muni wrote:Apprehended "knowing" and so fictituous creations, optical illusion of mind only.
To relax intellectual activity is kindly told. All appaerances-emptiness are liberated by themselves, no apprehended analyse does.
Whoever, seeing the cause and effect of all phenomena
Of cyclic existence and nirvana as infallible,
Thoroughly destroys the mode of misapprehension
of these objects [as inherently existent]
Has entered on a path pleasing the Buddhas.
As long as the two, realization of appearances -
the infallibility of dependent arising -
And realization of emptiness - the non-assertion [of inherent existence],
Seem to be separate, there is still no realization
Of the thought of Shakyamuni Buddha.
When [the two realizations exist] simultaneously
And when, from only seeing dependent-arising as infallible,
Definite knowledge destroys the mode of apprehension
[of the conception of inherent existence],
Then the analysis of the view [of emptiness] is complete.
Further, the extreme of [inherent] existence is excluded
[by knowledge of the nature] of appearances [existing only as nominal designations],
And the extreme of total non-existence is excluded [by knowledge of the nature] of emptiness [as the absence of inherent existence].
If within emptiness the way of appearances of cause and effect is known,
You will not be captivated by extreme views.
goodie wrote:Je Tsongkhapa says in his Medium length Lam Rim:
Illusions emanated (or conjured) by a magician are from the start empty of being horses and elephants, but appearances as horsers and elephants undeniably dawn; and likewise you should know that phenomena, persons and so forth, also are from the start empty of inherent existence - that is, of being established by way of their own nature right with the object - but it is undeniable that they appear as if established that way.
This example with magicians making a stick or some other object appear as horse or elephant is used widely in buddhist literature. But this example is quite foreign to a western way of thinking, because who has ever seen someone do such magic? So if someone here has witnessed such a thing, please write about, as I'm curious how this happens
TMingyur wrote:There are a great many concepts and metaphors which those who lack particular understanding for particular ones tend to take at face value and argue about alleged "differences".
goodie wrote:This example with magicians making a stick or some other object appear as horse or elephant is used widely in buddhist literature. But this example is quite foreign to a western way of thinking, because who has ever seen someone do such magic? So if someone here has witnessed such a thing, please write about, as I'm curious how this happens
I also asked a geshe from Sera monastery about this once, and he also confirmed that it is possible to still see this in India, and that from time to time magicians would come to the monastery or villages to perform such shows. He said for example they can make a big object (such as human) go through tiny holes etc. Would be interesting to see such thing in person though.kirtu wrote:I mentioned this to my Sakya lama one day nearly word or word. He told us that such magicians still exist in India and he had in fact see this kind of magic which seems to be a full magic show of some kind. He also said specifically that the magic could be somewhat gory (in appearance, not for real).
ngodrup wrote:I think the kind of "Magic" that Je Tsongkapa is talking about
is something we'd call "group hypnosis." By the "spell" of the
magician, the audience sees a hallucination. People who
come into the show late were not induced to hallucinate,
therefore they don't. That's the sense I've gotten when
asking Geshes who are fluent in English.