Shared by Yin Ling


https://www.lionsroar.com/this-very-mind-empty-and-luminous/

This Very Mind, Empty and Luminous
BY DZOGCHEN PONLOP RINPOCHE| MAY 1, 2008

Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
We can see awakening in the world around us, but we can also turn the telescope inward and look directly at our mind. In the Vajrayana school of Buddhism, we discover that this very mind is the mind of the Buddha, and what we’ve been searching for so long has been right in front of us all the time.

Photo by Arne Schog

Only when we have a genuine, abiding desire to free ourselves from suffering and all its causes does our spiritual journey begin. That original desire is very potent and very real. It is the basis upon which we enter the path that will lead us to our goal. Yet from the point of view of the Vajrayana, or tantric, school of Buddhism, there is no place to go on that path, no end of the road where we will one day satisfy our thirst for liberty. Why? Because the very thing that we are looking for—freedom, wakefulness, enlightenment—is right here with us all the time.

There is a story in the tantric meditative tradition of Mahamudra about a farmer who owns a buffalo. Not realizing that the buffalo is in its stable, the farmer goes off in search of it, thinking the animal has strayed from home. Starting on his search, he sees many different buffalo footprints outside his yard. Buffalo footprints are everywhere! The farmer then thinks, “Which way did my buffalo go?” He decides to follow one set of tracks and they lead him up into the high Himalayas, but he doesn’t find his buffalo there. Then he follows another set of footprints that lead way down to the ocean. However, when he reaches the ocean, he still doesn’t find his buffalo. It is not in the mountains or at the beach. Why? Because the buffalo is back home in the stable in his yard.

In the same way, we search for enlightenment outside ourselves. We search for freedom high up in the mountains of the Himalayas, at peaceful beaches, and in wonderful monasteries, where there are footprints everywhere. In the end, we may find traces of the great Tibetan yogi Milarepa’s enlightenment in the caves where he meditated, or hints of the Indian pandit Naropa’s enlightenment at the bank of the River Ganges. We may find signs of the enlightenment of many individual masters in different towns, cities, or monasteries. What we will not find, however, is the one thing we are looking for: our own enlightened nature. We may find someone else’s enlightenment, but it is not the same as finding our own.

No matter how much you may admire the realizations of the buddhas, bodhisattvas, and yogis of previous times, finding your own freedom inside yourself, your own enlightenment, your own wakefulness, is much different. When you have your own realization, it is like finding your own buffalo. Your buffalo recognizes you and you recognize your buffalo. The moment we meet our own buffalo is a very emotional and joyful moment.

In order to find our own enlightenment, we have to start right here where we are. We have to search inwardly rather than outwardly. From the Vajrayana point of view, the state of freedom, or enlightenment, is within our mind and has been from beginningless time. Like our buffalo comfortably resting in its stable, it has never left us, although we have developed the idea that it has left home. We think it is now somewhere outside, and we have to find it. With so many footprints leading in different directions, so many possibilities for where it could be, we may start to hallucinate. We might think it was stolen by a neighbor and is gone forever. We start to have all kinds of misconceptions and mistaken beliefs.

To summarize this, we can say: There is nothing called “buddha” or “buddhahood” that exists outside of one’s mind. We can say the same for samsara: It does not exist apart from one’s mind. That is why Milarepa sang:

Nirvana is nothing imported from somewhere else
Samsara is nothing deported to somewhere else
I’ve discovered for sure the mind is the buddha…

From the point of view of the Mahamudra and Dzogchen traditions of Vajrayana Buddhism, there is nothing within samsara—our state of dualistic confusion—to be relinquished, discarded, or left behind. And nirvana—the state of enlightenment—is not a place we go to from here. It is not a place found outside of where we are right now. If we wanted to renounce samsara, leave it behind physically, where would we go? To the International Space Station, the moon, or Mars? We would still be within samsara. So how can we leave samsara behind?

What we are trying to leave behind is duality, the mind of confusion, our perpetual state of suffering. Physically, yes, you can leave your hometown and go to some secluded place such as a mountain cave or a monastery. Your body will be somewhere else, but will your mind be in a different state? How your mind functions when you are in a mountain cave, a monastery, or at home is what determines whether you are in the state of samsara or nirvana.

According to the Vajrayana teachings, enlightenment is right here within our mind’s nature. That nature is what we are trying to discover and connect with. It is what we are trying to recognize, realize, and perfect. The entire journey on this path is trying to discover the nature of our mind as it is.

How can we recognize this nature of mind? The experience of awakening, of complete enlightenment, can be arrived at through many different methods. The methods of the three vehicles of Buddhism—the Hinayana, the Mahayana, and the Vajrayana—all lead to the same goal. The difference is not in the result achieved but in the time it takes to reach that result and in the methods used. Only the Vajrayana is said to possess the methods that can lead to the realization of the true nature of mind in one lifetime. In the Vajrayana liturgy, this way of achieving the state of wakefulness is called attaining “complete enlightenment in one instant.” When we take the instructions to heart, when we employ the methods properly, stage by stage, and when we focus on the path and do not drift on to any sidetracks, this awakening can take place in any minute. One moment we can be a totally confused, ordinary sentient being, and the next we can be a completely enlightened being. This outrageous but very realistic notion is known as sudden enlightenment, or “wild awakening.”

The Path of Devotion
The tantric path is sometimes known as the path of devotion. With the eye of devotion—toward our guru, our lineage, and our instructions—we can see the true nature of mind. What role does the guru play in our journey to find enlightenment? On the one hand, it is said that enlightenment is right there within you, and on the other hand, it is said that there is no enlightenment without devotion to the guru or lineage of enlightened masters. It sounds a little contradictory.

Why is devotion so important? How does it work? Devotion is a path, a skillful means through which you develop basic trust—trust in your own enlightened heart, trust that your mind is totally, utterly pure and has been right from the beginning. Trusting in that truth is what devotion is. You come to see the truth of your own enlightened heart through the guru and the lineage. Your relationship with your guru is personal, yet it is also beyond the personal. It is so close that you feel like you can control it, yet at the same time you realize it is beyond your control. It is similar to your ordinary relationships—with your spouse, friends, and family—yet it goes beyond them. If you can work with the relationship with the guru, it opens a door to working with every relationship in the world. It becomes a great vehicle for transforming your negative emotions and suffering.

The point here is that the guru simply plays the role of a mirror. When you look in a mirror, your own face is reflected back to you. The mirror does not reflect itself. It shows you whether your face is clean or dirty or if you need a haircut. The mirror is unbiased; it reflects positive and negative qualities equally clearly.

In the same way, when you look at the guru with devotion, you see both your positive and negative qualities. You see your failures, your struggles, your disturbing emotions arising, just as you see dirt on your face in an ordinary mirror. At the same time, you see beyond the surface impurities—which can simply be washed away. You see your true face, your actual reality, which is the perfectly pure nature of your mind.

What happens, though, if you are sitting in front of the mirror in a room that is dark? The mirror still possesses the potential to reflect, and you still possess all those qualities to be reflected. But if there is no light, you could sit there in the dark for ages and nothing would happen. You would never see anything. Therefore, it is not enough just to sit in front of the mirror. You need to turn on the light. In this case, the light is the light of devotion. When this light is on, and when the mirror of the guru is in front of you, you can see the reflection of your own nature of mind very clearly and precisely—yet in a nonconceptual way. That is the role of the guru and the lineage in our enlightenment. The guru is not the creator of your enlightenment. He or she is simply a condition for attaining your own enlightenment.

The mirror does not turn on the light for you. It does not bring you into the room and tell you to sit in front of it. It doesn’t say, “Look here!” The mirror is just a mirror occupying a certain space. You have to enter the room, turn on the light, walk toward the mirror, and look into it. So who is doing the job here? It’s us. We are activating this relationship.

Some traditions say that you have to be passive to receive divine grace or to have mystical experiences, but here it is the opposite. To invoke the blessing of the lineage, you have to be active. Everything is done by you; the guru is simply a condition, a mirror, that you have chosen to keep in your room. That mirror did not mysteriously land there, you know. You selected it and placed it there through your own efforts.

The lineage instructions are also not the creator of your enlightenment. They are simply another condition. They are powerful and profound tools, which you must employ. Instructions are like directions for getting where you want to go. The instructions, the directions, play an important role, but not more important than your own role in initiating and taking the journey. You play the more active role on the path. You act on the directions. They give you all the information you need—which way is the safest, which is a little bit risky, and which is the fastest but most hazardous. However, if you take no action, then eons from now you will still be wandering around without reaching your destination.

We have full power to decide the course of our personal journey. This is the Buddhist view. Even from the perspective of Mahamudra and Dzogchen, you are the center of the path and your enlightenment depends on your own effort. It does not depend on anyone or anything outside of you.

Using Mind to Discover the True Nature of Mind
The basic nature of our mind, and the basic nature of all phenomena that we perceive as being external to our mind, is luminous emptiness. In other words, all forms, sounds, and so on, as well as all thoughts and emotions, are appearing yet empty, empty yet appearing. There are various approaches to discovering this nature of mind that is with us all the time.

From the Mahamudra-Dzogchen point of view, we first look directly at the appearances of thoughts and emotions and ascertain their emptiness. Their nature of appearance-emptiness is easy to see, because such mental forms are fleeting and insubstantial. Once this is seen with confidence, then we look at external appearances. Having penetrated the nature of thoughts and emotions, seeing the true nature of the outer world—the external objects that appear to our sense consciousnesses—is much easier. We see that they are equally empty.

In the Hinayana and Mahayana approach, the order is reversed. We first focus our analysis outside and ask: How is form empty? How is sound empty? How is smell empty? and so on. Through reasoning, we discover that the true nature of all these forms is emptiness. Once we find that the nature of all perceived objects is empty, we conclude that the nature of the perceiving subject is naturally empty as well. Subject and object exist only in dependence upon one another.

From the Vajrayana point of view, it is easier and more straightforward to analyze your mind first. Your own mind is very clear to you—you know your thoughts and emotions very well and you experience them directly. They are not hidden from you. They are not something you have to discover through analysis. Your emotions and thoughts are right there in front of you, so when you look at them, your examination is experiential.

When we analyze a form or sound, or turn our mind to the metaphysics of seeds and sprouts, it is conceptual, an academic exercise. We come to “know,” but our knowing is not direct knowledge. Therefore, from the Mahamudra-Dzogchen point of view, that approach is regarded as indirect analysis. It is not a direct experience. For this reason, the Hinayana and Mahayana stages of the path are called the “causal vehicles.” They cause us to have, or lead us to, the direct experience later. The methods of the causal vehicles will bring us to that experience at some point, but not right now.

Mahamudra-Dzogchen uses the approach of direct analysis, which is known as the “analytical meditation of the simple meditator,” or kusulu. This does not mean simple in the sense of being intellectually deficient, but simple in the sense of being intellectually uncomplicated. The Hinayana and Mahayana approach to analysis is known, on the other hand, as the “analytical meditation of the scholar,” or pandita, which is theoretical or scholarly analysis.

While the scholarly approach is necessary, if used alone, it does not bring us direct experience right away. The analysis of the simple meditator, in which we begin by looking at our immediate experiences of mind, is very clear and brings direct experience to everyone. Using this method, when you look closely at a thought or emotion, you can see its nature of inseparable luminosity and emptiness. You do not find any solid or substantially existent thing. The reason you do not find anything solid is that, on the absolute level of reality, nothing exists in that manner. Therefore, when we look for it, we do not find it.

True emptiness, however, is not just “not finding” something. If, for example, you searched your home to see if there was an elephant somewhere in your house, and you did not find any elephant, would it mean that elephants do not exist? No. There are elephants living in zoos and in the wild.

Simply searching for something and not finding it is not the kind of analysis that leads us to the genuine experience of emptiness. To arrive at the true experience of emptiness, we must base our analysis on looking at something we do see, that appears to us to exist, whether that is an external or internal object. When we analyze that object, let’s say an elephant, we look at it in order to discover its true nature, its fundamental reality. We look for that nature by thoroughly analyzing the existence of the elephant and each of its parts—ears, trunk, eyes, great body, legs, and tail—until we exhaust our looking. At that point, we come to the conclusion that we cannot find the true existence of this solidly appearing being. Nevertheless, we can see, smell, hear, and touch this empty-yet-appearing elephant. That is the method of analyzing that leads to the experience of emptiness.

In the same way, when we look directly at a thought or emotion, it is hard to find anything solid. We may be experiencing strong anger, but when we look at those intense feelings of aggression, we can’t really pinpoint them. We can’t really identify what they are. We may not even be certain why we are angry. After a while, our anger dissolves. One moment, we can barely speak or breathe because we are so enraged. In the next moment, the fury is gone, leaving nothing behind. Even if we wanted to maintain our anger so we can continue tormenting our rival or foe, it is too late. Our empty-appearing anger is gone. In truth, it was never there in the first place.

Ordinary Mind
The actual point of all our efforts on the spiritual path, whether we are studying, meditating, or engaged in socially oriented activities, is to return to the genuine state of our mind, the inherent state of wakefulness, which is very simple and completely ordinary. This is the goal of all three vehicles, or yanas, of the Buddhist path.

The Hinayana school calls this state egolessness, selflessness, or emptiness. The Mahayana school calls it the great emptiness, or shunyata, freedom from all elaborations, all conceptuality. It is also known as the emptiness endowed with the essence of compassion, or as bodhichitta, the union of emptiness with the qualities of compassion and loving-kindness. Further, it is known as buddhanature or tathagatagarbha, the essence of all the buddhas, the “thus gone ones.” In the Vajrayana, it is called the vajra nature, or sometimes the vajra mind or heart, which refers to the indestructible quality of awareness. In Mahamudra, it is called ordinary mind, or thamal gyi shepa, and in Dzogchen, it is called bare awareness, or rigpa. The meanings of all these terms point to the most fundamental reality of our mind and phenomena, which is luminous emptiness. All is empty yet appears, appears yet is empty.

While many different methods are taught to reach this ordinary state of mind, the methods themselves can appear to be anything but ordinary. In some sense they are extraordinary, rather than ordinary; abnormal, rather than normal; and complex, rather than simple. The Hinayana path of personal liberation, for example, is known for its many detailed instructions for practice and postmeditation conduct. For monastics, there are the customs of shaving one’s head and putting on beautiful robes, which are rituals prescribed in order to lead the practitioner to the realization of selflessness.

In the same way, followers of the Mahayana system for realizing the great emptiness undertake the paramita practices, the six transcendent actions of generosity, discipline, patience, diligence (or exertion), concentration (or meditation), and discriminating knowledge (or prajna). In the Vajrayana, there are many complex practices, such as the visualization of deities and mandalas, which lead to the realization of the vajra mind.

So with all these practices, are we getting any closer to the natural state? Since it is natural for our hair to grow, the Hinayana practice of continually shaving our heads seems unnatural. It is also not the normal custom of society. In the Mahayana, there are many highly conceptual and occasionally “counterintuitive” methods for purifying negative states of mind, such as breathing in the impurities of the minds of others in tonglen practice. In the Vajrayana, in contrast to the Hinayana practice of shaving off our hair, we visualize not only extra hair, but also we imagine extra heads, extra arms, and extra legs.

Why do we do this, when such methods seem to take us further and further away from an ordinary, normal, and simple state of mind? There must be a reasonable explanation! The answer is simply that in order to reach the level of ordinary mind, to truly arrive at the basic state of simplicity, we have to cut through our habitual, dualistic pattern of labeling some things as normal and others as abnormal. If we have too much fixation on normalcy, on day-to-day convention, we have to cut through that to experience our mind as it truly is.

Therefore, in order to break through and transcend such solid, dualistic notions, we create “abnormal” situations to practice with on the path. In the deity yoga practice of the Vajrayana, you might be visualizing yourself in the form of an enlightened being with multiple heads, arms, and legs when you suddenly realize that you have no idea who you are—which is a wonderful experience. We usually have too many preconceived notions about who we are and about the world “out there.” We are so caught up in the process of labeling that we never see beyond the surface of those labels to the nonconceptual reality that is their basis.

When we work with profound and skillful methods like those of the Vajrayana path, they cut through the very root of our dualistic concepts. With these methods we rely on concept to go beyond concept, on thought to go beyond thought. A good example of this is a bird taking off from the ground. When the bird wants to fly, it has to either run a little bit or push down against the ground so that it can leap up. It has to rely on the earth to go beyond the earth—to leap into the space of sky. In the same way, we have to rely in the beginning on dualistic concepts in order to leap into the space of non-conceptuality or non-duality.

This is what all these teachings do for us. Through words and concepts, they point out the nature of phenomena, which is emptiness beyond words and concepts. If, when Buddha realized the true nature of mind and the world, he had never spoken about it, never communicated his wisdom to us through words, we would have no way to enter this profound path.

When it comes to the Mahamudra-Dzogchen tradition, however, the masters of these traditions introduce ordinary mind, or bare awareness, with utmost simplicity. Such a master might say to a student, “Look, a flower. Do you see it?” The student will say, “Yes, I see the flower.” The master will say, “Do you see the beautiful sunshine outside today?” The student will say, “Yes, I see the beautiful sunshine today.” Then the master will say, “That’s it.”

Normally we feel that our perceptions, thoughts, and emotions are too ordinary to mean much. Just seeing a flower or the sunshine on a beautiful day is too simple to be profound. As meditatorswe want whatever is profound, and so we look past our mundane experiences. We are looking for something that is extraordinary. Something big. We want the maha, or “great,” religious experience that we know is out there somewhere in a mysterious place called “the sacred world.” However, whenever we try to look outside, that is the point at which we depart from our own enlightened nature. We start walking away from the natural state of our mind—the basic state of Mahamudra and Dzogchen. “Looking outside” does not mean that we literally leave our home and go look in our neighbor’s backyard, or that we pack our bags and catch a bus for the next town, or shave our head and enter a monastery. Looking outside means looking outside whatever experience you are having right now.

Think about it from the perspective of your own experience. What do you do when an aggressive thought suddenly arises? You might try to stop that thought, deflect its energy by justifying it, or even correct it—change it from a “negative” thought into a “positive” one. We do all these things because we feel that that thought, just as it is, is not good enough to meditate on. We will meditate on the next pure thought we have; or even better, we will rest in the essence of the gap between our thoughts, the very next one we recognize. In this way, we continually miss the moment that we are awake now. The problem is that we will never catch up to the wakefulness of the next moment, the wakefulness we will have in the future. If aggression is here now, then that aggression is at heart, in its very nature, vividly awake, empty, and luminous. As our simple-minded master of Mahamudra and Dzogchen might say, “Do you see it? That is it.”

You may prefer to meditate on the Buddha rather than on your emotions. The Buddha is always perfectly relaxed and at ease; therefore, you feel very comfortable. When you are meditating on your emotions, you may start to feel slightly anxious and uncomfortable. You may think that your mental health is at risk, or that the environment of your mind is not in a sacred, uplifted, or spiritual state. It is helpful to a certain point, at the beginning of our training, to meditate on pure objects like images of the Buddha, deities, or great masters. If, however, you get addicted to relying on such objects, there can be negative consequences. When you feel you cannot invoke the experience of sacredness or connect with your basic, enlightened mind through your everyday experiences of perceptions, thoughts, and emotions, you are developing a serious problem. Your emotions are as familiar, as commonplace, as sunshine and flowers, and that is great news for realizing ordinary mind. You have so many opportunities. Appreciate and take advantage of them.

What we have been looking for—the true nature of our mind—has been with us all the time. It is with us now, in this very moment. The teachings say that if we can penetrate the essence of our present thought—whatever it may be—if we can look at it directly and rest within its nature, we can realize the wisdom of buddha: ordinary mind, naked awareness, luminous emptiness, the ultimate truth. The future will always be out of reach. You will never meet up with the buddha of the future. The present buddha is always within reach. Do you see this buddha? Where are you looking?

Adapted with permission from the “Wild Awakening” lecture series presented in Vancouver and Toronto, Canada, in February, 2004.
 
I was contemplating on dependent arising and emptiness this morning, follow on a conversation with a friend ytd.. my inquiry goes -
**
When you see a flower,
ask, is the flower in my mind? is the flower out there apart from my mind? Is the flower in between mind and out there? where? where is the flower?🤨
When you hear a sound, ask,
Is the sound in my ear? in my mind? in my brain? in the radio? in the air? separated from my mind? is it independently floating? WHERE?🤨
when you touch a table, ask,
Is this touch, in my finger? in the table? in the between space? in my brain? in my mind? separated from mind? WHERE?🤨
Keep finding. See, Hear, Feel. The mind need to look to be satisfied. If not it keeps being ignorant.
*
Then you will see, There was never a SELF , self in buddhism means independent thing - singular, independent, one, substantial THING sitting outside or inside or any where in this 'world'.
For the sound to appear, the ear, radio, air, waves, mind, knowing, etc etc etc need to come together and there's a sound. lack of one and there is no sound.
-this is dependent arising.
But then where is it? what really is this that you are hearing? so vivid of an orchestra! but where?! 🤨
-That is Emptiness.
**
It's all just illusory. There, yet not there. Appear yet empty.
That is , the nature of reality.
You never needed to fear. You only wrongly thought it's all real.
You, John Tan, Tyler Jones and 16 others
8 Comments
3 Shares
Like
Comment
Share

8 Comments

Most relevant


  • Yasmin El-Hakim
    wonderful investigation
    ❤️🙏

    Like
    Reply1d
    Rosina Marie
    That last part though ❤🙏

    Like
    Reply1d
    John Tan
    Yin Ling Luminous appearance that does not exist (med pa gsal snang)
    See whether u can find articles about "med pa gsal snang", I can't, maybe u can. 🤦
    Like
    Reply1d
    Active
    Yin Ling
    John Tan haha I will try , if cannot I will ask Soh Wei Yu the ever resourceful one 🤣

    Like
    Reply1d
    Active
    Yin Ling
    John Tan https://www.lionsroar.com/this-very-mind-empty-and-luminous/
    this one ok?
    This Very Mind, Empty and Luminous
    LIONSROAR.COM
    This Very Mind, Empty and Luminous
    This Very Mind, Empty and Luminous

    Like
    Reply1d
    John Tan
    Yin Ling yes very good except that it din use that phrase. But the explanation about analytical vs experiential (true) emptiness is good.👍.

    Like
    Reply1dEdited
    Active
    Yin Ling
    John Tan that phrase i cannot find, too many tibetan words appear, cant read lol

    Like
    Reply1d
    Chae Cramb
    Try "par" instead of "pa". No articles, but you'll find a bunch of posts by Malcolm and Kyle if you google "med par gsal snang".

    2
    Like
    Reply10h
    Active

 

 
Tsongkhapa short verse on his profound enlightenment to the truth.
***
In a short verse work composed as a letter to his first attendant, Tsakho Ngawang Drakpa, Tsongkhapa would
articulate this crucial point about the equation between emptiness and dependent origination:
When, with respect to all phenomena of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa,
You see that cause and effect never transgress their laws,
And when you have dismantled the focus of objectification,
At that point, you have entered the path that pleases the buddhas.
As long as the two understandings—
Of appearance, the regulated world of dependent origination,
And of emptiness, the absence of all standpoints—remain separate,
You have not realized the intent of the Sage.
However, at some point when, without alteration and at once,
The instant you see that dependent origination is undeceiving
If the entire object of grasping at certitude is dismantled,
At that point your analysis of the view is complete.
Furthermore, when appearance dispels the extreme of existence, And when emptiness dispels the extreme of nonexistence,
And you understand how emptiness arises as cause and effect, You will never be swayed by views grasping at extremes.
You, John Tan, William Lim and 11 others
18 Comments
1 Share
Like
Comment
Share

18 Comments

Most relevant


  • John Tan
    This is perhaps the most important point for me post anatta insight. So profound and deep.🙏

    4
    Like
    Reply2d
    Hide 14 Replies
    Active
    Yin Ling
    John Tan yes and you emphasise this repetitively so thank you.
    Like
    Reply2d
    John Tan
    Yin Ling yes. Tsongkhapa is familiar with emptiness free from all elaborations in traditional tibetan schools and in fact in his earlier days, he accepted this view. But many in the traditional schools see the ultimate that lacks sameness or difference, i.e, non-arisen of "sameness" of "difference" as literally "no" sameness or difference thinking that "oh ultimately they r just conceptual notions". Instead, Tsongkhapa pointed out that this "unestablished" free from elaborations means dependent arising, dependent on conditons, "this is, that is".

    4
    Like
    Reply2dEdited
    Active
    Yin Ling
    John Tan not sure I get it. soteriologically does it mean one don’t say all is ultimate just conceptual notions, and immobilise and say all is ultimately conceptual,
    but understand because of DO there is strong sense of causality and functionality?
    Like
    Reply2d
    John Tan
    Yin Ling sort of but not easy to articulate for it involves a very very fine and profound insight that Tsongkhapa is trying point out that is difficult to put into words.
    Just like when we say non-dual, there is a difference between a non-dual experience that subsumes object into an ultimate pure subject and the non-dual experience that recognize the non-arisen of "subject" and "object", aka, freedom from extremes in buddhism.
    Similarly, seeing through conceptual elaborations, is also not just a blanket elimination of conceptual symbols nor should we jump into hasty and careless conclusion too quickly asif "nothing happens" ultimately or a rejection of cause and effect. It may appear to be so and easy to jump into that conclusion.
    It involves several finer insights that include how conceptual notions and it's linguistic structure confuse the mind and how we can validly understand the nature of what appears after we understand these issues of conceptual elaborations for although they r conceptual elaborations, they r not elaborating "nonsense" as appearances inadvertently appear.
    And when u see that, u see the ultimate free from elaborations does not contradict "dependent arising", "arising" through cause and conditions. But not within my capacity to put into words. 🤦🤪
    Like
    Reply2dEdited
    Active
    Yin Ling
    John Tan omg very deep haha. Ok I will let it simmer and see if I slowly get it.
    It is interesting also because Tsongkhapa did not really agree to his teacher Rendawa 4 levels of insights which what u said the above is Rendawa’s third level, according to what thupten Jinpa was teaching. I keep reading but i just don’t get it thoroughly so will leave it aside for now🥹

    2
    Like
    Reply2d
    John Tan
    Yin Ling yeah just leave it aside first. Gelug do get overly analytical sometimes and as I m more into direct experiential insights so Iike u, I just let it simmers deep. Btw, which book r u referring to when u mentioned abt Thupten Jinpa's teaching?
    Like
    Reply2dEdited
    Active
    Yin Ling
    John Tan https://wisdomexperience.org/courses/tsongkhapas-madhyamaka/
    I am attending this course. It’s in week 2 and Jinpa wrote his own notes I think. Can join any time
    Tsongkhapa's Madhyamaka - The Wisdom Experience
    WISDOMEXPERIENCE.ORG
    Tsongkhapa's Madhyamaka - The Wisdom Experience
    Tsongkhapa's Madhyamaka - The Wisdom Experience

    2
    Like
    Reply2d
    Cheng Chen
    Yin Ling I believe the essence of JT’s summary of Tsongkhapa is a matter of directly embodying the the final view, as opposed to some logical deductive substitute. Ultimately what Tsongkhapa is offering is freedom at the end of logic as opposed to a reliance on it.
    For instance, one can have a total experience of pure evenness that appears to be similar to the so-called natural state, but really one just fell into the trap of a uni-polar nondualism. That is all phenomenon is luminous and there are no boundaries. And yet, subtly, there’s still a reliance on the primacy of nondual experience, a perversion of mind-only where one takes the philosophy literally as opposed to only as a tool.
    But even this is subtly distracting one from just being naturally normal, where all constructions, including a nondual reality is already-known. In the real natural state here or there and this or that are simple and self-known. It’s not a problem for this to be dependent on that nor objectivity to be dependent on subjectivity. There are merely natural functions of human cognition. Why would one make a problem if there isn’t one. Why try to forcefully dissolve all boundaries? To what end? So that one can abide in luminosity? Sounds like escapism to me…
    To be clear, though, it (the luminous nonduality) is NOT merely a mental, logical shortcut… you generally don’t get to complete self-luminous self-experience without going overboard with that one-sided nonduality first and then dropping that… but I digress.
    So, the point is not to solely dissolve all boundaries—albeit that’s fun and certainly important, a good parlor trick—the point is to just be cool. In freedom, there is no need to additionally deny nor depend on anything more than what is already known. That’s why they call it perfection, not because it’s actually perfect, but that there is no imperfection to begin with, so…
    “Just be cool.”
    —Tsongkhapa, 1357-1519

    Like
    Reply2dEdited
    Cheng Chen
    Please correct if my reflection on the Tsongkhapa summary is off.
    Like
    Reply2d
    Active
    Yin Ling
    Cheng Chen haha thanks. I really don’t know enough to comment really , there’s something I don’t quite get with what John was trying to say. Need more merit I think .
    Like
    Reply2d
    Cheng Chen
    Yin Ling I realize that what I previously blasted out was too rough and unrefined. I’ve revised what I wrote to be more clear and relatable. Have another read-through!
    Also, you don’t lack merit. You just need to take more trips to the natural state.
    More faith and and humility probably will be of relative marginal benefit as compared to more direct trips to the natural state. I don’t deny “good merit” is needed for that, but let’s not fool ourselves into mistaking a description for a prescription…
    I suppose that’s why they call it the two accumulations… and you can guess which one I lack 😛

    Like
    Reply1dEdited
    Tyler Jones
    John Tan do you consider this most crucial post-anatta insight fundamentally different from the other post-anatta insights discussed at length on the blog? Such as +A/maha/total exertion or spontaneous perfection? Does anyone other than Tsongkhapa and his followers clearly point to it?
    Like
    Reply1d
    John Tan
    Tyler Jones no. It does not differ +A and -A, the natural openness requires that understanding. Tsongkhapa is profoundly insightful and revolutionary in certain sense, unfortunately I m not familiar with his other followers. However imo what Tsongkhapa expounded cannot be understood by analysis alone, we can't logically deduced or induced what he said, it can only be experientially authenticated.

    2
    Like
    Reply1dEdited
    Cheng Chen
    Tylaaaaa Jone: yo I get that you were asking JT, so I’m not going to comment on his +/- thing model…
    But bro, nearly all writings of highly attained masters all get at this point one way or another. Tsongkhapa is just being lightly logical about it without going overboard, kinda hinting and reminding ya’ll to just…
    BE COOL!
    Like
    Reply1dEdited
    Active


    Write a reply…
    William Albert
    Maybe it's the translation, but I really don't understand what they are trying to say.

    Like
    Reply1d
    Active
    Yin Ling
    William Albert I personally find the translation clear. and actually cannot be clearer. but it is profound yes.
    Like
    Reply1d
    Cheng Chen
    What part is confusing?
    Like
    Reply1d
    Active


    Write a reply…