Here's a video that Thusness and I found very interesting. I think what is said in this video lines up well with the Buddhist teaching of Emptiness. Thusness have suggested I post it in our blog, http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com, which I did.
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb1u9zOPwiQ&feature=related
It also reminds me of an article written by Longchen:
The non-solidity of existence
This article describes a spiritual insight. It may be quite hard to understand.
The
things that we experience are registered by all the sense organs. The
eye sight registers vision, the ears register sound, the body registers
sensations. These perception, sensations and experiences are not
happening in some places. They are the experience of the arising of
certain conditions. There is no solidity and physicality in the actual
experience.
What we
experienced is not universal and common to all. Here's an example to
illustrate that: We know that as human beings, we see in term of
colours. Some animals are however colour-blind, thus they see
differently from us. But none of us, is really seeing the truth nature
directly. The senses of different species of sentient beings experience
things differently. So who is seeing the real image of an object? None.
Likewise,
the various planes of existence are due to different conditions
arising. In certain types of meditation, one is said to be able to
access these planes of existence. This is because they are not specific
locations. They are mental states and are thus non-localised. In these
meditations, our consciousness changes and 'aligned' more with these
other states or planes of existence.
All
the planes of existence are simultaneously manifesting, but because our
senses are human-based conditioned arisings, we only see the human
world and other beings that shared 'similar' resonating arising
conditions. But nevertheless, the other planes of existences are not
elsewhere in some other places.
What
we think of as places are really just consciousness and there is no
solidity whatsoever. Even our touch sense is just that. The touch sense
gives an impression of feeling something that is physical and
three-dimensional. But there is really no solid self-existing object
there. Instead, it is simply the sensation that gives the impression of
physical solidity and form.
OK, that all I can think of and write about this topic. I will revise and improve this article where the need arises.
For your necessary ponderance. Thank you for reading.
These articles are parts of a series of spiritual realisation articles .
It also reminds me of something Thusness talked about in the Transcript of the Lankavatara Sutra sharing by Thusness in January 2007 (note that this isn't meant to be a commentary of the
sutra but simply a personal sharing of his experience with it):
When we look at Buddhism, Buddhism is very consistent. Why do I say
that Buddhism is very consistent? Not because I like Buddhism. You see,
a person saying that I have experienced Presence, and I AM the Eternal
Witness, I AM God, I AM all powerful and I AM the First Cause, and yet,
they see a dualistic world. This is in total conflict; this has totally
no logic at all. Because, you see, in Buddhism when we talk about
Non-Duality, we are saying something like the Dependent Origination.
Because of This, That Is. This arises, That arises. This ceases, That
ceases. We look at the entire formation, there is no “Who?” Where is
the “Who?” When we ask “Where?”, there is no “Where?”. When we ask
“When?”, there is no “When?” It can be 10 million miles away. It can be
in another planet. The teaching is consistent. It does not require a
“Who”, a “Where”, a “When”. Condition arises, it is there. It is not
stored in any place, or anywhere. This is the teaching. The entire
teaching is consistent when it comes to the practise. They didn’t say
Concentration can lead to Insight. They tell you, Vipashyana Meditation
can lead to Insight of what Reality is all about. It does not teach
that there is a Self. The Buddha taught the three dharma seals: there
is No-Self. So the teaching is consistent in terms of philosophy, in
terms of meditation practice, and in terms of the truths that is being
preached.
And also in terms of spiritual powers. When I say something like
Clairvoyance... I can see, not bounded by distance. I can hear, not
bounded by distance. How come? Why? If we were to take other religions,
they can’t explain. But if you were to take Buddhism, Buddha had never
told you, has never taught, something of an Ego, something of a Where,
something of a When. It is not bounded by Time and Space at all in the
entire philosophy. Never has he taught anything like that. And
therefore, when we talk about spiritual powers, it is consistent. It is
knowing without the need for a Space and Time, not bounded by Space and
Time, because the entire teaching is so. And what is being said about
this? It is the Nature. This is your nature. Reality is like that, it
is so. Therefore, when we understand the teachings, we understand that
yes, it is not right to be attached, therefore we cannot say we want to
seek spiritual powers, like Nub. But we have to understand, this is our
Nature, this is our Reality. Because the teaching has never
contradicted itself. If you want to know about your reality, you have
to practise. That is the teaching. And the practise has always been
telling you to observe these 3 universal characteristics. So when we
see the link between the practise, the philosophy, even something
spiritual and something that is not scientific. This is important.
....in
Buddhism they teach you otherwise. They teach you not to see things in
terms of “I”, not to see things in terms of a “where” and a “when”.
Let’s say something very simple. When I say that things happen, it is
not like those people that subscribe to think that anything is just
taking by itself, it’s nature. Mainly what is important is conditions.
You must have the conditions, then things can surface. When the
conditions is there, they just surfaces, and manifest. If there is
cause in ten million miles away or ten million light years away, or
whatever it is, or in other realms, as long as there is conditions, it
WILL surface, it is not travelling {inaudible}. Can you understand this
part? Condition is there, they just manifest. This is one thing.
The second thing, to break the view of an entity, when we say that,
where? Why must we keep of asking where? Why must we keep on asking
who? Where does the seed of propensity reside? It doesn’t reside
anywhere. Don’t ask where. It’s just the way it is. Because whenever
you ask where, who, and when, it is because you are very accustomed to
our way of inquiry. The way we enquire. It is an inquiry system only.
It is not reality. It is just the way you ask things only. It is just
the way we are molded, and therefore we ask things this way. If we ask
things this way, then the idea of God is more {inaudible} You see, the
idea of God is based on the first cause, right? What is God? God is the
first cause. But why must there be a first cause? There is a first
cause because there is a limit to the way we think. It is due to the
poverty of our own thinking mechanism. The mind requires a base to
start. So it is for the thinking mind to understand. It is not reality.
Only the mind needs to understand this way. Reality doesn’t behave that
way. Can you see? So we are trying to fit reality into a model of
concept. Correct?
p.s. link updated.