Misguided man, have I not stated in many discourses consciousness to be dependently arisen, since without a condition there is no origination of consciousness?

 

Soh Wei Yu

2m 
Shared with Your friends
Friends
Looks like a great book by the Dalai Lama. It even quoted the sutta I always quote. https://www.amazon.com/Realizing-Profound.../dp/B09ZBKNZB7
Active
Yin Ling
23m 
“Because it is easy to consider consciousness with its thoughts, feelings, moods, and opinions to be the person, it is worthwhile to examine this notion more closely. The Buddha clearly states that consciousness is not the self. In the Greater Sutta on the Destruction of Craving, he calls Bhikṣu Sāti and questions him about his wrong view that the consciousness is the self. The following dialogue ensues (MN 38.5):
(The Buddha): Sāti, is it true that the following pernicious view has arisen in you: As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and wanders through the round of rebirths, not another?
(Sāti): Exactly so, Venerable Sir. As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, it is this same consciousness that runs and wanders through the round of rebirths, not another.
(The Buddha): What is that consciousness, Sāti?
(Sāti): Venerable Sir, it is that which speaks and feels and experiences here and there the “ the result of good and bad actions.
(The Buddha): Misguided man, to whom have you ever known me to teach the Dhamma in that way? Misguided man, have I not stated in many discourses consciousness to be dependently arisen, since without a condition there is no origination of consciousness?
Sāti’s view is that consciousness exists in and of itself, independent of conditions. Saying the self is that which speaks shows the I as an agent of the action of speaking. Saying the self feels is the notion that the I is a passive subject that experiences. “Here and there” indicates the self as a transmigrator that remains unchanging as it passes through many rebirths. This consciousness or self goes from life to life, creating karma and experiencing its results, but not being transformed or changing in the process. It has an unchanging identity that remains the same as it experiences one event after another and goes from one life to the next. In short, Sāti views the consciousness as an ātman or Self.
The commentary explains that Sāti was an expert in the Jātaka Tales, in which the Buddha recounts his previous lives, saying, “At that time, I was[…]”
Excerpt From
Realizing the Profound View
Bhikṣu Tenzin Gyatso, Bhikṣuṇī Thubten Chodron
This material may be protected by copyright.
1 comment
Like
Comment
Share
1 comment
  • Soh Wei Yu
    Yin Ling
    “Nowhere in the Pāli canon or Pāli commentaries is the mental consciousness or the collection of aggregates said to be the self. No phenomenon (dharma) whatsoever is posited as the self or person. Although some Buddhist schools have posited something that is the person that carries the karmic seeds—the collection of aggregates, mental consciousness, foundation consciousness, and so forth—there is no such notion in the Pāli tradition. Based on the Pāli sūtras and their commentaries, Theravādins regard the person as a conceptual notion imputed dependent on the basis of the five aggregates.”
    Excerpt From
    Realizing the Profound View
    Bhikṣu Tenzin Gyatso, Bhikṣuṇī Thubten Chodron
    This material may be protected by copyright.
    Punna Wong
    Reply20m
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1m

Labels: , , , , 0 comments | | edit post
Primordial

Yes André, I agree with most of what u said, just 3 points:

 

1.  Primordial state, original face.

 

What does it mean to to be without the imagined and imputed?  It is simply one's primordial state, always and already so despite non-recognition.

 

So the path can be directly pointing to one's original face or to rid from all imputed imagined artificialities.

 

But the direct leap out of the imputed layer is often not exhaustive and thorough, many blindspots and hindrances.  Therefore a short cut can often turns out to be a longer cut.

 

2.  Unmade, natural and spontaneous

 

I agree that without imputations, there is no boundaries.  Therefore all experiences is open and spacious and without the layer of imagined, whatever appears is pristine and pellucid, transparent and crystal.

 

In addition to that, purge of all imputed artificialities, whatever appears is also unmade and unconditioned, natural and spontaneous.

 

3.  Seeing through duality and seeing from inherency, to me is not the same and has different experiential taste.

 

When we say "the lightning is flashing", there r no two parts - "lightning" and "flashing", the flashing is the lightning.

 

When we say "the mover and the movement", there r no two parts - "mover" and "movement", the mover is the movement.

 

Same for the anatta insight, hearer hearing sound.  There is no 3 parts, no hearer hearing sound, the hearer is the hearing is the sound.

 

That is seeing through thingness, agency and action.

 

But seeing through duality like inner/outer, left/right, entry/exit, object/subject is different.  When the line of demarcation that divides dissolves, experience turns non-dual but sense of "thingness" can still remain imo.

 

So this teaching of exhausting "thingness" is quite unique, it is not just doing away with duality or conceptualities in naked awareness or raw attention.

 

Last question:

 

What if one does not go through the path of seeing through mental imputation and reification? 

 

Any other ways to free oneself from the sense of agency-action, duality and boundaries?

 

Got to go, late for work.  Thks for sharing!



- John Tan, 2020

Labels: , , 0 comments | | edit post
Empty Clarity

It is not only realising mere appearances r just one's radiance clarity but empty clarity is like that...like a 🌈.  Beautiful and clearly appears, but nothing "there" at all.  These 2 aspects r very important. 

1.  Very "vivid", pellucid

2.  Nothing real

Tasting either one will not trigger the "aha" realization.


- John Tan, 2020

Labels: , , , 0 comments | | edit post
Seeing Through

John Tan weeks ago:


"Clarity as I AM is only dualistic and must go into anatta which is just the beginning into emptiness free from all elaborations and DO which is just natural perfection.

Because we do not know what the primordial and natural perfection is all about, we can only talk about de-construction of conventional constructs from self to all phenomena otherwise all experiences at every phases of insight will be distorted.

We think we know what is natural and primordial but we don't.

Whether it is anatta or not is dependent on insights and view, not just experience.

Means there must be a see through, then one realizes and go further to realize that self is a mental construct, learnt and taught, was never there but thought to be there.

However how subtle and deep do these conventional constructs affect mind and experiences is a different matter.

Many do not understand what is and how freedom mental constructs are like. No clarity of view and experience as long as one do not see DO and emptiness from mental constructs level as well as empty radiance level.

The mind will always link back to the physical and material world of conventional understanding, unknowingly links analysis and interpretation excluding consciousness from the equation.

Or we will jump into conclusion of denying causal efficacy not knowing what exactly mmk is pointing to and what exactly is negated. What do we mean by no cause and effect and what sort of cause and effect r we talking about and what exactly is non-causal talking about...

These are all the mind cognitive obscurations, it is unable to clearly sort out.

This proves our mind is still oscillating between the extremes."
Labels: , , , 0 comments | | edit post