可以用logic来理解。而现量，禅宗里面讲的当下，那是绝虑忘言、冷暖自知的。一个参禅悟道的人，我悟道我怎么跟你讲，你始终隔着一层雾。你会想：“哦，师父讲，如如、不动、不变、随缘”，都是用意识里面的那个观念在推测，不变随缘，随缘不变的观念是什么，永远落入能、所对立的思想。

...

所以說禪是我們理性跟智性的登峰造極，這不是一般世間人聰明就可以解決的，禪是人文精神的昇華，是人們向前、向上努力創建的最高成就，人們必須達到這個境界才能陶然於存在又超越。既存在，就是面臨這個現實的社會，當下又去超越它，既自在又灑脫，既離執著的生活境界而安祥於每一個時空，也就是說，懷著宇宙的心過活你現象界的正常人生。

這一句話太棒了，我再講一遍——懷著宇宙的心過活現象界的正常人生。體會出來嗎？懷著宇宙，宇宙就是無量無邊，無止境的虛空，那麼大的胸量過活我們現在現象界的生活，現象就是你的起居作習，你必須吃飯，你必須穿衣對不對？你必須與人際交關係，這一些平常的生活。就是懷著如同虛空的胸量，過活你每一個生命的每一個點。

1991:

再来就是“照”,所谓照就是妙用的意思,实相的本体,还不能只是用寂静、透视、安详、绝对来解释,它还存在一种照的能力。这个“照”字就是无作的能力,不假任何的造作,具足有观照的能力,具足有无量的神通妙用的能力,就是寂照。这个所依,为文字所依,性体的所证,为观照所证,意思就是你修观照的功夫,到最后还是要证悟到你清净绝对的本性,为观照所证底下就写四个字,叫做:不生不灭。这不生不灭就不好讲了,我在这个地方再形容一下,你们务必要好好的听,所谓不生不灭,我们说:不是生,对灭讲的,也不是说灭,而对生讲的,意思就是说,生灭当下就是虚妄不实,一切都因为你的错觉而有生灭,但是你又不能放弃这个知觉的错觉,而悟到这个不生不灭的道理,我们讲真空之体,涅槃的不生不灭,不是你想像当中那一种不变的东西,或者是说你把它观想说,不生不灭就是一种永恒,就像虚空一样的,或者是说你把它观想说:这不生不灭大概是什么都不管,放下、放弃,那也不对!如果你把不生不灭当作说,在生灭里面有一种不生不灭,也不对!这很麻烦,这种东西,除非你开悟,否则讲来讲去,你都会落入两边的,你都会落入两边的东西。我现在举例子,如果你听得懂,你马上就彻悟,如果你听不懂的话,也可以给你一种启发。我现在注意讲,那你注意听什么叫做不生不灭,从几个角度来讲,譬如说这是一个钻石,放在这个地方,钻石有没有叫你贪?没有!它本来如如不动的放在这个地方,一切都是因为你起心动念,你强以分别它,所以说这是好的、这是贵重的、这是不好的,因此你起心动念,当你还没有来投胎这个世间的时候,你对它并不认识,当你来投胎出生以后,你有强烈对它有执著的观念,这就变成强烈的生灭,有我们这个生灭的心意识形态,作为生命的题材,就变成我们的色身,由前世的业力,转变到今生今世的色身,这个色身就变成共业所感的意识,生灭的执著,所以我们现在也只能做到心里的如如不动,你清清楚楚的看这个世间,你不思善,不思恶,就这个时候,就是你本来的面目,然后当你厘清楚了不生不灭自性的时候,你当下就了断无始劫以来的业力,来世你就不会来投胎,为什么?因为你没有业力,业力一观照的话,不生不灭的清净本性就显现出来,那你就断了一切的惑,断了一切的惑,你就没有做生命题材的东西。所以这个不生不灭,从我们本性来讲的话,我们有一个心,保持一个清净心、冷静的心,不受分别妄想颠倒左右,那个就是本来面目,这是一个角度来解释不生不灭。

　　如果用这一张卫生纸,来解释不生不灭来讲的话,这卫生纸本身是一种缘起性空的,缘起是借重一切众生的意识形态,所构成的共业生灭的意识观念,意识观念,所以你看它有生有灭,你看它有生有灭,这是众生的共业所感,所产生的一种幻觉,以众生的位来讲,这明明有生灭,但是就本性来讲,你撕掉这个卫生纸,我问你:你本性有没有撕成两半?有没有?没有!意思就是生灭当体就是自性本空,让它生灭,你并不必要为这个生灭法起一个动念,你起一个动念就完全错误,生者自生,灭者自灭,不干你本性的事情,当下即如如,一切都如。这样讲如果还不清楚,我们再举一个例子,当我们没有来投胎的时候,我们完全没有作用,父精母血那么一点点的东西,你现在有所作用的这一念,统统是颠倒、妄想,等到几十年以后,你就要回归到你本来的面目,就是一切空,所以是故空中无色法,一切色法都是妄相;无受想行识,一切的感受、思想、一切的行为造作,意识形态,第八意识的识,受想行识,亦复如是,统统当体即空。所以实相就是真空之体,就是所谓的不生不灭,而不生不灭不是离开生灭法,离开生灭法里面,找不到一个不生不灭的自性,悟到了这个不生不灭的自性,他就不是一个普通人了,一切的世间再大的委屈、再大的伤害,他也没有感觉:我在忍耐,因为它本来就是没有的东西,你要叫他讲什么忍耐呢?讲无生法忍,即马上悟到无生法忍,连“忍耐”这二个字都不谈,本来就没有,你忍耐什么?一切法了不可得,自性圆明寂静,寂而常照,照而常寂,清清楚楚,六根门头惊天动地!我们叫做眼“见”眼睛“看”,而佛不是,他是眼“观”,他不是用看的,他用观的,你有见就是执著,佛用观的,所以“观”世音菩萨,就是观察一切众生的痛苦,观就是透视他,你眼见,见就是执。所以真空之体,就是我们所观照的所证的不生不灭。所以我们三十条清规里面就说:务使顿明心地,意思就是学佛第一个最重要的课程,你要先了解本性是什么东西,这是十方三世一切佛成道的根本,不悟到本性,你的修行会变成情绪化的变化,今天有赚钱,情绪就好一点;今天不好了,心情绪就不好了,他不能如如不动的东西,不悟到实相就不能如如不动的东西,没有办法!好!再来我们看到观照的般若,观照的般若就是实相之用,实相是法身,是理体;是圆明寂照;是不生不灭,那么这个观照是怎么样呢?是要让我们实行的,观照底下要写两个字:实行。

。。。

法尔如是,本来如此,本来就是了不可得;本来就是不可思不可议,本来就是不可讨论的东西,没有所谓的因缘果,佛性是超因、超缘、超果的,超越因缘果,是不昧因缘果,意思就是生灭法当下就是自性本空,就是不生不灭法,随缘当体即空,所以我们讲不变,因为不变的自性,所以我们能够随缘,方便讲是这样,毕竟讲是法尔如是,本来如此,叫做如如不动的东西。

。。。

深般若就是法空般若，法空般若包括色、受、想、行、识，我们说人空般若是色、受、想、行、识，知道它是这五蕴所构成的，而法空般若，包括色受想行识，包括地水火风，当体就是自性的东西，性色真空，真空性色。简单讲，人空般若，只悟到所有宇宙构成的元素，而法空般若是这些元素就是你本性的东西。

再讲一遍，人空般若，只悟到说，你的色自是地水火风构成的，而法空般若是当下地水火风就是你本性的东西。如果你造业就幻化成坚固，四大就成对立的东西，如果你悟到，这四大地水火风，就是你本性的东西，不离开你的色，不离开你的本性，色心无碍，所以具足神通。

。。。。

　　无性真空，缘生幻色，无性因为缘生是无性的，所以它当体就是真空，真空就是绝对空，不容许一丝一毫的，一尘了不可得，空到底，叫做真空，空不到底叫做偏空。只有我空，空不到底。空到底是深般若。无性真空就是空到底。缘生幻色，一切都是缘起法，是变化出来的色法，是缘生幻色。因缘所变幻出来种种的色法。

　　第三行，体相不离，空色不二。

　　体是空，相是缘生，体跟相就是不离，不离就是空跟色是不二，体是空，相是有，所以空跟有是不二，体是无为法，相是有为法，有为不离无为，无为当下就是有为，有为当下就是无为，所以说空色不二。幻外无真，所以叫做真空，真外无幻，所以叫做幻色，幻就是烦恼法，烦恼法以外没有真，就是菩提，如果离开烦恼以外，就没有所谓的菩提，这叫做真正的菩提。真外无幻，如果菩提性以外，离开这个菩提，也没有所谓幻化的烦恼法，所以叫做幻色，所以真正的烦恼是来自于菩提。就是说，幻色为什么来自于菩提?因为不悟菩提，当然就是幻色。意思是说，幻外无真，当下就是真空，那么真外就没有所谓的幻化，所以当下就是幻色。波就是水，水当然就是波，湿性相同故。

　　万法真如，真如有随缘德，意思就是我们清清净净的本性，随着一切生灭却不会变化，方便讲，不变随缘，真如是不变，我们现在不是真如，我们现在是分别、是执著，所以随缘就变，随缘就变，所以，我常常告诉同学们说，我常常喜欢用这样一个比喻说，当你们到火车站去的时候，上上下下的人那么多，举世尽从忙里过，谁人肯向死前休? 全世界的人都在忙，匆匆忙忙里面的度过，哪一个人世间肯在死亡里面下一番功夫?这个[死]字下功夫，平常放不下，要想在临命终放得下，那是自欺欺人，若要临终放得下，除非平日看得破，看破才能放下。所以说真如有随缘德，因此我希望保持一个无所著的心;因此我希望保持一个无所著的心;保持一个安详的心，好好地在空性里面下一番功夫，谁能给你烦恼?谁能给你痛苦?还都是自己。所以真如就是万法，因为妙法当体就是如，真如有不变性，所以万法就是真如。一切皆如，天台宗里面讲的一切皆如。无一法不如，为什么?每一法都有是空性的，当然就如，不如是你的家的事，是因为你幻化出来的妄想执著，所产生的强烈的对立观念，而在幻化的无明里面产生烦恼、欲望，因此滚动你的追求，所以你一直拉不回来，无法破这个无明的壳。所以，世界上谁是幸运的人?不是轿车、也不是中爱国奖券，不是中大家乐，也不是股票上扬，世界上是学佛的最幸福，但是哪一个人是至高无上最大的幸运呢?就是悟道的人，彻悟本性的人，那就是世界上最富有的人。为什么，全世界的财产给他他不增加;全世界的财产给他，他不减少，你看!不增不减，财产有多少呢?连零都不必写，你说这个数目有多大?你说1000，已经四个零了，一百亿、一千亿，那个数目字大到连零都不能写，再怎么添个零，还是不能描写那个大，在圣不增，在凡不减。所以我常常说，哪一门学问，有办法像佛陀这样子讲出来的学问，那真要跟他老人家嗑头。

　　底下，看左边。
　　真空幻有。中间那一行，中道一义照了分别。
　　等一下最后看。

　　真空幻有，那是对前面讲的万法真如。万法当体就是真如，可是真空就是真如，真如当下就是幻有。真空能成幻有，空性里面会幻化成这个色法，色法就是幻有，也幻化成受、想、行、识，意思是我们现在的感受，现在的思想，现在的行为造作，八识田中都是错误的，都是无量亿劫来造业，所存错误躯壳的思想，所以我为什么说，大企业家到最后要找宗教家?大科学家到最后也要找宗教家?为什么?你用尽了一切的受、想、行、识，去思维、去研究，你就是不能透出本性的东西出来，一样迷茫!一样迷茫!任凭你大企业家、大哲学家、大演绎家、大心理学家、大宗教家，除了佛教以外，不管你有多厉害。为什么?因为你离不开受、想、行、识，是不是?你今天你祷告上帝，你不是用受、想、行、识吗?你对上帝的感受，你想要到天堂去，你[行]就是祷告，这不是一样?而佛不一样，受想行一切皆空，当下就是如如，佛就是我，我就是佛，一体两面的东西，佛是我心中里面的，我是佛心中的一个众生，心、佛、众生三无差别，你说我在祈祷也对，你说我没有祈祷也对。

。。。。

法尔如是,就是讲如如,法尔如是,一切法本来就是自性空,没有所谓的对立;没有所谓的能所;没有所谓的分别;没有所谓的妄想;也没有所谓的颠倒、分别,统统没有,一切法皆如。为什么?一切法毕竟空。

...

无智得，智就是能观之知，得就是所证的理，以能观之知，认为有所得的证这个理，那么所谓无知呢，就是能观的知，空就是除掉，也没有所谓的能观的知，也没有所空的境界，因为境界本来就空，不需要你加一个空的思想，我修行，我不要除掉这个境界，圣人除心不除境，是不是?凡夫是除境不除心，你圣人的话，大智慧的人，于内觉观，于一念顷，即入圣位，一刹那之间，你观照你的内在，你就马上进入圣人的位次里面。于一念顷，内觉观，内，观照你的内在，无所得，一切什么都放得下来。所以，圣人修心不除境，你只要好好地在心地上下功夫，那境界就不重要了，怎么来你怎么去面临它，当然凡夫会受到境界的影响，我们还是没有办法，还是好好地调配一下。所以能观知也空，所空的境也空，意思是不能认为这个境界是被你所空，这样也是一种执著，意思就是说境界当体即空，不需要你去空掉它，不须要多事就对了。无智方为真智。无智就是你不动用到所谓的世智辩聪，没有动用到所谓的智慧，那就是真正大智慧的人，因为本性具足，自然流露。无得方是真得。对!因为你没有所谓的得，因为有得必有失。

etc
Labels: 0 comments | | edit post
Three Translations of Kalaka Sutta



A teaching by Buddha on how a Buddha perceives the world -- as it is, in its suchness, without the delusion of a perceiver or perceived object. Commentary says five hundred monks attained liberation upon listening to this discourse.

Ven Nanamoli’s translation:

"Whatever in this world with its deities ... is to be seen, heard, sensed, and cognized, or reached, sought out and encompassed by the mind, that I know, that I have directly known. Now while that is recognized by a Perfect One, he nevertheless does not use it as a basis (for conceits). Were I to say of all that, that I know it not, that would be falsely spoken by me; and were I to say of it that I know it and know it not, that would be the same; and were I to say of it that I neither know it nor know it not, that would be incorrect on my part. So, having seen what can be seen, a Perfect One conceives no conceit3 of what is seen, he conceives no conceit of what is unseen, he conceives no conceit of what could be seen, he conceives no conceit of any seer. Having heard what can be heard ... Having sensed what can be sensed ... Having cognized what can be cognized ... he conceives no conceit of any cognizer. A Perfect One thus equipoised towards things seen, heard, sensed, or cognized, remains thus equipoised; and there is no other equipoise that is beyond or superior to that equipoise, I say."
A. 4:24

Another translation, by Ven Thanissaro:

At Kāḷaka’s Park
Kāḷaka Sutta (AN 4:24)
NAVIGATIONSuttas/AN/4:24
On one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Sāketa in Kāḷaka’s park. There he addressed the monks: “Monks!”
“Yes, lord,” the monks responded to him.
The Blessed One said: “Monks, whatever in this world with its devas, Māras & Brahmās, in this generation with its contemplatives & brahmans, its rulers & commonfolk, is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That do I know. Whatever in this world with its devas, Māras & Brahmās, in this generation with its contemplatives & brahmans, its rulers & commonfolk, is seen, heard, sensed, cognized, attained, sought after, pondered by the intellect: That I directly know. That has been realized by the Tathāgata, but in the Tathāgata1 it has not been established.
“If I were to say, ‘I don’t know whatever in this world… is seen, heard, sensed, cognized… pondered by the intellect,’ that would be a falsehood in me. If I were to say, ‘I both know and don’t know whatever in this world… is seen, heard, sensed, cognized… pondered by the intellect,’ that would be just the same. If I were to say, ‘I neither know nor don’t know whatever in this world… is seen, heard, sensed, cognized… pondered by the intellect,’ that would be a fault in me.
“Thus, monks, the Tathāgata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn’t suppose an (object as) seen. He doesn’t suppose an unseen. He doesn’t suppose an (object) to-be-seen. He doesn’t suppose a seer.
“When hearing.…
“When sensing.…
“When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn’t suppose an (object as) cognized. He doesn’t suppose an uncognized. He doesn’t suppose an (object) to-be-cognized. He doesn’t suppose a cognizer.
Thus, monks, the Tathāgata—being the same with regard to all phenomena that can be seen, heard, sensed, & cognized—is ‘Such.’2 And I tell you: There is no other ‘Such’ higher or more sublime.
“Whatever is seen or heard or sensed
and fastened onto as true by others,
One who is Such—among the self-fettered—
would not further claim to be true or even false.
“Having seen well in advance that arrow
where generations are fastened & hung
—‘I know, I see, that’s just how it is!’—
there’s nothing of the Tathāgata fastened.”
Note
1. Reading tathāgate with the Thai edition.
2. Such (tādin): An adjective applied to the mind of one who has attained the goal. It indicates that the mind “is what it is”—indescribable but not subject to change or alteration.

Another translation, by Ven Nyanananda, Magic of Mind:

KALAKARAMA SUTTA
Translated by Bhikkhu Nanananda

http://www.nibbanam.com/MagicOfMind.pdf

At one time the. Exalted One was staying at Saketa in Kalaka's monastery. There the Exalted One
addressed the monks, saying: `Monks'. `Revered Sir,' replied those monks in assent. The Exalted One
said:

"Monks, whatsoever in the world with its gods, Maras and Brahmas among the progeny
consisting of recluses and brahmins, gods and men, - whatsoever is seen, heard, sensed,(1) cognized,
attained, sought after and pondered over by the mind - all that do I know. Monks, whatsoever in the
world ......... of gods and men, - whatsoever is seen, ........ by the mind, - that have I fully understood;
all that is known to the Tathagata (2) but the Tathagata has not taken his stand upon it.(3)
If I were to say `Monks, whatsoever in the world..... of ..... gods and men -whatsoever is seen .....
by the mind - all that, I do not know' – it would be a falsehood in me’.(4) If I were to say: ‘I both
know and know not’ – that too would be a falsehood in me. If I were to say: ‘I neither know it nor
am ignorant of it’ – it would be a fault in me (5). Thus, monks, a Tathdgata does not conceive (6) of a visible thing as apart from sight(1a); he does not conceive of ‘an unseen’ (2a) he does not conceive of a
'thing-worth-seeing', (3a) he does not conceive about a seer. (4a)
He does not conceive of an audible thing as apart from hearing; he does not conceive of 'an
unheard', he does not conceive of a 'thing-worth-hearing'; he does not conceive about a hearer. He
does not conceive of a thing to be sensed as apart from sensation; he does not conceive of an
unsensed; he does not conceive of a `thing-worth-sensing'; he does not conceive about one who
senses. He does not conceive of a cognizable thing as apart from cognition; he does not conceive
of an uncognized; he does not conceive of a `thing-worth-cognitiog'; he does not conceive about
one who cognizes.

Thus, monks, the Tathagata, being such-like in regard to all phenomena seen, heard, sensed,
and cognized, is `Such'. (5a) Moreover, than he who is `Such', there is none other greater or more
excellent, I declare.(6a)
`Whatever is seen, heard, sensed or clung to,
is esteemed as truth by other folk,
Midst those who are entrenched in their own views, (7a)
being 'Such' I hold none as true or false.

This barb I beheld, well in advance,(1b)
'whereon mankind are hooked, impaled.
`I know, I see 'tis. verily so' - (2b)
no such clinging for the Tathagatas
Notes:

(1) 'muta': Sensations arising from taste, touch and smell.

(2) According to the Commentary (AA) 'the plane of omniscience' sabbannutabhumi has been made known by the three phrases: 'all that do I
know', 'that have I fully understood' and 'all that is known to the Tathagata.'

(3) Comm: 'The Tathagata does not take his stand upon, or approach by way of craving or
views. The Exalted One sees a form with the eye, but in him there is no desire and lust (for it); he
is well released in mind. The Exalted One hears a sound with the ear . . . . . smells an odour with
the nose ..... tastes a flavour with the tongue .... touches a tangible with the body ...... cognizes an
idea with the mind, but in him there is no desire-and-lust; he is well released in mind (S. IV 164) -
hence was it said that the Tathagata takes no stand upon it. It should be understood that by this
phrase the plane of the Influx-free khinasavabhumi is made known.'

(4)This rendering is in accordance with the reading 'na janami found in the Chattha Sangiti edition.
Enquiries have revealed that it conforms to the Mandalay Slabs. The P.T.S. edition, as well as some
Sinhala script editions, gives ' janami omitting the negative particle, but this is unlikely, as it
contradicts the Buddha's own statement in the preceding para. The initial declaration 'all that do I
know' tamaham jdndmi') is reinforced by what follows: `that have I fully understood' (tamahain ab
bhannasim `all that is known to the Tathagata' (tam tathigaiassa viditam") A significant reservation has
also been added : `but the Tathagata has not taken his stand upon it' (tam tathagato na upatthdsi'). Hence
the reading janami would lead to a contradiction: 'If I were to say .......... all that do I know ........ it
would be a falsehood in me'. The variant reading 'na janami on the other hand, suggests itself as the
second alternative of the tetralemma, followed as it is by the third and fourth alternatives.
The relevance of these three alternatives to the context is reflected in that reservation referred to
above.

(5)The phrases: 'it would be a falsehood in me', 'that too would be a falsehood in me,' 'it would be a
fault in me', are said to indicate the 'plane of truth' (saccabhumi).

(6)'Na mannati : Mann ana marks that stage in sense perception when one egotistically imagines or
fancies a perceived 'thing' to be out there in its own right. It is
a fissure in the perceptual situation which results in a subject - object. dichotomy perpetuating the
conceit and 'mine'.

(1a) The Comm: (AA. SHB. 519) takes the words datttha datthabbam in the text to mean: `having seen, should be
known' and explains the following words dittham na mannati' as a separate phrase meaning that the Tathagata does not
entertain any cravings, conceits or views, thinking: I am seeing that which has been seen by the people'. It applies the
same mode of explanation throughout. It is perhaps more plausible to explain dattha or dittha (vl. in Burmese MSS;
see A. II 25 fn. 3)' as an ablative form of the past participle giving the sense: `as apart from from sight'; and,
`datthabbam dittham' taken together, would mean: 'a visible thing'. So also, the other three corresponding terms: sutta
muta and vinnatam The Buddha Jayanthi Tipitaka Series (No. 19, Sinhalese script) recognizes this reading but follows
the Comm. in rendering them as absolutives.The Sangiti Pitaka edition (Burmese script) as well as the P.T.S. edition,
has the absolutive form: 'sutva' 'mutvd' and vinnatva -which is probably a re-correction following the commentarial
explanation,

(2a) 'adittham na mannati': According to the Comm. this means that the Tathagata does not fancy (due to craving etc.)
He is seeing something which has not been seen by the people. But the expression seems to imply just the opposite.
It brings out the idea behind the statement: "If I were to say: 'Monks, whatsoever in the world ... of ... gods and men
whatsoever is seen ... by the mind -all that I do not know,' it would be a falsehood in me."

(3a) `datthabbam' na mannati': Here the full gerundival sense of the verb is evident. The Tathagata does not consider
any of those 'sights' that people cherish, as 'worth-whileseeing' - in the highest sense. He does not see anything
substantial in them.

(4a) 'dattharam na mannati': The Tathagata does not entertain any conceit of being the 'agent' behind seeing. When
'sights' lose their object-status they do not reflect a 'seer' on the subjective side. These four modes of conceiving
represent the plane of voidness' sunnatabhumi

(5a) tadi 'Such' o r 'Such-like.'
An epithet of the emancipated one signifying his supreme detachment. This
declaration indicates the. plane of the 'Such One' (tadibhumi).

(6a) 'tesu ...... sayasamvutesu The Comm. says: 'among those who are of (divers) views and who had
grasped them having themselves recollected and cherished those view-points'. The expression rather conveys the
sense of self -opinionatedness due to philosophical in-breeding, and may be rendered by: 'among those who are
restricted samvuta to their own views'.

(7a) [Seems to be missing in the PDF...]

(1c)etanca sallam paligacca disva `Having seen this barb well in advance'- explained by the Comm as the
barb of views which the Buddha saw in advance, at the foot of the Bodhi tree.

(2c)`janami passami tatheva etam': A phrase often cited in the Pali Canon as representing the stamp of
dogmatism characteristic of speculative views. It is on a par with the dogmatic assertion: `idameva
saccam moghamannam' (`This alone is true, all else is false') which accompanies the formulation of the
ten 'Unexplained Points' (avyakatavatthuni).

Ven. Nyanananda wrote this in the Introduction:
“The commentary (A.A.) finds for it a setting in the aftermath of the conversion of the millionaire Kàlaka, who is supposed to have constructed the monastery. According to it, the discourse was a sequel to the widespread acclamation of the Buddha's marvellous qualities. Be that as it may, the discourse, as a matter of fact, does contain some marvellous aspects of the Tathàgata's transcendental wisdom. That the impact of the discourse was actually astounding is symbolically expressed by the commentarial assertion that the earth trembled at five points in this sermon, at the conclusion of which five hundred monks attained Arahantship.”

Labels: , , , 0 comments | | edit post
Super long discussion/debate on Advaita vs Buddhism

Super long discussion on Advaita vs Buddhism

https://www.facebook.com/groups/AwakeningToReality/permalink/4591226277585433/

0 comments | | edit post
The Trap of Non-Conceptuality

 Also see: The Disease of Non-Conceptuality

For me, the idea that conceptuality is a trap is actually a trap itself that depletes the potential of spiritual practice. It entails throwing away a very valid dimension of experience - after all, thinking is part of reality as well. And since it is thinking that creates the illusion of duality, it is at the level of thought that illusions must be dismantled. At the level of "reality" there is nothing to be done.

"Observe and see" [which is the only instruction you say you follow,] is also doing something. A spiritual path without instructions is not a path. And from the moment there are instructions, all of them may be valid, depending on the practitioner.

The neo-Advaita has this characteristic of tending to be nihilistic in relation to the path and means of liberation. "There is no one, there is nothing that needs to be done." This reveals a profound misunderstanding concerning the nature of experience: Everything happens in experience, even without an agent to perform it - the spiritual path is no exception.

The simplicity of "not thinking" is a comfortable nest that prevents us from asking important and bothersome questions. There is "presence" in the act of observation, but that presence has to be investigated in order to make its nature known. Otherwise, we are substituting a belief - in the self - for another - in some immutable and eternal presence. Both ego and presence are obvious and undeniable for those who establish them.

Buddhism also dissolves all concepts, but only when they have already done their job of deconstructing all concepts. "Silencing" conceptuality too soon is to throw away the ladder (of analytical thinking) before we've used it to go beyond the wall (of conceptual ignorance).
 

 – Andre A. Pais

Labels: , 3 comments | | edit post
The Essential Dogen


 

Labels: , 0 comments | | edit post
Nafis Rahman's Experience of Total Exertion

Nafis Rahman recently realised anatta. (See: Nafis Rahman's Breakthrough to Anatta)

 

Soon he is having experiences of total exertion. Progressing well. I recommended him a soto zen book this time, which he finds resonating: Being-Time by Shinshu Roberts



    Nafis Rahman

    7thSphonsoreddrf 
    I can see non-arising in terms of thoughts now due to Mahamudra, it’s impossible to find or grasp a thought just like trying to grab an individual raindrop when it’s raining outside. However, I’m not sure how to see non-arising in terms of phenomena or everyday objects like the chair in my room. Just endlessly deconstructing doesn’t seem to be working. Any advice is greatly appreciated. Similar to this article: https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../emptinesschar...?
    From personal experience (trying to understand what it means):
    I was practicing the time exercises in Seeing that frees and then had an experience around 1 month ago where time no longer existed or atleast I couldn’t see it anymore. It’s like multiple timelines all merged together, past life, past, present, and future and that everything was happening in the same time simultaneously. Not sure if this is an insight or delusion, but this feeling of “multi-dimensional” time has been pretty stable for the last 2 weeks and feels very liberating.
    While practicing the walking meditations, I completely deconstructed any sense of body or road to the point where there was only clashing sensations without any body producing the sensations in the first place. The experience is still underdeveloped; I want to go further but suffer an energy imbalance whenever I go too far. However in the process of deconstructing my body, I had a weird experience where instead of walking on top of the world, it feels like I’m walking as the world itself. Like oneness, but not advaita oneness. It feels like multiple strands of oneness are intertwined together or oneness without a “source”, and I’m beyond time and space or atleast shattered the barriers they used to impose. Also feels like I’m one with the universe while the universe is creating itself, or in a state of universal oneness, where everything is more infinitely dimensional. It happens now whenever I walk, at least for the last two weeks, and walking feels very profound. Also in general as well. Difficult to describe in words, couldn’t find anything similar in the ebook or any Buddhist book.
    11 Comments

    Comments


    1

    • Reply
    • 5h
    • Edited

    Being-Time by Shinshu Roberts
    AWAKENINGTOREALITY.BLOGSPOT.COM
    Being-Time by Shinshu Roberts
    Being-Time by Shinshu Roberts
    1

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 5h

    • Nafis Rahman
    Author
    Soh, when I listen to music, it feels like I’m one with the universe while one with the music, while at the same time, the music is one with the universe and vice-versa. Like some kind of inter-dimensional global universal oneness state beyond space-time and other boundaries. Is this "total exertion" or a delusion?

    • Reply
    • 5h
    • Edited

    • Soh Wei Yu
    badge icon
    Boundaries is the delusion.
    When the bond that creates artificial boundaries and separation is sufficiently released through penetrating dependent origination and emptiness, total exertion becomes a natural state.

    • Reply
    • 5h

    • Nafis Rahman
    Author
    Soh Wei Yu
     This description of being-time is very resonating btw! Thought I was hallucinating, but it seems to be an actual insight.
    1

    • Reply
    • 5h

    • Nafis Rahman
    Author
    I'll read this being-time book first. I was afraid of going deeper into this "oneness" state, so I tried to avoid it, but I'll go even deeper now. If I have any follow-up questions, I'll be sure to ask.
    1

    • Reply
    • 5h

    • Nafis Rahman
    Author
    Btw, it feels very magical, even anatta feels like nothing in comparison. I don't feel human anymore....i wish everyone in the world could feel total exertion right now.
    1

      • Reply
      • 5h



    • Primordially Unborn
    AWAKENINGTOREALITY.BLOGSPOT.COM
    Primordially Unborn
    Primordially Unborn
    1

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 5h

    Nafis Rahman
    Author
    Lol, just checked the guide. I was so busy trying to realize A- that I experienced A+ instead...

    • Reply
    • 5h

    • Nafis Rahman
    Author
    Soh
    , is Stage 6 basically being in a state of universal oneness/total exertion without boundaries where everything is illusionary and non-arising?

    • Reply
    • 5h

    • Soh Wei Yu
    badge icon
    From AtR guide: "+A Emptiness is Total Exertion and Maha. -A Emptiness is the empty, non-arising and illusory nature of presencing appearance. Phase 6 is about replacing the whole view with Dependent Origination and Emptiness through direct realization, and +A and -A are the experiences from it. However, it is possible to have glimpses of +A and -A and still lack definitive realization. For example, one may have taste of dream-like nature from all appearances arising as one’s radiance, but it is still a glimpse or experience than the realization of emptiness, which overturns the view of seeing phenomena in terms of existing by way of its own essence, arising, abiding and ceasing.
    In phase 6, it is no longer about clarity (clarity is already implicit and forgotten rather than singled out or over-emphasized). It is possible to realize and experience +A without going into -A, or realize and experience -A without going into +A, and it is also possible to experience both and later come to an integration of +A and -A through an experiential realization. Total exertion too has various depths, at a mature phase the total exertion penetrates not only the ten directions but the three times (past, present and future).
    "

  • Reply
  • 1m
Labels: , , 0 comments | | edit post