Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rimpoche
The book is out of print and available here in PDF format. It goes through the Indo-Tibetan schools of thought on emptiness.
http://itisnotreal.com/progressive-stages-of-meditation-on-emptiness.html
Parting from 4 attachments (youtube) Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL22CA72C2B31E1B5B
Longchenpa - Resting in the Nature of Mind - Khenpo Sherab Zangpo
Originally posted by Dharmadhatu:Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rimpoche
The book is out of print and available here in PDF format. It goes through the Indo-Tibetan schools of thought on emptiness.
http://itisnotreal.com/progressive-stages-of-meditation-on-emptiness.html
Have not read the other two. But this book is very good.
Thanks for sharing :)
Khenpo Tsultrim Rinpoche's book is good. But in my experience, the Prasangika Madhyamika view is higher than the Shentong view since the Shentong still establishes a true existence of clear light, a fault present in non-Buddhist traditions as well. Loppon Namdrol once debated with Khenpo Tsultrim Rinpoche on Shentong, and Khenpo Tsultrim Rinpoche had to admit that the view of Shentong is no different from Advaita Vedanta except for the former's emphasis on Buddhahood.
However, Madhyamika view is intellectually derived, so one must have direct realization of Clear Light, then realize anatta and emptiness to further deconstruct the view of inherent existence to realize the inseparability of luminosity and emptiness (not emptiness of other).
Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche said that the Dzogchen view is philosophically the same as Prasangika Madhyamika, only that the former is from direct experience while the latter from intellectual inference.
Khenpo Tsultrim Rinpoche has certain insight into emptiness (the illusory, dream-like nature of what dependently originates) as well as non-dual luminosity, but I don't see the experiential description of anatta. But what Tsultrim Rinpoche has described for example, cannot be found in texts of Zen Master Dogen, and what Zen Master Dogen described cannot be found in what is described by Tsultrim Rinpoche. Both are important. As Thusness said, there needs to be a balance.
Actually I have been reflecting and noticing that very few practitioners and masters have direct realization of luminosity and realizes its emptiness... vast majority falls into substantial non-dualism (the other day I was telling Thusness that I had trouble finding modern Chinese Mahayana masters who described anatta as I wanted to let my mom read since almost all of them are about One Mind, which he agrees). Those who realize anatta I can count by my fingers... As for Shentong, it is not just purely Advaita view or purely substantial non-dualism since it does factor in dependent origination and emptiness, however it is still unable to factor in anatta to dissolve the view of true existence of the Clear Light as absolute reality in the way Alex Weith does: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/10/zen-exploration-of-bahiya-sutta.html.
Actually I was thinking Simpo_'s deepening of the insight of anatta only came after his insight into D.O./emptiness... in other words when he realized D.O./emptiness, he was still at substantial non-dual phase. May he correct me if I'm wrong. So my point is Thusness Stage 6 may not come only after Stage 5, the steps aren't linear. For Simpo and others, it is from 1 to 4, then skip to 6 before visiting 5 to dissolve that last trace.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Actually I was thinking Simpo_'s deepening of the insight of anatta only came after his insight into D.O./emptiness... in other words when he realized D.O./emptiness, he was still at substantial non-dual phase. May he correct me if I'm wrong. So my point is Thusness Stage 6 may not come only after Stage 5, the steps aren't linear. For Simpo and others, it is from 1 to 4, then skip to 6 before visiting 5 to dissolve that last trace.
Yep, AEN is correct.
In my case, the stabilise realisation of No-self (anatta) came after the early/initial insight of emptiness.
Before the stablisation of no-self, there was still substantial efforting in getting into the 'view'.
The irony is that once the no-self experience is stabilised, one will wonder why did one not see it in the first place. This is because it is so direct. It is as if one is beating around the bush for years just to see the most obvious and direct. However, on hindsight, all the years of practice is really just clearing enough obscurations (habit as well as conceptual conditionings).
My feeling is that the next stage is actually about the stabilisation of emptiness.
In my experience, the initial insights will come first. Then there will be followed by cycles that will revisit these insights until a stabilisation of each insight occurs.
Yes what you said is very true... one will need to go through them cycles by cycles for stability.
p.s. am reminded of this,
The simplest thing that is indivisibly whole, is no difference from this
breathe, this sound. A thousands years ago, a thousand years later and
now, still, this breathe, this sound. Neither the same nor different,
always so primordial. - Thusness
Something I wrote in my synopsis:
http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2010/12/my-e-booke-journal.html
Since I can't really tell, (seems like it's incredibly easy to get stuck in one mind and think you've got anatta) mind giving a list of names of those mahayana master who who have actual realization of anatta and emptiness?
Actually I have been reflecting and noticing that very few practitioners and masters have direct realization of luminosity and realizes its emptiness... vast majority falls into substantial non-dualism (the other day I was telling Thusness that I had trouble finding modern Chinese Mahayana masters who described anatta as I wanted to let my mom read since almost all of them are about One Mind, which he agrees). Those who realize anatta I can count by my fingers... As for Shentong, it is not just purely Advaita view or purely substantial non-dualism since it does factor in dependent origination and emptiness, however it is still unable to factor in anatta to dissolve the view of true existence of the Clear Light as absolute reality in the way Alex Weith does: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/10/zen-exploration-of-bahiya-sutta.html.
Thank you for all these sharings... really, can't express my gratitude enough for the clarity provided ...
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:But what Tsultrim Rinpoche has described for example, cannot be found in texts of Zen Master Dogen, and what Zen Master Dogen described cannot be found in what is described by Tsultrim Rinpoche. Both are important. As Thusness said, there needs to be a balance.
Can you summarise what is Dogen's view and what is Tsultrim Rinpoche's view that need to be synthesized?
Originally posted by simpo_:Yep, AEN is correct.
In my case, the stabilise realisation of No-self (anatta) came after the early/initial insight of emptiness.
Before the stablisation of no-self, there was still substantial efforting in getting into the 'view'.
The irony is that once the no-self experience is stabilised, one will wonder why did one not see it in the first place. This is because it is so direct. It is as if one is beating around the bush for years just to see the most obvious and direct. However, on hindsight, all the years of practice is really just clearing enough obscurations (habit as well as conceptual conditionings).
My feeling is that the next stage is actually about the stabilisation of emptiness.
In my experience, the initial insights will come first. Then there will be followed by cycles that will revisit these insights until a stabilisation of each insight occurs.
Hi Simpo, what is the 'view' that you were efforting to get into at that point?
Also, what triggered off the insight into emptiness in the first place?
@jui: its best to have clarity about the view, then you can discern yourself...
@dharmadhatu:
you can checkout the bottom few post in http://sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/445025?page=1
Originally posted by Dharmadhatu:Hi Simpo, what is the 'view' that you were efforting to get into at that point?
Also, what triggered off the insight into emptiness in the first place?
Hi Simpo, what is the 'view' that you were efforting to get into at that point?
I am referring to the 'view' of no-self. Actually, the word view can be misleading but there is no way to describe it.
Put it another way, before the stabilisation of no-self... it is hard to see how the 'sense of self' is muddled in the contents/thoughts. One will have a tendency to apply effort to get into a particular preferred state. With the stabilisation of no-self, this effort is correctly understood as 'sense of self' efforting. Every effort that is being applied causes the arising of the sense of self. It is like a dog trying to bite its own tail... going around in loop.
Also, what triggered off the insight into emptiness in the first place?
There is no way to really trigger an insight into emptiness apart from deconstructing. But then deconstruction can also lead to other experiences... Also when the insight comes it will be when least expected.
Prior to insight into emptiness, there may be a strong luminosity experience... but one must not get attached to it and let it go. This may allow the other characteristics (eg emptiness) to shine through.
There is a distinction between experience and realisation. In the realisation, there is a knowing. In an experience, there is a misinterpretation. For example, these experiences can be quite similar to Kundalini arising... The main difference is that an experience can be a misinterpretation of what actually happened.
A misinterpretation of what actually happened will prevent further and deeper experiences.
For example, if one has an I AM experience and believe that there is an eternal witness/observer. ... he/she will not be able to have a non-dual experience. Thus the opportunity to directly understand/realise non-duality is severed by the misinterpretation caused by the I AM experience. This same thing applies to the realisation of emptiness and no-self.
Actually...all experiences are already no-self and empty... It is because this is so that liberation is possible.
Originally posted by Jui:Since I can't really tell, (seems like it's incredibly easy to get stuck in one mind and think you've got anatta) mind giving a list of names of those mahayana master who who have actual realization of anatta and emptiness?
2008:
(12:21 AM) Thusness: Why u worry so much abt others ppl stage?
(12:22 AM) AEN: lol
(12:23 AM) Thusness: Rather pray hard that u will not be misled and go through countless lives of rebirth again
(12:23 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:23 AM) Thusness: What u must have is to correctly discern
(12:24 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:25 AM) Thusness: If u want to hv clarity of the essence of the six phases, discern and understand correctly.
(12:25 AM) Thusness: What if I m no more around?
(12:25 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:26 AM) Thusness: Rather ask urself have u correctly understood then abt others
(12:27 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:27 AM) Thusness: How I know?
(12:27 AM) AEN: oic
(12:27 AM) Thusness: U kept asking abt others, I worry more abt u.
(12:27 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:28 AM) Thusness: If u know, u will be able to know r they there.
(12:28 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:29 AM) Thusness: Like ken and Ajahn Amaro clearly have same experience but different understanding
(12:29 AM) Thusness: David loy treat them the same too.
(12:29 AM) Thusness: Not realizing the differences
(12:30 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:30 AM) Thusness: So have the right understanding
(12:31 AM) Thusness: One is abiding, the other is non-abiding
(12:32 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:32 AM) Thusness: One is still efforting, the other is effortless
(12:32 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:33 AM) Thusness: One is Brahman, the other is DO
(12:34 AM) Thusness: One is mirror, the other is pure manifestation
(12:34 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:36 AM) Thusness: 'Self' is grasped unknowingly because it is independent, changeless
(12:36 AM) Thusness: Therefore they can't treasure the Transience
(12:37 AM) Thusness: They can't c conditions
(12:37 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:37 AM) Thusness: The Transience and conditions are most sacred
(12:38 AM) Thusness: How can Self c this?
(12:38 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:39 AM) Thusness: But one must know the emptiness nature of Transience, unfindable and ungraspable
(12:39 AM) Thusness: And rises when condition is
(12:40 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:40 AM) Thusness: When we say attributes, we r referring to the empty nature of awareness
(12:41 AM) AEN: wat u mean
(12:41 AM) Thusness: But awareness is full of colors
(12:41 AM) AEN: u mean attributelessness?
(12:41 AM) AEN: icic
(12:41 AM) Thusness: Like 'redness' of a flower
(12:42 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:42 AM) Thusness: But to advatins, it is absence
(12:42 AM) Thusness: Nothing to do with awareness
(12:43 AM) AEN: u mean they see awareness as formless?
(12:43 AM) Thusness: yes
(12:43 AM) AEN: icic
(12:44 AM) Thusness: Means absence of attributes as colorless, formless
(12:44 AM) Thusness: But what buddhism is referring is its emptiness nature
(12:45 AM) Thusness: Not that there is a real formless entity
(12:45 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:45 AM) Thusness: Awareness is appearances appearing when condition is
(12:46 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:46 AM) Thusness: awareness is not free of thoughts
(12:46 AM) Thusness: To advaitins, it is.
(12:47 AM) Thusness: To buddhist practitioner, thought is awareness
(12:48 AM) Thusness: One thought arises
(12:48 AM) Thusness: Next one
(12:48 AM) Thusness: Like what Ajhan Amaro said
(12:48 AM) Thusness: There is no worry abt no thought, no conceptually
(12:49 AM) Thusness: All will be experienced in their most vivid forms
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:2008:
(12:21 AM) Thusness: Why u worry so much abt others ppl stage?
(12:22 AM) AEN: lol
(12:23 AM) Thusness: Rather pray hard that u will not be misled and go through countless lives of rebirth again
(12:23 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:23 AM) Thusness: What u must have is to correctly discern
(12:24 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:25 AM) Thusness: If u want to hv clarity of the essence of the six phases, discern and understand correctly.
(12:25 AM) Thusness: What if I m no more around?
(12:25 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:26 AM) Thusness: Rather ask urself have u correctly understood then abt others
(12:27 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:27 AM) Thusness: How I know?
(12:27 AM) AEN: oic
(12:27 AM) Thusness: U kept asking abt others, I worry more abt u.
(12:27 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:28 AM) Thusness: If u know, u will be able to know r they there.
(12:28 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:29 AM) Thusness: Like ken and Ajahn Amaro clearly have same experience but different understanding
(12:29 AM) Thusness: David loy treat them the same too.
(12:29 AM) Thusness: Not realizing the differences
(12:30 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:30 AM) Thusness: So have the right understanding
(12:31 AM) Thusness: One is abiding, the other is non-abiding
(12:32 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:32 AM) Thusness: One is still efforting, the other is effortless
(12:32 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:33 AM) Thusness: One is Brahman, the other is DO
(12:34 AM) Thusness: One is mirror, the other is pure manifestation
(12:34 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:36 AM) Thusness: 'Self' is grasped unknowingly because it is independent, changeless
(12:36 AM) Thusness: Therefore they can't treasure the Transience
(12:37 AM) Thusness: They can't c conditions
(12:37 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:37 AM) Thusness: The Transience and conditions are most sacred
(12:38 AM) Thusness: How can Self c this?
(12:38 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:39 AM) Thusness: But one must know the emptiness nature of Transience, unfindable and ungraspable
(12:39 AM) Thusness: And rises when condition is
(12:40 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:40 AM) Thusness: When we say attributes, we r referring to the empty nature of awareness
(12:41 AM) AEN: wat u mean
(12:41 AM) Thusness: But awareness is full of colors
(12:41 AM) AEN: u mean attributelessness?
(12:41 AM) AEN: icic
(12:41 AM) Thusness: Like 'redness' of a flower
(12:42 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:42 AM) Thusness: But to advatins, it is absence
(12:42 AM) Thusness: Nothing to do with awareness
(12:43 AM) AEN: u mean they see awareness as formless?
(12:43 AM) Thusness: yes
(12:43 AM) AEN: icic
(12:44 AM) Thusness: Means absence of attributes as colorless, formless
(12:44 AM) Thusness: But what buddhism is referring is its emptiness nature
(12:45 AM) Thusness: Not that there is a real formless entity
(12:45 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:45 AM) Thusness: Awareness is appearances appearing when condition is
(12:46 AM) AEN: icic..
(12:46 AM) Thusness: awareness is not free of thoughts
(12:46 AM) Thusness: To advaitins, it is.
(12:47 AM) Thusness: To buddhist practitioner, thought is awareness
(12:48 AM) Thusness: One thought arises
(12:48 AM) Thusness: Next one
(12:48 AM) Thusness: Like what Ajhan Amaro said
(12:48 AM) Thusness: There is no worry abt no thought, no conceptually
(12:49 AM) Thusness: All will be experienced in their most vivid forms
Thanks for the sharing.
Yes, imo, thoughts can be awareness as well. Otherwise no-self will be a thoughtless state... and one will not be able to function. But it is not.
Additionally, there is also a distinction between 'awareness distracted' and 'awareness undistracted.' IMO, the former is unaware of the characteristic(nature/essence) of an experience.
Indeed.. thanks for sharing :)
p.s. just found something by Thusness which seems to correlate to what you said regarding the attachment to luminosity:
2008:
(3:47 PM) Thusness: It is the 'dropping' or 'non-grasping' that is more important. :)
(3:47 PM) Thusness: accompanied with the deep insight of non-duality and emptiness.
(3:49 PM) Thusness: The biggest problem after non-dual experience is wanting to have that experience.
(3:49 PM) AEN: wat u mean
(3:49 PM) Thusness: hearing 'sound', there is the urge to hear it clearer, more vivid and claer
(3:49 PM) Thusness: when seeing, there is the urge to see clearer.
(3:50 PM) Thusness: so there is effort towards sustaining 'raw'
(3:50 PM) Thusness: But the truth is in 'dropping the self', 'dropping any form of grasping' that luminous clarity improves.
(3:51 PM) Thusness: that moment is gone completely.
(3:51 PM) AEN: oic..
(3:51 PM) Thusness: so practice the 'non-grasping', totally open, drop all.
(3:51 PM) Thusness: u must 'feel' the essence of it.
(3:52 PM) Thusness: read the second door I told longchen, it is important.
(3:52 PM) AEN: icic..
(3:52 PM) AEN: but btw when practicing mindfulness there is an effort towards sustaining 'rawness' rite
(3:52 PM) Thusness: first is non-duality no-self , then it is second door.
(3:52 PM) AEN: u mean shld be totally effortless
(3:53 PM) AEN: icic..
....
(11:32 PM) Thusness: But it is non-dual
(11:32 PM) AEN: icic..
(11:32 PM) Thusness: So it is a passing phase
(11:33 PM) AEN: oic..
(11:33 PM) Thusness: Then emptiness
(11:33 PM) AEN: icic..
(11:33 PM) Thusness: Then non-conceptuality to give up all mental gymnastics
(11:34 PM) Thusness: All concepts and theories because it is so confusing trying to sync
(11:34 PM) Thusness: U Nvm read what I wrote ah?
(11:35 PM) Thusness: I said there will be a period of desync
(11:35 PM) Thusness: And practitioner will rather rest in naked awareness
(11:36 PM) Thusness: last time I wrote to jonls also
(11:36 PM) Thusness: If u never get confuse...something like that
(11:37 PM) AEN: oic.. ya
(11:37 PM) Thusness: Then one prefers to be authenticated in isness
(11:37 PM) Thusness: Something like that
(11:38 PM) AEN: oic..
(11:38 PM) Thusness: Totally confused then one give up thoughts, give up views, give up concepts
(11:38 PM) Thusness: Give up solutions
(11:39 PM) Thusness: Just merely let go
(11:39 PM) Thusness: We become clear, vivid and luminous
(11:40 PM) Thusness: But that will also subsides
(11:40 PM) AEN: what will subside
(11:40 PM) Thusness: Very soon non-conceptuality will become an object of practice
(11:40 PM) AEN: oic
(11:41 PM) Thusness: That sharp, vivid, crystal experience
(11:41 PM) Thusness: Like whole body become a crystal
(11:41 PM) AEN: icic..
(11:42 PM) Thusness: Everything thing becomes very clear
(11:42 PM) AEN: oic..
(11:42 PM) Thusness: As if u can touch thought with that clarity
(11:42 PM) AEN: wat u mean
(11:42 PM) Thusness: As if u can touch sound
(11:42 PM) AEN: oic
(11:44 PM) AEN: btw u read my email just now?
(11:44 PM) AEN: other than the self and other part isit ok
(11:44 PM) Thusness: that clarity is like a crystal clear sensation and u r 'touching' the arising as with ur clarity
(11:45 PM) Thusness: No yet all
(11:45 PM) AEN: icic..
(11:45 PM) Thusness: This crystal clear sensation will very soon become an object of grasping
(11:46 PM) Thusness: Okie
(11:49 PM) Thusness: I don't know his experience
(11:51 PM) AEN: oic..
(11:51 PM) Thusness: Observe longchen experience more important
(11:52 PM) Thusness: All his experiences are very valuable
(11:52 PM) AEN: oic..
(11:52 PM) Thusness: And he is very sincere
(11:52 PM) AEN: icic..
(11:53 PM) Thusness: I tell u abt the crystal clear sensation because it will come
(11:54 PM) AEN: oic..
(11:54 PM) AEN: just now morning practice mindfulness in the park, v clear.. but not crystal clear like wat u said la
(11:54 PM) Thusness: don't get distracted
(11:54 PM) AEN: can feel the negative ion.. lzls can feel v strong also
(11:54 PM) AEN: then i just practice mindfulness
(11:54 PM) AEN: on the sensation
(11:55 PM) Thusness: Yes
(11:55 PM) AEN: very strange its like electric current like that
(11:55 PM) AEN: then i become very calm and mindful of the sensation in my hands
(11:55 PM) Thusness: Icic
(11:58 PM) Thusness: A practitioner will ding dong to and fro wanting to feel as much presence as possible until one get over attentive
(11:58 PM) AEN: whats wrong with over attentive :P
(11:59 PM) Thusness: till one realise the link between that experience of crystal clear sensation
(12:00 AM) Thusness: The experience of what I call transparency
(12:00 AM) Thusness: is in letting go.
(12:01 AM) Thusness: Is in non abiding
(12:02 AM) Thusness: Then practitioner will 'love' and 'dare' to give up
(12:02 AM) Thusness: Hehe
(12:03 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:08 AM) AEN: Then practitioner will 'love' and 'dare' to give up --> actually also lead to the crystal clear sensation rite
(12:08 AM) AEN: cos the crystal clear sensation is suppose to be naturally present and effortless
(12:08 AM) AEN: shld not require effort
(12:08 AM) AEN: rite
(12:11 AM) Thusness: not should be effortless or escorting
(12:12 AM) Thusness: It is because our nature is emptiness
(12:12 AM) Thusness: Is impermanence
(12:12 AM) Thusness: and luminosity
(12:13 AM) AEN: oic..
(12:14 AM) AEN: so dropping helps us see its emptiness?
(12:14 AM) Thusness: By attempting to experience more 'presence' of what that is already gone is what that is preventing it.
(12:14 AM) AEN: oic
(12:15 AM) AEN: ic.. so any attempt is to miss its ungraspableness/impermanence?
(12:16 AM) Thusness: But we will continue to do it until our emptiness nature is clearly seen. Deep enough to replace our inherent view.
(12:17 AM) Thusness: Then non-dual will become effortless.
Originally posted by simpo_:Hi Simpo, what is the 'view' that you were efforting to get into at that point?
I am referring to the 'view' of no-self. Actually, the word view can be misleading but there is no way to describe it.
Put it another way, before the stabilisation of no-self... it is hard to see how the 'sense of self' is muddled in the contents/thoughts. One will have a tendency to apply effort to get into a particular preferred state. With the stabilisation of no-self, this effort is correctly understood as 'sense of self' efforting. Every effort that is being applied causes the arising of the sense of self. It is like a dog trying to bite its own tail... going around in loop.
Also, what triggered off the insight into emptiness in the first place?
There is no way to really trigger an insight into emptiness apart from deconstructing. But then deconstruction can also lead to other experiences... Also when the insight comes it will be when least expected.
Prior to insight into emptiness, there may be a strong luminosity experience... but one must not get attached to it and let it go. This may allow the other characteristics (eg emptiness) to shine through.
There is a distinction between experience and realisation. In the realisation, there is a knowing. In an experience, there is a misinterpretation. For example, these experiences can be quite similar to Kundalini arising... The main difference is that an experience can be a misinterpretation of what actually happened.
A misinterpretation of what actually happened will prevent further and deeper experiences.
For example, if one has an I AM experience and believe that there is an eternal witness/observer. ... he/she will not be able to have a non-dual experience. Thus the opportunity to directly understand/realise non-duality is severed by the misinterpretation caused by the I AM experience. This same thing applies to the realisation of emptiness and no-self.
Actually...all experiences are already no-self and empty... It is because this is so that liberation is possible.
Simpo, thank you for your explanation. your this and previous explanations have been very useful and clear.
I hope people make full use of the sharings in this forum and AEN's blog. Frankly, i have been many years in dharma but i have not come across such sharings so clear, direct and certain, based on direct experience. Please do not waste it.
Originally posted by simpo_:Thanks for the sharing.
Yes, imo, thoughts can be awareness as well. Otherwise no-self will be a thoughtless state... and one will not be able to function. But it is not.
I have read that Tulku Urgyen said that in rigpa, there is no definitely conceptual thoughts. I have been thinking about this on and off for a long time too. Maybe it has something to do with instantaneous self-liberation of thought when it arises due to recognition of its nature directly.
Coincidentally, just saw this online...
“Teachers say, ‘Now meditate,’ then one sits down and one may think that one should imagine emptiness. That is not what is meant. What is meant is don’t wander, don’t wander. Hearing the word meditate, it sounds like one has to do something. But there is not even as much as a dust mote to do as an act of meditation. It’s just like space here — a totally inconcrete openness. Try to imagine that, imagine space. Can you imagine space? You can imagine it is empty, but that is a thought. Does that thought help anything? To meditate on a thing means bringing that to mind, but can you bring space to mind? Okay, space is empty. To keep that in mind is another thought. But without thinking anything, meditate on space. Can you? Isn’t it better to leave it unimagined? Unmeditated? That is why it is said: The supreme meditation is to not meditate. The supreme training is to keep nothing in mind. While resting free of anything to imagine, like space, do not be distracted for even one instant. The one who trains like that can truly be called a ‘space yogi’. A yogi is an individual who connects with that which is naturally so. Space means that which always is. Remain without imagining anything at all, not meditating on anything. Once you start to meditate on space, it becomes an imitation. Simply allow the space to not wander. Remain undistracted. There is no impetus for any thoughts to reoccur. A thought is a mental way of formulating something — in other words, our attention formulates a thought. The thought doesn’t come from anywhere else. If we don’t think, where would a thought come from? In the basic space that is unimaginable, remain undistractedly. Let your indescribable awareness remain undistracted in the naked state of basic space. It doesn’t have to be imagined, because this basic space that is utterly naked is our own nature already. You don’t have to imagine that this is so.” -Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche
Originally posted by Jui:Since I can't really tell, (seems like it's incredibly easy to get stuck in one mind and think you've got anatta) mind giving a list of names of those mahayana master who who have actual realization of anatta and emptiness?
Yesterday I found a truly good video by a modern living Mahayana master (Ven Hui Lu), I also sent to Thusness who found it very good: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDVQVq0UM6U&feature=related
Rarely see practitioners, teachers or masters realize this nowadays... but anything short of this is not Buddhism. Anything short of this is Hinduism... and most Buddhists are Hindus in Buddhist drag nowadays.
http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/p/chinese-articles.html
深入观行, 婆酰迦�。
了悟ç»�æ—¨, ç›´æŒ‡æ— å¿ƒã€‚
æ— æ‰§èƒ½æ‰€, 忘å�´èº«å¿ƒã€‚
方知�性, �需明相。
明相�性, �色明心。
真心空性, �缘显相。
迷时幻相, 悟时真心。
山河大地, 原是法身。
色声香味, 尽是妙心。
Dogen: Impermanence is Buddha-nature.
å…祖慧能曰：“æ— å¸¸è€…ï¼Œå�³ä½›æ€§ä¹Ÿï¼›æœ‰å¸¸è€…，å�³ä¸€åˆ‡å–„æ�¶è¯¸æ³•åˆ†åˆ«å¿ƒä¹Ÿã€‚”
é�“元禅师曰：“è�‰æœ¨ä¸›æž—ä¹‹æ— å¸¸ï¼Œå�³ä¸ºä½›æ€§ï¼›äººç‰©èº«å¿ƒä¹‹æ— 常，å�³ä¸ºä½›æ€§ï¼›å›½åœŸå±±æ²³æ˜¯æ— 常，以其å�³ä½›æ€§æ•…。阿耨多罗三è—�三è�©æ��æ˜¯æ— å¸¸ï¼Œä»¥å…¶å�³ä½›æ€§æ•…。大般涅槃是佛性，以其å�³æ— 常故。æŒ�二乘诸ç§�å°�è§�者，ç»�师ã€�论师ã€�三è—�师ç‰ç‰ï¼Œçš†å¯¹å…祖言论惊疑怖ç•�。如是则彼ç‰å�³ä¸ºå¤–é�“之党。”
http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/08/non-duality-of-essence-and-form.html
Non-duality of Essence and Form
Posted by: An Eternal Now
http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=H6A674nlkVEC&pg=PA21&lpg=PA21
From Bendowa, by Zen Master Dogen
Question Ten:
Some have said: Do not concern yourself about birth-and-death. There is a way to promptly rid yourself of birth-and-death. It is by grasping the reason for the eternal immutability of the 'mind-nature.' The gist of it is this: although once the body is born it proceeds inevitably to death, the mind-nature never perishes. Once you can realize that the mind-nature, which does not transmigrate in birth-and-death, exists in your own body, you make it your fundamental nature. Hence the body, being only a temporary form, dies here and is reborn there without end, yet the mind is immutable, unchanging throughout past, present, and future. To know this is to be free from birth-and-death. By realizing this truth, you put a final end to the transmigratory cycle in which you have been turning. When your body dies, you enter the ocean of the original nature. When you return to your origin in this ocean, you become endowed with the wondrous virtue of the Buddha-patriarchs. But even if you are able to grasp this in your present life, because your present physical existence embodies erroneous karma from prior lives, you are not the same as the sages.
"Those who fail to grasp this truth are destined to turn forever in the cycle of birth-and-death. What is necessary, then, is simply to know without delay the meaning of the mind-nature's immutability. What can you expect to gain from idling your entire life away in purposeless sitting?"
What do you think of this statement? Is it essentially in accord with the Way of the Buddhas and patriarchs?
Answer 10:
You have just expounded the view of the Senika heresy. It is certainly not the Buddha Dharma.
According to this heresy, there is in the body a spiritual intelligence. As occasions arise this intelligence readily discriminates likes and dislikes and pros and cons, feels pain and irritation, and experiences suffering and pleasure - it is all owing to this spiritual intelligence. But when the body perishes, this spiritual intelligence separates from the body and is reborn in another place. While it seems to perish here, it has life elsewhere, and thus is immutable and imperishable. Such is the standpoint of the Senika heresy.
But to learn this view and try to pass it off as the Buddha Dharma is more foolish than clutching a piece of broken roof tile supposing it to be a golden jewel. Nothing could compare with such a foolish, lamentable delusion. Hui-chung of the T'ang dynasty warned strongly against it. Is it not senseless to take this false view - that the mind abides and the form perishes - and equate it to the wondrous Dharma of the Buddhas; to think, while thus creating the fundamental cause of birth-and-death, that you are freed from birth-and-death? How deplorable! Just know it for a false, non-Buddhist view, and do not lend a ear to it.
I am compelled by the nature of the matter, and more by a sense of compassion, to try to deliver you from this false view. You must know that the Buddha Dharma preaches as a matter of course that body and mind are one and the same, that the essence and the form are not two. This is understood both in India and in China, so there can be no doubt about it. Need I add that the Buddhist doctrine of immutability teaches that all things are immutable, without any differentiation between body and mind. The Buddhist teaching of mutability states that all things are mutable, without any differentiation between essence and form. In view of this, how can anyone state that the body perishes and the mind abides? It would be contrary to the true Dharma.
Beyond this, you must also come to fully realize that birth-and-death is in and of itself nirvana. Buddhism never speaks of nirvana apart from birth-and-death. Indeed, when someone thinks that the mind, apart from the body, is immutable, not only does he mistake it for Buddha-wisdom, which is free from birth-and-death, but the very mind that makes such a discrimination is not immutable, is in fact even then turning in birth-and-death. A hopeless situation, is it not?
You should ponder this deeply: since the Buddha Dharma has always maintained the oneness of body and mind, why, if the body is born and perishes, would the mind alone, separated from the body, not be born and die as well? If at one time body and mind were one, and at another time not one, the preaching of the Buddha would be empty and untrue. Moreover, in thinking that birth-and-death is something we should turn from, you make the mistake of rejecting the Buddha Dharma itself. You must guard against such thinking.
Understand that what Buddhists call the Buddhist doctrine of the mind-nature, the great and universal aspect encompassing all phenomena, embraces the entire universe, without differentiating between essence and form, or concerning itself with birth or death. There is nothing - enlightenment and nirvana included - that is not the mind-nature. All dharmas, the "myriad forms dense and close" of the universe - are alike in being this one Mind. All are included without exception. All those dharmas, which serves as "gates" or entrances to the Way, are the same as one Mind. For a Buddhist to preach that there is no disparity between these dharma-gates indicates that he understands the mind-nature.
In this one Dharma [one Mind], how could there be any differentiate between body and mind, any separation of birth-and-death and nirvana? We are all originally children of the Buddha, we should not listen to madmen who spout non-Buddhist views.
..................
Chinese translation:
é�“元禅师《办é�“è¯�》-洪文亮è€�师(æ—¥ä¸)翻译 (12/11/2009)
问：有人说ä¸�è¦�怕生æ»ï¼Œå› 为有一ç§�很快å�¯ä»¥å‡ºç¦»ç”Ÿæ»çš„方法。这就是说å�ªè¦�知é�“心性常ä½�就对了。æ¤èº«æœ‰ç”Ÿæœ‰ç�，å�¯æ˜¯å¿ƒæ€§å�´ä¸�ç�。å�‡å¦‚知é�“ä¸�生ä¸�ç�的心性在我们的身ä¸ï¼Œå°±æ˜¯æˆ‘们本性，而身体是一个å�‡ç›¸ï¼Œæ»æ¤ç”Ÿå½¼ä¸�定，心å�´å¸¸ä½�在过去现在未æ�¥è€Œä¸�å�˜ï¼Œå¦‚èƒ½è¿™æ ·äº†è§£ä¾¿æ°¸è¿œè§£è„±ç”Ÿæ»ã€‚æ¤ç”Ÿæ»æ—¶ï¼Œå�³å…¥æ€§æµ·ï¼Œå…¥æ€§æµ·è‡ªç„¶å°±æœ‰è¯¸ä½›å¦‚æ�¥çš„妙德，现在虽然已ç»�明白这个é�“ç�†ï¼Œå› 为被å‰�世的妄业所æˆ�的身体还在，所以还ä¸�èƒ½å’Œè¯¸åœ£ä¸€æ ·ã€‚å¦‚æžœè¿˜ä¸�知é�“æ¤ç�†ï¼Œé‚£å°±æ°¸è¿œä¼šåœ¨ç”Ÿæ»æµ·ä¸å¤´å‡ºå¤´æ²¡ã€‚å› æ¤ä¹‹æ•…，å�ªè¦�ä½ èµ¶å¿«æ˜Žäº†å¿ƒæ€§çš„å¸¸ä½�，何必闲å��空过一生，ç‰å¾…ç©ºèŠ±ç»“æžœï¼Ÿè¿™æ ·çš„è¯´æ³•ï¼Œæ˜¯è¯¸ä½›è¯¸ç¥–æ£ä¼ 的法å�—？
ç”ï¼šçŽ°åœ¨ä½ æ‰€è¯´çš„å®Œå…¨ä¸�是佛法，是仙尼外é�“之è§�。这个外é�“之è§�是说，我们身体里有个ç�µçŸ¥ï¼Œè¿™ä¸ªçŸ¥ï¼Œé�‡ç¼˜å°±èƒ½åˆ†åˆ«å–„æ�¶æ˜¯é�žã€�痛痒苦ä¹�。而æ¤ç�µæ€§å½“æ¤ç”Ÿç�时，离æ¤ç”Ÿå½¼ï¼Œçœ‹æ�¥ä¼¼ä¹Žæ¤ç�彼生，所以认为常ä½�ä¸�ç�，这是外é�“之è§�ã€‚ä»–ä»¬ä»¥ä¸ºè¿™æ˜¯ä½›æ³•ï¼Œç®€ç›´æ˜¯æŠŠç“¦ç ¾å½“é‡‘å®�，这ç§�痴迷真å�¯ç¾žï¼Œæ— 以为喻。大å”�å›½çš„æ…§å¿ å›½å¸ˆæ·±è¯«è¿™ä¸ªè¯´æ³•ï¼Œè®¡è‘—å¿ƒå¸¸ç›¸ç�的邪è§�，以为是诸佛的妙法，起生æ»çš„æœ¬å› ï¼Œè€Œä»¥ä¸ºèƒ½ç¦»ç”Ÿæ»ï¼Œé�žæ„šä¸ºä½•ï¼Ÿå�¯å�¹å�¯ä¼¶ï¼�è¦�知é�“这是外é�“的邪è§�，ä¸�å�¯å�¬ï¼�事到如今ä¸�得已，为了伶悯这些人，救救æ¤é‚ªè§�，我å†�æ�¥ç”³è¯´ä¸€ç•ªã€‚
佛法本æ�¥è¯´æ˜Žèº«å¿ƒä¸€å¦‚ã€�性相ä¸�二，å�°åº¦ä¸å›½éƒ½çŸ¥é�“这个é�“ç�†ï¼Œå“ªèƒ½è¿�背？何况若è¦�说常ä½�，万法都是常ä½�，ä¸�分身与心；è¦�说寂ç�，诸法都是寂ç�，还è¦�分心与相å�—？说身ç�心常，ä¸�是è¿�背æ£ç�†å�—？ä¸�å�ªè¿™æ ·ï¼Œåº”该è¦�了解生æ»å°±æ˜¯æ¶…槃，ä¸�å�¯ä»¥åœ¨ç”Ÿæ»ä¹‹å¤–说涅槃。å†�说，以为心离开身体而常ä½�ï¼Œä»¥è¿™æ ·çš„äº†è§£ï¼Œå¦„è®¡ä¸ºè§£è„±ç”Ÿæ»çš„佛智，è¦�知é�“这个了解知觉之心，还ä¸�是在生ç�ä¸è€Œä¸�常ä½�å�—？这个è§�解便ä¸�æ”»è‡ªç ´ã€‚ä»”ç»†ä½“ä¼šèº«å¿ƒä¸€å¦‚æ˜¯ä½›æ³•çš„è¦�旨，怎么说æ¤èº«ç”Ÿç�时，唯独æ¤å¿ƒç¦»èº«è€Œä¸�生ç�ï¼�å�‡å¦‚有时一如，有时é�žä¸€å¦‚çš„è¯�，佛所说的自然都是虚妄ä¸�å�¯ä¿¡ã€‚å�ˆè®¤ä¸ºç”Ÿæ»å¿…é¡»è¦�厌离，难å…�就犯了谤佛之罪，å�¯ä¸�慎哉？è¦�知é�“佛法有心性大总相法门，包括一大法界，ä¸�分性相，ä¸�说生ç�，è�©æ��涅槃也都是心性。一切诸法万象森罗都是一心，这些诸法皆平ç‰ä¸€å¿ƒï¼Œæ¯«æ— 差别，这是佛家所说的心性。å�¯ä»¥åœ¨ä¸€æ³•ä¸Šåˆ†èº«å¿ƒï¼Œåˆ†ç”Ÿæ»æ¶…槃å�—？既然我们都是佛的å¦ç”Ÿï¼Œä¸�è¦�去å�¬ç‹‚人胡言乱è¯ã€�这些外é�“之è§�。
Originally posted by Dharmadhatu:I have read that Tulku Urgyen said that in rigpa, there is no definitely conceptual thoughts. I have been thinking about this on and off for a long time too. Maybe it has something to do with instantaneous self-liberation of thought when it arises due to recognition of its nature directly.
Hmm...
Originally posted by Dharmadhatu:I have read that Tulku Urgyen said that in rigpa, there is no definitely conceptual thoughts. I have been thinking about this on and off for a long time too. Maybe it has something to do with instantaneous self-liberation of thought when it arises due to recognition of its nature directly.
Hi Dharmadhatu,
I don't think i am really qualified to talk about self-liberation. I am really at the very early stage of it.
From my limited experience, all i can say is that thoughts will be clearly seen... When there is no-self and there is clarity, thoughts are not followed. This allows the thoughts to be clearly seen and dissolve. . At times, thoughts may even cease. That mean, when the last thought dissolve there is a temporary space where no thought arise.
So, I will not classify no-self as any particular state. It can have thoughts as well as being without thoughts. In the clarity, these thoughts are very vivid and their dissolving is also very vivd.
Normally, with a sense of self... thoughts are fuzzy.... thoughts form a continunous chain.