Dharma Wheel

A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
It is currently Mon Dec 22, 2014 9:45 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 184 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:05 am
Posts: 1302
Location: San Francisco, CA
Lotus_Bitch wrote:
With no disrespect what-so-ever, Buddha actually did refute the notion of Brahman or an independent, eternal, absolute "Awareness/Consciousness" that things arise from and dissolve into.

Taking these excerpts from a Dharmawheel forummer's blog.

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/09/two-sutras-teachings-of-buddha-on.html:

Two Sutras (Discourses by Buddha) on the Mistaken Views of Consciousness

In these sutras, the Buddha warned against mistaken understandings of the I AM and non-dual experience/realisation prior to the Anatta insight (i.e. Thusness Stage 1~4). Shurangama Sutra in particular maps well with Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment

First Sutra (Shurangama Sutra)

http://www.heartspace.org/writings/trad ... Sutra.html

(41) Ananda, you should know that the good person has thoroughly seen the formations skandha as empty, and he must return consciousness to the source. He has already ended production and destruction, but he has not yet perfected the subtle wonder of ultimate serenity.

He can cause the individual sense faculties of his body to unite and open. He also has a pervasive awareness of all the categories of beings in the ten directions. Since his awareness is pervasive, he can enter the perfect source. But if he regards what he is returning to as the cause of true permanence and interprets this as a supreme state, he will fall into the error of holding to that cause. Kapila the Sankhyan, with his theory of returning to the Truth of the Unmanifest, will become his companion. Confused about the Bodhi of the Buddhas, he will lose his knowledge and understanding.

This is the first state, in which he creates a place to which to return, based on the idea that there is something to attain. He strays far from perfect penetration and turns his back on the City of Nirvana, thus sowing the seeds of externalism.

Second Sutra (Mulapariyaya Sutta: The Root Sequence)

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html


..."He directly knows water as water... the All as the All...

"He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? Because he has known that delight is the root of suffering & stress, that from coming-into-being there is birth, and that for what has come into being there is aging & death. Therefore, with the total ending, fading away, cessation, letting go, relinquishment of craving, the Tathagata has totally awakened to the unexcelled right self-awakening, I tell you."

That is what the Blessed One said. Displeased, the monks did not delight in the Blessed One's words.
Rob Burbea in Realizing the Nature of Mind:

One time the Buddha went to a group of monks and he basically told them not to see Awareness as The Source of all things. So this sense of there being a vast awareness and everything just appears out of that and disappears back into it, beautiful as that is, he told them that’s actually not a skillful way of viewing reality. And that is a very interesting sutta, because it’s one of the only suttas where at the end it doesn’t say the monks rejoiced in his words.

This group of monks didn’t want to hear that. They were quite happy with that level of insight, lovely as it was, and it said the monks did not rejoice in the Buddha’s words. (laughter) And similarly, one runs into this as a teacher, I have to say. This level is so attractive, it has so much of the flavor of something ultimate, that often times people are unbudgeable there


Okay, I'm focusing on the Pali suttas so the Surangama Sutra is a Mahayana deal. I'm pitting the Pali against the Mahayana and Vajrayana, etc. I'm trying to see if the Mahayana, etc., violate the view of the Pali. As for the Mulapariyaya Sutta, it still doesn't explain what the Buddha meant by the passage I cited previously. I already agreed he's talking about the Unconditioned.

I'm trying to sort out if, for example Guru Yoga, violates the sutta you mentioned. Or does it fit?

Also there's a difference between not conceiving of something and it not being there. It could be there anyway.

People are not dealing with the issue.

What does it mean for the dharmakaya to be all-pervasive.

Jeff seems to be consistent with Garchen Rinpoche.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:24 am
Posts: 275
deepbluehum wrote:

I'm trying to sort out if, for example Guru Yoga, violates the sutta you mentioned. Or does it fit?

What does it mean for the dharmakaya to be all-pervasive.

Mutual inter-penetration of all dharmas. Reality is not seperated by internal and external; the entire universe mutually arising as these sounds, sights, smells, tastes, thoughts, sensations.

I don't see how Guru Yoga as a meditation would violate the sutta I quoted. Isn't it basically a meditation on the qualities of an enlightened being? You're asking the wrong person about this.

_________________
Many meditators know how to meditate,
But only a few know how to dismantle [mental clinging].
- Je Gyare


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:05 am
Posts: 1302
Location: San Francisco, CA
deepbluehum wrote:
I forgot I read Harvey already. He underscores that the suttas do not really deny a Self. He points to the same clauses I did to support that.

*edit* rather I should say he blurs the line between Vedanta with this passage.


Oops. I was actually thinking about "The Yogi and the Mystic: Studies in Indian and Comparative Mysticism," by Karl Werner

Just read Harvey. There's a slight of hand going on there. Whenever he writes Self with a capital S, as if to refute vedic Self, the passages he cites are really just talking about the personality.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:26 am 
Online

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 154
Lotus_Bitch wrote:
Jeff wrote:
deepbluehum wrote:
I recently asked Garchen Rinpoche how Guru Yoga works. Garchen Rinpoche told me the nature of mind is omnipresent and permeates all beings which is why one can unite with the mind of the guru. I asked him if this was the same as the Hindu notion of Brahman? He said the Buddha only meant to refute a Creator God, but the notion of Brahman is basically fine with buddha-dharma. That was surprising to me.

Malcolm has also pointed out that in the Khandro Nyingthig texts Guru P has stated that everything is rigpa.

So does Guru Yoga betray the Pantheism underlying Mahayana, Vajrayana and Dzogchen?


Garchen Rinpoche is very wise.

At the level of duality, the easiest way to think of it is that we are all beings in consciousness. A true guru is able to connect at the heart (or overlap presence in consciousness). Through the connection information/energy/light is shared which can "acceralate" spiritual growth (almost like drafting). At it's essence, the practice is the same as Tibetan Deity Yoga. But, in Deity yoga, one must have control of "tummo" to connect with the Deity/Master in consciousness. A true guru has realized non-dual and can thus at a dualistic level "connect" to anyone.

:smile:

What you typed starting with "At the level of duality, the easiest way to think of it is that we are all beings in consciousness" is closer to an Advaitan view.

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/09/two-sutras-teachings-of-buddha-on.html

Buddha warned (in Shurangama Sutra) against taking Consciousness as a permanent Spiritual Self:

(33) Further, in his practice of samadhi, such a good person's mind is firm, unmoving, and proper and can no longer be disturbed by demons. He can thoroughly investigate the origin of all categories of beings and contemplate the source of the subtle, fleeting, and constant fluctuation. But if he begins to speculate about self and others, he could fall into error with theories of partial impermanence and partial permanence based on four distorted views.

First, as this person contemplates the wonderfully bright mind pervading the ten directions, he concludes that this state of profound stillness is the ultimate spiritual self. Then he speculates, "My spiritual self, which is settled, bright, and unmoving, pervades the ten directions. All living beings are within my mind, and there they are born and die by themselves. Therefore, my mind is permanent, while those who undergo birth and death there are truly impermanent."

......

Because of these speculations of impermanence and permanence, he will fall into externalism and become confused about the Bodhi nature. This is the third externalist teaching, in which one postulates partial permanence.

......

Finally, if your pure, bright, clear, and unmoving state is permanent, then there should be no seeing, hearing, awareness or knowing in your body. If it is genuinely pure and true, it should not contain habits and falseness.

How does it happen, then, that having seen some unusual thing in the past, you eventually forget it over time, until neither memory nor forgetfulness of it remain; but then later, upon suddenly seeing that unusual thing again, you remember it clearly from before without one detail omitted? How can you reckon the permeation which goes on in thought after thought in this pure, clear, and unmoving consciousness?

Ananda, you should know that this state of clarity is not real. It is like rapidly flowing water that appears to be still on the surface. Because of its rapid speed, you cannot perceive the flow, but that does not mean it is not flowing. If this were not the source of thinking, then how could one be subject to false habits?

If you do not open and unite your six sense faculties so that they function interchangeably, this false thinking will never cease.

That's why your seeing, hearing, awareness, and knowing are presently strung together by subtle habits, such that within the profound clarity, existence and non-existence are both illusory. This is the fifth kind of upside-down, minutely subtle thinking.


I did not try to define consciousness as any final state. It was an attempt to describe guru yoga in a framework of terms that would be understandable from a dualistic perspective. Existence (or form) is a subset of consciousness. Consciousness arises out (or is a subset) of raw awareness (void). Literally "nothing" to describe about the void.

:smile:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:39 am 
Online

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 154
Lotus_Bitch wrote:

First Sutra (Shurangama Sutra)

http://www.heartspace.org/writings/trad ... Sutra.html

(41) Ananda, you should know that the good person has thoroughly seen the formations skandha as empty, and he must return consciousness to the source. He has already ended production and destruction, but he has not yet perfected the subtle wonder of ultimate serenity.

He can cause the individual sense faculties of his body to unite and open. He also has a pervasive awareness of all the categories of beings in the ten directions. Since his awareness is pervasive, he can enter the perfect source. But if he regards what he is returning to as the cause of true permanence and interprets this as a supreme state, he will fall into the error of holding to that cause. Kapila the Sankhyan, with his theory of returning to the Truth of the Unmanifest, will become his companion. Confused about the Bodhi of the Buddhas, he will lose his knowledge and understanding.

This is the first state, in which he creates a place to which to return, based on the idea that there is something to attain. He strays far from perfect penetration and turns his back on the City of Nirvana, thus sowing the seeds of externalism.


Thank you for the above word. I am not familiar with Buddhist texts. The statement... "He can cause the individual sense faculties of his body to unite and open. He also has a pervasive awareness of all the categories of beings in the ten directions." is exactly what I meant in my earlier texts about when someone realizes "non-duality". "Pervasive awareness of beings" is the same as I described earlier regarding connecting/merging/being.

But, I am not trying to define it as any ultimate state.

:smile:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:07 am 
Online

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 154
Lotus_Bitch wrote:
deepbluehum wrote:

I'm trying to sort out if, for example Guru Yoga, violates the sutta you mentioned. Or does it fit?

What does it mean for the dharmakaya to be all-pervasive.

Mutual inter-penetration of all dharmas. Reality is not seperated by internal and external; the entire universe mutually arising as these sounds, sights, smells, tastes, thoughts, sensations.

I don't see how Guru Yoga as a meditation would violate the sutta I quoted. Isn't it basically a meditation on the qualities of an enlightened being? You're asking the wrong person about this.


Only at the outer (or simplest) level is Guru yoga "basically meditation on the qualities of an enlightened being".

The previous sutra stated... "He can cause the individual sense faculties of his body to unite and open." This would include control over the "winds of tummo" (energy/kundalini). As I mentioned in an earlier post, one can form an "energetic/information" exchange. As they say, the master appears when the time is right. When one finds a (their) true guru/master, it can be physically felt. This would seem to be true in all traditions.

:smile:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:26 am
Posts: 189
guru yoga is just practicing the nature of the mind, or in the case of Dzogchen the 3 wisdoms.

end of thread


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:44 pm
Posts: 1565
SSJ3Gogeta wrote:
guru yoga is just practicing the nature of the mind, or in the case of Dzogchen the 3 wisdoms.

end of thread

Not really.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 7:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 7:41 pm
Posts: 1502
To DBH and Malcolm and others.
The only thing worth doing as a Buddhist is to look at the nature of the experience right now. When you look it seems like something is there but actually you can't say that anything is there. So that's it.
I've finished with useless debates because they don't really change what experience is. Those concepts that myself and others throw around here on this forum don't change the nature of the experience one bit. Not even Dzogchen is about adding things to experience.
So I'm signing off from this forum because I'm not bothered with all the debates or being right or wrong. None of the debates or answers change or do up experience one bit. Making mistakes can't happen when you are just interested to know what experience is. So I don't care for anything beyond that.
Thanks for all of your replies in the past and thanks to all the moderators who have a thankless task. Best wishes to all on the path. It's time I stopped posting here because experience itself is wordless. Thanks. :thanks:

_________________
The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 7:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:58 pm
Posts: 1106
Malcolm wrote:
This "consciousness without feature" is the one-sided samadhi of cessation the Lanka-avatara asserts Arhats fall into, from which they are aroused to begin the Bodhisattva path.

You remember, of course, that Nāgārjuna uses a version of the passage from DN 11 in his Ratnāvalī. There are also other sources, such as the Kāśyapaparivarta Sūtra, which describe the mind as being "anidarśana," etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 11:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:34 pm
Posts: 50
Andrew108 wrote:
It's time I stopped posting here because experience itself is wordless.


Please (don't) post here because you want to make a cause for liberation of all sentient beings ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:24 am
Posts: 275
Jeff wrote:
Lotus_Bitch wrote:
Jeff wrote:

Garchen Rinpoche is very wise.

At the level of duality, the easiest way to think of it is that we are all beings in consciousness. A true guru is able to connect at the heart (or overlap presence in consciousness). Through the connection information/energy/light is shared which can "acceralate" spiritual growth (almost like drafting). At it's essence, the practice is the same as Tibetan Deity Yoga. But, in Deity yoga, one must have control of "tummo" to connect with the Deity/Master in consciousness. A true guru has realized non-dual and can thus at a dualistic level "connect" to anyone.

:smile:

What you typed starting with "At the level of duality, the easiest way to think of it is that we are all beings in consciousness" is closer to an Advaitan view.

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/09/two-sutras-teachings-of-buddha-on.html

Buddha warned (in Shurangama Sutra) against taking Consciousness as a permanent Spiritual Self:

(33) Further, in his practice of samadhi, such a good person's mind is firm, unmoving, and proper and can no longer be disturbed by demons. He can thoroughly investigate the origin of all categories of beings and contemplate the source of the subtle, fleeting, and constant fluctuation. But if he begins to speculate about self and others, he could fall into error with theories of partial impermanence and partial permanence based on four distorted views.

First, as this person contemplates the wonderfully bright mind pervading the ten directions, he concludes that this state of profound stillness is the ultimate spiritual self. Then he speculates, "My spiritual self, which is settled, bright, and unmoving, pervades the ten directions. All living beings are within my mind, and there they are born and die by themselves. Therefore, my mind is permanent, while those who undergo birth and death there are truly impermanent."

......

Because of these speculations of impermanence and permanence, he will fall into externalism and become confused about the Bodhi nature. This is the third externalist teaching, in which one postulates partial permanence.

......

Finally, if your pure, bright, clear, and unmoving state is permanent, then there should be no seeing, hearing, awareness or knowing in your body. If it is genuinely pure and true, it should not contain habits and falseness.

How does it happen, then, that having seen some unusual thing in the past, you eventually forget it over time, until neither memory nor forgetfulness of it remain; but then later, upon suddenly seeing that unusual thing again, you remember it clearly from before without one detail omitted? How can you reckon the permeation which goes on in thought after thought in this pure, clear, and unmoving consciousness?

Ananda, you should know that this state of clarity is not real. It is like rapidly flowing water that appears to be still on the surface. Because of its rapid speed, you cannot perceive the flow, but that does not mean it is not flowing. If this were not the source of thinking, then how could one be subject to false habits?

If you do not open and unite your six sense faculties so that they function interchangeably, this false thinking will never cease.

That's why your seeing, hearing, awareness, and knowing are presently strung together by subtle habits, such that within the profound clarity, existence and non-existence are both illusory. This is the fifth kind of upside-down, minutely subtle thinking.


I did not try to define consciousness as any final state. It was an attempt to describe guru yoga in a framework of terms that would be understandable from a dualistic perspective. Existence (or form) is a subset of consciousness. Consciousness arises out (or is a subset) of raw awareness (void). Literally "nothing" to describe about the void.

:smile:

The way you're framing it is still very Advaitin. While words will never be able to truly convey the experience of insight into the nature of mind: Words (when being used to describe such an insight to an individual) will reveal a persons understanding. Your understanding reveals that you do not have insight into anatta and dependent origination.

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/09/two-sutras-teachings-of-buddha-on.html

(46) Further, the good person has thoroughly seen the formations skandha as empty. He has ended production and destruction, but he has not yet perfected the subtle wonder of ultimate serenity.

He may speculate that there is an emptiness within the perfect brightness, and based on that he denies the myriad transformations, taking their eternal cessation as his refuge. If he interprets this as a supreme state, he will fall into the error of taking what is not a refuge to be a refuge. Those abiding in Shunyata in the Heaven of [Neither Thought nor] Non-Thought* will become his companions. Confused about the Bodhi of the Buddhas, he will lose his knowledge and understanding.

This is the sixth state, in which he realizes a state of voidness based on the idea of emptiness within the perfect brightness. He strays far from perfect penetration and turns his back on the City of Nirvana, thus sowing the seeds of annihilationism.

*or the formless jhana of neither perception nor non-perception.

_________________
Many meditators know how to meditate,
But only a few know how to dismantle [mental clinging].
- Je Gyare


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:24 am
Posts: 275
Jeff wrote:
Lotus_Bitch wrote:
deepbluehum wrote:

I'm trying to sort out if, for example Guru Yoga, violates the sutta you mentioned. Or does it fit?

What does it mean for the dharmakaya to be all-pervasive.

Mutual inter-penetration of all dharmas. Reality is not seperated by internal and external; the entire universe mutually arising as these sounds, sights, smells, tastes, thoughts, sensations.

I don't see how Guru Yoga as a meditation would violate the sutta I quoted. Isn't it basically a meditation on the qualities of an enlightened being? You're asking the wrong person about this.


Only at the outer (or simplest) level is Guru yoga "basically meditation on the qualities of an enlightened being".

The previous sutra stated... "He can cause the individual sense faculties of his body to unite and open." This would include control over the "winds of tummo" (energy/kundalini). As I mentioned in an earlier post, one can form an "energetic/information" exchange. As they say, the master appears when the time is right. When one finds a (their) true guru/master, it can be physically felt. This would seem to be true in all traditions.

:smile:

These articles may help you to better understand the quoted passages of the Surangama Sutra.

[url]http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/search/label/Zen%20Patriarch%20Bodhidharma
[/url]
Zen Patriarch Bodhidharma on the Inseparability of Awareness and Conditions
Posted by: An Eternal Now

The following blog entry is from a post made in my forum a few years ago time ago. It is about seeing awareness as manifestation instead of a mirror reflecting, and seeing the inseparability of awareness and conditions. This is also related to a previous blog entry Dependent Arising of Consciousness which contains a related text by Arya Nagarjuna.

---------------

Passerby/Thusness saw some inadequateness in one of the Zen Patriarch Bodhidharma translations, and translated himself a certain passage and commented on my forum:

Original Chinese text from Bodhidharma's Bloodstream Sermon (血脉论): 若智慧明了,此心号名法性,亦名解脱。生死不拘,一切法拘它不得,是名大自在王如来;亦名不思议,亦名圣体,亦名长生不死,亦名大仙。名虽不同,体即是一。圣人种种分别,皆不离自心。心量广大,应用无穷,应眼见色,应耳闻声,应鼻嗅香,应舌知味,乃至施为运动,皆是自心。

(I myself translated certain parts to fill in the gap): With the illumination of wisdom (prajna), mind is known as Dharma Nature, mind is known as Liberation. Neither life nor death can restrain this mind, no dharmas (phenomenon) can. It’s also called the King of Great Freedom Tathagata, the Incomprehensible, the Holy Essence, the Immortality, the Great Immortal. Its names vary but its essence is one. Sages vary, but none are separate from his own mind. The mind’s capacity is limitless, and its conditional functions are inexhaustible. With the condition of eyes, forms are seen, With the condition of ears, sounds are heard, With the condition of nose, smells are smelled, With the condition of tongue, tastes are tasted, every movement or states are all one's Mind.

Comments by Passerby/Thusness:

若智慧明了,此心号名法性,亦名解脱。

A better way to translate this should be:

With the illumination of wisdom (prajna), mind is known as Dharma Nature, mind is known as Liberation.

Comments: It is important to know that mind is itself liberation. That is why knowing the nature of our mind is the way of liberation. If Liberation is not experienced, then the clarity is still not there. There is no true understanding of what mind is.

Liberation is this Pristine Awareness itself in its natural state. That is why understanding this Pristine Awareness is the direct path towards liberation. If we cannot see that the 5 aggregates are themselves our Buddha Nature, then we will not understand there is nothing to shunt from the transience. Thought liberates, sound liberates, tastes liberates. The transience liberates. If we do not see that, then we are taking a gradual path. It is also not advisable to speak too much about spontaneous arising or self liberation. It can be quite misleading.

----------------

应眼见色,应耳闻声,应鼻嗅香,应舌知味,乃至施为运动,皆是自心。

A better way to translate should be:

With the condition of the eye, forms are seen, With the condition of ears, sounds are heard, With the condition of nose, smells are smelled, With the condition of tongue, tastes are tasted, every movement or states are all one's Mind.

Thusness/Passerby's comments:

Here there are 2 important points to take note. First is that Buddha Nature is the transience. Second it is more of '应'. Means with the condition of the eye, forms arise. With ears, sound arises.

Awareness is not like a mirror reflecting but rather a manifestation. Luminosity is an arising luminous manifestation rather than a mirror reflecting. The center here is being replaced with Dependent Origination, the experience however is non-dual.

One must learn how to see Appearances as Awareness and all others as conditions. Example, sound is awareness. The person, the stick, the bell, hitting, air, ears...are conditions. One should learn to see in this way. All problems arise because we cannot experience Awareness this way.

Conventionally we experience in the form of subject and object interaction taking place in a space-time continuum. This is just an assumption. Experientially it is not so. One should learn to experience awareness as the manifestation. There is no subject, there is only and always manifestation, all else are conditions of arising. All these are just provisional explanations for one to understand.

Further comments:

What's seen is Awareness. What's heard is Awareness. All experiences are non-dual in nature. However this non-dual luminosity cannot be understood apart from the ‘causes and conditions’ of arising. Therefore do not see ‘yin’ as Awareness interacting with external conditions. If you see it as so, then it still falls in the category of mirror-reflecting. Rather see it as an instantaneous manifestation where nothing excluded. As if the universe is giving its very best for this moment to arise. A moment is complete and non-dual. Vividly manifest and thoroughly gone leaving no traces.


Other comments:

Phrase like “everything arises from Emptiness and subsides back to Emptiness” is equally misleading. By doing so, we have made ‘Emptiness’ into a metaphysical essence; similarly not to make the same mistake for “causes and conditions”, not to objectify it into a metaphysical essence. All are provisional terms to point to our insubstantial, essence-less and interdependent nature.

_________________
Many meditators know how to meditate,
But only a few know how to dismantle [mental clinging].
- Je Gyare


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:24 am
Posts: 275
Lotus_Bitch wrote:
These articles may help you to better understand the quoted passages of the Surangama Sutra.


http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/search/label/Alex%20Weith

A Zen Exploration of the Bahiya Sutta
Posted by: An Eternal Now
Some excerpts of postings about Bahiya Sutta by AlexWeith (who is a lay Soto Zen teacher/priest who recently realized anatta) from http://kennethfolkdharma.wetpaint.com/t ... Results=20

Thusness told me that he thinks all these are very well written, which I fully agree.


"In the seen, there is only the seen, in the heard, there is only the heard, in the sensed, there is only the sensed,
in the cognized, there is only the cognized. Thus you should see that indeed there is no thing here;
this, Bahiya, is how you should train yourself. Since, Bahiya, there is for you
in the seen, only the seen, in the heard, only the heard, in the sensed, only the sensed,
in the cognized, only the cognized, and you see that there is no thing here,
you will therefore see that indeed there is no thing there. As you see that there is no thing there,
you will see that you are therefore located neither in the world of this,
nor in the world of that, nor in any place betwixt the two.
This alone is the end of suffering.” (Ud. 1.10)

.............

There is no end to the process of awakening, but in Zen Buddhism there are steps and strategies. These introductory posts will explain my position, what I discovered so far, and how it unfolds.

Having got hold of the ox, one has realized the One Mind. In Zen literature this One Mind has often been compared to a bright mirror that reflects phenomena and yet remains untouched by appearances. As discussed with one of Sheng-yen's first Western students, this One Mind is still an illusion. One is not anymore identified to the self-center, ego and personality, yet one (the man) is still holding to pure non-dual awareness (the ox). Having tamed the ox, the ox-herder must let go of the ox (ox forgotten) and then forget himself and the ox (ox and man forgotten).

The problem is that we still maintain a subtle duality between what we know ourself to be, a pure non-dual awareness that is not a thing, and our daily existence often marked by self-contractions. Hoping to get more and more identified with pure non-dual awareness, we may train concentration, try to hold on to the event of awakening reifying an experience, or rationalize the whole thing to conclude that self-contraction is not a problem and that suffering is not suffering because our true nature is ultimately beyond suffering. This explains why I got stuck in what Zen calls "stagnating waters" for about a year.

This is however not seen as a problem in other traditions such as Advaita Vedanta where the One Mind is identified with the Brahman that contains and manifests the three states of waking, dreaming and deep sleep within itself, yet remains untouched by its dreamlike manifestation.

So what has been puzzling me what the sense of presence, the sense of being and its relation with the sense that things around me manifest their presence. Over the months I realized that if this beingness seems to be located as the center of our being, it is actually the flavor of all things.

Reading the blog "Awakening to Reality" that has become my main source of inspiration, I realized that this presence felt as the presence of 'what is' is the *luminosity* that the Mahamudra teachings are talking about. Gradually, feeling my own sense of being has become feeling the beingness of all things, leading to a deeper non-dual realization that gradually colapsed the sense of a Primoridal Awareness, True Self, or Bright Mirror into what is present here and now.

The conclusion is that all phenomena are in themself empty and luminous, ungraspable and self-aware, ever changing and alive. The conclusion is also that there is nothing beyond that; no permanent pure potential beyond phenomena, no true self that would be the source and substance of phenomena and above all no primordial awareness or Consciousness that would contain the five aggregates.

The whole universe is contained and expressed in a the "cypress tree in the court", simply because in the absence of a super Self in the background, the cypress tree brightly present in this very moment is the absolute reality made manifest in its suchness (tathata). Most Zen koans point to this realization, together with Hui-neng poem "Fundamentally no wisdom-tree exists, Nor the stand of a mirror bright. Since all is empty from the beginning, Where can the dust alight".

Surprizingly this deconstruction leads to a deeper level of non-duality. Huang-po's "One Mind' is starting to become Mazu's "No Mind, no Buddha".

.............

Practically speaking this means:

1). becoming aware of one's sense of existence and focusing on it until it starts to feel as if the only reality is this pure presence-awareness containing everything;

2). shifting this sense of being-existence-presence-awareness to apprehend the beingness of all things, until everything starts to feel bright, luminous, present and alive. At this stage, there is no more "self" and "other", nor is there any subtle duality between primordial awareness and phenomena arising and passing away within it. There is only "seeing seeing the seen" without a seer, nor solid material objects behind the seen.

This does not mean that there is absolutely no Primordial Awareness, Self or One Mind. This would be an extreme position rejected by the Buddha. This explains why the Buddha remained silent when asked about the existence of a Self. Answering "Yes" would mean that there is an eternal abiding inherent essence beyond phenomena (eternalism), while answering "No" would lead to nihilism, the other extreme view. The Buddha's way is the middle way, between these two extremes. There is a self, but this self is an conventional concept to describe something that appears to be and is experienced as such, but it not an abiding ultimate reality.

There is a Mind, but this Mind is empty [of an abiding essence]. This Mind is the *non-abiding mind* of the Diamond Sutra. Therefore, *Mind* is *No Mind*.

.............

This also means that the first step is to disembed from impermanent phenomena until the only thing that feels real is this all pervading uncreated all pervading awareness that feels like the source and substance of phenomena. Holding on to it after this realization can hower become a subtle form of grasping diguised as letting go.

The second step is therefore to realize that this brightness, awakeness or luminosity is there very nature of phenomena and then only does the duality between the True Self and the appearences arising and passing within the Self dissolve, revealing the suchness of what is.

The next step that I found very practical is to push the process of deconstruction a step further, realizing that all that is experienced is one of the six consciousness. In other words, there is neither a super Awareness beyond phenomena, not solid material objects, but only six streams of sensory experiences. The seen, the heard, the sensed, the tasted, the smelled and the cognized (including thoughts, emotions, and subtle thougths like absorbtion states, jhanas).

At this point it is not difficult to see how relevent the Bahiya Sutta can become.





.............


@beoman & @giragirasol:

Yes, when we realize that there is no super Awareness beyond consciousnes and become mindful of
consciousness as it manifests at the 6 doors of the senses, we also realize that everything that we can ever experience is contained within one of these 6 streams of consciousness, including the 4 other aggregates that are known through the agregate of consciousness and the arupa jhanas that are in reality very subtle non-conceptual mind-states of the cognizing-consciousness.

Arriving at this point, we can start to investigate the 5 aggregate as well as the sense of self.

If we start with the aggregate of form (the physical body), we realize that our direct experience of the body is nothing more than stream of images (seeing legs, arms, a nose), the other senses and above all sensations. Exploring these sensations we realize that there is an impermanent stream of sensations that more of less matches the images of the body. However, the stream of seeing-consciousness is always distinct from the stream of sensing-consciousness. One never sees a sensation, but an unpleasant sensations can match the sight of a wounder arm. These stream are therfore seem as independent, yet totally interdependent. A sound, can trigger a thought that can trigger a sensations, that can trigger the images of a hand moving. Altogether, these 6 impermanent every changing streams of consciousness create the illusion of a solid substancial body. The same method applies to the other aggregates.





.............


When it comes to the investiation of the sense of self, we must first realize that, even after what some have called technical 4th path, and even if we know that what we are is not any of the 5 aggregates, we still have a sense of self, a sense of existence. The sense "I am" has not been overcome yet.

This issue is discussed in the Khemaka Sutta.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

In this text, Ven. Dasaka meets the Arhant Khemaka and tells him that "there is nothing I assume to be self or belonging to self, and yet I am not an arahant. With regard to these five clinging-aggregates, 'I am' has not been overcome, although I don't assume that 'I am this." (...) ""Friends, it's not that I say 'I am form,' nor do I say 'I am something other than form.' It's not that I say, 'I am feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness,' nor do I say, 'I am something other than consciousness.' With regard to these five clinging-aggregates, 'I am' has not been overcome, although I don't assume that 'I am this.'"

The Arhat answers saying "friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, he still has with regard to the five clinging-aggregates a lingering residual 'I am' conceit, an 'I am' desire, an 'I am' obsession."

Abendoning the five lower fetters means being an Anagami. Here the Arhant says that that even Anagami may still have a residual sense of self that he calls, the 'I am' conceit, an 'I am' desire, an 'I am' obsession."


As to how this sense 'I am' is experienced, the Arhant asks: "then how would he describe it if he were describing it correctly?"

And the monk replies, "as the scent of the flower: That's how he would describe it if he were describing it correctly." he sense of self is like the scent of the flower. It is the flavor of being.

In order to get rid of this residual sense of self and become an Arahat, the sage explains:

"As he keeps focusing on the arising & passing away of these five clinging-aggregates, the lingering residual 'I am' conceit, 'I am' desire, 'I am' obsession is fully obliterated. Just like a cloth, dirty & stained: Its owners give it over to a washerman, who scrubs it with salt earth or lye or cow-dung and then rinses it in clear water. Now even though the cloth is clean & spotless, it still has a lingering residual scent of salt earth or lye or cow-dung. The washerman gives it to the owners, the owners put it away in a scent-infused wicker hamper, and its lingering residual scent of salt earth, lye, or cow-dung is fully obliterated".

This means observing the arising and passing away of the 5 aggregates until "the lingering residual 'I am' conceit, 'I am' desire, 'I am' obsession is fully obliterated".





.............

Practically speaking, the above mentioned method works in the same way. One can either split each of the 5 aggregates into 6 streams of consciousness, to see how the sense of "a body" (aggregate of form) arises when all senses working together create the illusion of substantiality, pretty much like the images track and the sounds tracks of a movie that together create the illusion of reality. Using the same method we can also see how the illusion of a solid body dissolves when we look deeply and see that what we had assumed to be a body is nothing more than an illusion created by 6 impermanent, separate-yet-interdependent streams of consciousness.

We can also investigate the sense of self as such.

In the seen, only the seen. We first realize that we cannot know the objects seen as such, but only the seen (shapes, colors, textures, etc.). We also realize that there is no separate entity that sees. There is seeing, but no seer. Seeing is seeing. Same with the other streams of sense consciousness.

Then, what I do is to look for a sense of self, and see whether it is more assocated to one of these 6 streams of consciousness. It is generally associated with a physical sensation around the solar plexus or gut, and is therefore related to the stream of sensing-consciousness. When this is seen for what it is, the sense of self drops. There is nothing beside the spontanious functioning of the senses.

Here the purpose is not to lock and make permanent a special state of consciousness, but only to gain deeper and deeper insights into Anatta and Shunyata until we become absolutely unable to make anything into "me" or "mine".

.............

@giragirasol - and yes the results experienced during meditation when we stop investigating and let go of clinging that what has been seen as an illusion does match the traditional description of Rigpa. It first come for a brief moment, until it eventually becomes the only game in town. This is no surpize, since the Dzogchen teachings are basically about seeing the fruit (of mainstream Buddhism) as its ground (view) and the path (practice).

But here one should clearly mention that there is absolutely no inherently existing "Awareness" that is felt as existing separately from "phenomena arising witghin awareness", which would be Advaita Vedanta and maybe Kashmir Shaivism, but not Dzogchen. The Dalai Lama was very clear about that and insisted on the fact that Dzogchen can lead people astay if they lack a clear understanding of no-self, emptiness, co-dependent origination, interdependence, etc., recommending the in-depth study of Longchenpa with a solid background rooted in Tsongkapa's Lam Rim or other similar treaties.



.............

With respect to the Zen 10 ox-herding pictures this above deals with "ox forgotten, man remains" (no more super-Awareness, One Mind beyond the 18 dhatus, 6 senses) and then "ox and man forgotten" when the lingering "sense I am" that used to apprehend the aggregate of consciousnes as the One Mind is also extinguished. This is not the only interpretation, but it does match Zen master Sheng-yen's commentaries.


.............


And of course, mindfulness of the mind/6 sense doors/citta, being totally one with the seen, the heard, etc. is at the heart of Zen practice.

Ultimately, meditation practice is always "allowing everything to be as it is". However can only let go of what we see as an illusion. As an exemple disembedding from thoughts, sensations and perceptions allows us see them as mere reflexions. It then becomes easier to let go of thougths, sensations and perceptions. However, the same practice will also crystalize the sense of a witness untouched by phenomena that gradually evolves into a super non-dual Awareness seen as the source and substance of phenomena. Without further investigation, letting go is letting go thoughts, sensations and perceptions, but unknowingly also holding on to the Witness, Awareness or some other illusory inherent self hanging somewhere in the background. It is only when we investigate and look deeply into this awareness that we become able to let go of clinging to what looked like the Absolute leading to a deeper non-dual realization from the Awareness vs reflections-within-awareness duality.

.............

There remains a duality between "That" and phenomena. "That" feels like an impersonal uncreated clean mirror in the background that reflect phenomena, yet remains untouched. As a matter of fact that is the Self that Raman Maharishi talked about. That is the Arma (or Atta in Pali).

On a later stage, we realize that "That" can self-contract or on the contrary expend. It is like zooming in an out. In reality, it never changes, but gets more or less identified with phenomena. Attending to this pure presence-awareness, it naturally grows and overpowers phenomena to the point where everything is seen as appearences reflected within it. Yet "That" is the Self.

The problem is not the Self, but what we make out of it. Grasping at it tends to create a subtle duality, since we can become more or less identified with its dreamlike projections. There is Awareness vs phenomena arising within awareness. Awarenees is IT. Phenomena arising within it are Maya, illusions. We must cease identification with, or disembed from illusory (empty, impermanent, not-the-self) phenomena. This is precisely what great Advaita Jnanis did, like Ramana Maharishi who meditated for years in a cave after his awakening.

The problem is that the more we disembed as this stage, the more we grasp at this pure non-dual Awareness, Absolute or Self and fail to realize what the Buddha realized under the Bodhi Tree.

My conviction is that in order to realize No-Self (Anatta), the Buddha has realized the Self. He was already an accomplished yogi, a master in his own right. But he still wasn't satisfied, because it wasn't yet the end of suffering. Why, because as long as there remains any tiny sense of "me" or "mine" either in relation with body and mind, or with a Self, primordial awareness, Consciousness, Brahman, the One Mind, God, etc. there will be suffering.

.............

So what is this pure, unborn, empty, timeless and nondual Awareness? As I see it now, it is just the non-arising, unsupported, empty and self-luminous nature of what is that the mind grasps and imagines to be an essential sustancial inherhent ultimate reality beyond phenomena. Seeing a white ox on a while empty field covered with snow (common Zen simile for the experience of the One Mind), the mind assumes that there is a pure "Whiteness" beyond all white objects.

Why? Because when the mind is not yet freed from ignorance, it needs to hold on to some kind of stable reference point, reifying its unconditioned and nonabiding nature realized in a moment of total surrender into seeing the eternal Source and substance of all things.

As I am starting to see it now, there is no clean mirror behind the images reflected in the mirror.The mirror cannot be separated from its reflected images. The reflected images are the mirror. Reality is like a lucid dream, but there is no dreamer, nor dreamed reality beyond the dream. There is just an timeless flow of dream images dreaming themselves within the dream. In dreaming, only the dream / in seeing, only the seen / in hearing, only the heard.

_________________
Many meditators know how to meditate,
But only a few know how to dismantle [mental clinging].
- Je Gyare


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
deepbluehum wrote:
I forgot I read Harvey already. He underscores that the suttas do not really deny a Self. He points to the same clauses I did to support that.



You need to read it again. He does not state what you just said.

_________________
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://www.sakyapa.net
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:07 pm
Posts: 289
Location: Taiwan
deepbluehum wrote:
What does it mean for the dharmakaya to be all-pervasive.


The dharmakaya is the body of the root consciousness, all phenomena arises within the consciousnesses, not outside, therefore, phenomena and dharmakaya are inseparable (not two), this is the meaning of the dharmakaya being all-pervasive.

jyoti


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:05 am
Posts: 1302
Location: San Francisco, CA
Here's an interesting passage from Harvey

Quote:
The lack of boundaries to the Arahat's mind is perhaps well illustrated at M.l.206-07 (cf. M.III.156). Here, the Buddha
approaches the monks Anuruddha, Nandiya and Kimbila, greeting them simply as 'Anuruddhas'. He then asks them, 'And how is it that you, Anuruddhas, are living together on friendly terms and harmonious, as milk and water blend, regarding one another with the eye of affection?' To this, Anuruddha replies that this is because he has developed lovingkindness, with respect to acts of body, speech and mind, for his companions, and thus gone on to become such that, 'I, Lord, having surrendered my own citta, am living only in accordance with the citta of these venerable ones. Lord, we have diverse bodies (kaya) but assuredly have only one citta '. He then explains that they help each other with various chores and (p.210) that he has read the minds of his companions so as to know that they have mastery of all eight meditative jhanas, and destroyed the spiritual 'cankers' (asavas) (i.e. they are Arahats). In this passage, one thus finds three Arahats being regarded as having one citta and being all called 'Anuruddha', even though this is the actual name of only one of them. This merging of cittas is motivated by lovingkindness, a quality which when fully developed means that a person no longer has the barriers which make him prefer his own happiness to that of others, and make the citta 'immeasurable' (see Vism.307-08, Sn.368 and 705). One must also assume that such a merging is enabled by the three monks being Arahats, whose cittas are no longer enclosed in an 'egg-shell' of spiritual ignorance, and who no longer wave the 'flag' of 'I am'.


...Harvey (1995) p. 61


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
Jnana wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
This "consciousness without feature" is the one-sided samadhi of cessation the Lanka-avatara asserts Arhats fall into, from which they are aroused to begin the Bodhisattva path.

You remember, of course, that Nāgārjuna uses a version of the passage from DN 11 in his Ratnāvalī. There are also other sources, such as the Kāśyapaparivarta Sūtra, which describe the mind as being "anidarśana," etc.


Yes, that is true. He uses the passage in the course of deconstructing the idea of an integral self.

Nāgārjuna commonly uses Agama passages to illustrate points the Nikāya schools and Mahāyāna hold in common. He also asserts in the Ratnāvalī that the teachings in the Sravaka canon are unable to bring one to Buddhahood.

M

_________________
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://www.sakyapa.net
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:24 am
Posts: 275
Jyoti wrote:
deepbluehum wrote:
What does it mean for the dharmakaya to be all-pervasive.


The dharmakaya is the body of the root consciousness, all phenomena arises within the consciousnesses, not outside, therefore, phenomena and dharmakaya are inseparable (not two), this is the meaning of the dharmakaya being all-pervasive.

jyoti

This is yet again another Hindu/ Advaitin view, which is wrong view in all yanas of Buddhism.

I'm gonna switch it up and use some quotes from Longchenpa's "Naturally Liberated Mind, The Great Perfection" (Sanskrit: maha-sandhicittatiisvamutki-na-ma
Tibetan: rdzogs-pa chen-po sems-nyid rang-grvl) from Tulku Thondup's "The Practice of Dzogchen:"

The utterly pure view has no extremes or center.

It cannot be indicated by saying "it is this," nor is there in it any distinctions of height or width.

It transcends eternalism and nihilism, and it is free from the stains of the four assertions of extremes.

Sought, it will not be found; watched, it is not seen.

It is detached from directions and partiality, and it transcends all the objects of conception.

It has no standpoint, neither voidness nor non-voidness.

There is no separate emptiness apart from apparent phenomena.

It is like fire and heat, the qualities of fire.

The notion of their distinctness is a division made by mind.

Water and the moon’s reflection in water are indivisibly one in the pool.

Likewise, appearances and emptiness are one in the great dharmata.

These appearances are unborn from the beginning, and they are the dharmakaya.

In the mind which has no essence,

The primordially empty mind, which has no root, is not defiled by the phenomenal appearances of samsara and nirvana.

In the rootless mind, pure from the beginning, there is nothing to do and no one to do it-how satisfying!

In the mind which is free from ground, root, and substance, the spontaneous uncreated qualities are fully perfected.

The essence of appearances and mind is emptiness, and that meaning of dharmakaya;

Their nature is unceasing, and that is the appearance of sambogakaya;

Their characteristics are various and that is the nirmanakaya.

By experiencing the non-conceptual universal ground, they stray into the formless realm;

Experiencing the clear-empty consciousness of the universal ground, they stray into the form realm;

Experiencing the six consciousness they stray into the desire realm.

The changes of the mind are the steps [to different realms] of samsara.

Phenomena are the nature of substancelessness.

The sky of unapprehending mind has no center or end.

As luminescent intrinsic awareness has no extremes and center, there is no duality of defilements and antidotes.

_________________
Many meditators know how to meditate,
But only a few know how to dismantle [mental clinging].
- Je Gyare


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:55 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:22 pm
Posts: 154
Lotus_Bitch wrote:
Jeff wrote:

Only at the outer (or simplest) level is Guru yoga "basically meditation on the qualities of an enlightened being".

The previous sutra stated... "He can cause the individual sense faculties of his body to unite and open." This would include control over the "winds of tummo" (energy/kundalini). As I mentioned in an earlier post, one can form an "energetic/information" exchange. As they say, the master appears when the time is right. When one finds a (their) true guru/master, it can be physically felt. This would seem to be true in all traditions.

:smile:

These articles may help you to better understand the quoted passages of the Surangama Sutra.

[url]http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/search/label/Zen%20Patriarch%20Bodhidharma
[/url]
Zen Patriarch Bodhidharma on the Inseparability of Awareness and Conditions
Posted by: An Eternal Now

The following blog entry is from a post made in my forum a few years ago time ago. It is about seeing awareness as manifestation instead of a mirror reflecting, and seeing the inseparability of awareness and conditions. This is also related to a previous blog entry Dependent Arising of Consciousness which contains a related text by Arya Nagarjuna.

---------------

Passerby/Thusness saw some inadequateness in one of the Zen Patriarch Bodhidharma translations, and translated himself a certain passage and commented on my forum:

Original Chinese text from Bodhidharma's Bloodstream Sermon (血脉论): 若智慧明了,此心号名法性,亦名解脱。生死不拘,一切法拘它不得,是名大自在王如来;亦名不思议,亦名圣体,亦名长生不死,亦名大仙。名虽不同,体即是一。圣人种种分别,皆不离自心。心量广大,应用无穷,应眼见色,应耳闻声,应鼻嗅香,应舌知味,乃至施为运动,皆是自心。

(I myself translated certain parts to fill in the gap): With the illumination of wisdom (prajna), mind is known as Dharma Nature, mind is known as Liberation. Neither life nor death can restrain this mind, no dharmas (phenomenon) can. It’s also called the King of Great Freedom Tathagata, the Incomprehensible, the Holy Essence, the Immortality, the Great Immortal. Its names vary but its essence is one. Sages vary, but none are separate from his own mind. The mind’s capacity is limitless, and its conditional functions are inexhaustible. With the condition of eyes, forms are seen, With the condition of ears, sounds are heard, With the condition of nose, smells are smelled, With the condition of tongue, tastes are tasted, every movement or states are all one's Mind.

Comments by Passerby/Thusness:

若智慧明了,此心号名法性,亦名解脱。

A better way to translate this should be:

With the illumination of wisdom (prajna), mind is known as Dharma Nature, mind is known as Liberation.

Comments: It is important to know that mind is itself liberation. That is why knowing the nature of our mind is the way of liberation. If Liberation is not experienced, then the clarity is still not there. There is no true understanding of what mind is.

Liberation is this Pristine Awareness itself in its natural state. That is why understanding this Pristine Awareness is the direct path towards liberation. If we cannot see that the 5 aggregates are themselves our Buddha Nature, then we will not understand there is nothing to shunt from the transience. Thought liberates, sound liberates, tastes liberates. The transience liberates. If we do not see that, then we are taking a gradual path. It is also not advisable to speak too much about spontaneous arising or self liberation. It can be quite misleading.

----------------

应眼见色,应耳闻声,应鼻嗅香,应舌知味,乃至施为运动,皆是自心。

A better way to translate should be:

With the condition of the eye, forms are seen, With the condition of ears, sounds are heard, With the condition of nose, smells are smelled, With the condition of tongue, tastes are tasted, every movement or states are all one's Mind.

Thusness/Passerby's comments:

Here there are 2 important points to take note. First is that Buddha Nature is the transience. Second it is more of '应'. Means with the condition of the eye, forms arise. With ears, sound arises.

Awareness is not like a mirror reflecting but rather a manifestation. Luminosity is an arising luminous manifestation rather than a mirror reflecting. The center here is being replaced with Dependent Origination, the experience however is non-dual.

One must learn how to see Appearances as Awareness and all others as conditions. Example, sound is awareness. The person, the stick, the bell, hitting, air, ears...are conditions. One should learn to see in this way. All problems arise because we cannot experience Awareness this way.

Conventionally we experience in the form of subject and object interaction taking place in a space-time continuum. This is just an assumption. Experientially it is not so. One should learn to experience awareness as the manifestation. There is no subject, there is only and always manifestation, all else are conditions of arising. All these are just provisional explanations for one to understand.

Further comments:

What's seen is Awareness. What's heard is Awareness. All experiences are non-dual in nature. However this non-dual luminosity cannot be understood apart from the ‘causes and conditions’ of arising. Therefore do not see ‘yin’ as Awareness interacting with external conditions. If you see it as so, then it still falls in the category of mirror-reflecting. Rather see it as an instantaneous manifestation where nothing excluded. As if the universe is giving its very best for this moment to arise. A moment is complete and non-dual. Vividly manifest and thoroughly gone leaving no traces.


Other comments:

Phrase like “everything arises from Emptiness and subsides back to Emptiness” is equally misleading. By doing so, we have made ‘Emptiness’ into a metaphysical essence; similarly not to make the same mistake for “causes and conditions”, not to objectify it into a metaphysical essence. All are provisional terms to point to our insubstantial, essence-less and interdependent nature.


Hi lotus_bitch,

Thank you for all of the words from other forums, but I seem to miss your point to them for me. In no way am I trying to define an order of progression for anyone. My main point was to help with an understanding of Guru yoga (per the thread topic). As the thread unfolded, my secondary point was to help with the understanding that things like "non-dual awareness" is far more than an intellectual understanding (as Buddha described in the sutra).

Also, remember that in most ancient texts when they said "mind", they meant "heart" or "heart-mind".

:smile:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 184 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Saoshun and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group