xabir2005

Jamgon Kongtrul says: By progressing in the experiences of that meditation, one attains the four visions. First in the (first) vision of direct realization of the ultimate nature, one achieves the experiences of realization equivalent to that of the path of accumulation............... ..........Then in the (second)vision of the increase of experiences which is similar to the path of application.............. .............Then in the (third) vision of perfection of the intrinsic awareness, in the first, middle and final stages, One realize the paths of seeing and meditation (Until the seventh Bhumi)....... Then in the (fourth and last) vision of cessation into the ultimate nature, Because in the Three Pure Stages (8th to 10th Bhumis), the host of conceptual defilements are manifestly exhausted and the gross bodies are exhausted and the delusory perceptions are exahusted, this vision is called the dissolution. This vision is the great luminous intrinsic wisdom....... I distinctly remember Namdrol (that is where I found that info from in the first place) said that the fourth vision corresponds 8 to 16 bhumis (under the 16 bhumis scheme). But too lazy to find the thread for you. lol

Middle way is the viewless view free from extremes of being and non-being, eternalism and nihilism, etc etc. The view of anatta and dependent origination/emptiness constitutes the right view, when realized one becomes free from all views. Successively. One is emptiness of self pertaining to an atman, one is emptiness of self pertaining to all mental and physical phenomena. So it is the same, but applied to different things. Perception not reified is nirvana. That saṁsāra is nirvāṇa is a major tenet of Mahāyāna philosophy. "Nothing of saṁsāra is different from nirvāṇa, nothing of nirvāṇa is different from saṁsāra. That which is the limit of nirvāṇa is also the limit of saṁsāra; there is not the slightest difference between the two." [1] And yet there must be some difference between them, for otherwise no distinction would have been made and there would be no need for two words to describe the same state. So Nāgārjuna also distinguishes them: "That which, taken as causal or dependent, is the process of being born and passing on, is, taken noncausally and beyond all dependence, declared to be nirvāṇa." [2] There is only one reality -- this world, right here -- but this world may be experienced in two different ways. Saṁsāra is the "relative" world as usually experienced, in which "I" dualistically perceive "it" as a collection of objects which interact causally in space and time. Nirvāṇa is the world as it is in itself, nondualistic in that it incorporates both subject and object into a whole which, Mādhyamika insists, cannot be characterized (Chandrakīrti: "Nirvāṇa or Reality is that which is absolved of all thought-construction"), but which Yogācāra nevertheless sometimes calls "Mind" or "Buddhanature," and so forth. - David Loy This: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html Which stages of enlightenment? There are the 4 paths to arhant, 10 bhumis to buddhahood, 4 yogas of naropa, 5 ranks of tozan, 10 oxherding pictures, etc etc. I'll tell you though: Thusness Stage 5 can roughly equate with Sotapanna, and Thusness Stage 6 with 1st Bhumi, imo. But the insight of Stage 5 of Anatta is the same in regards with Sotapanna to Arhant, and the insight of Stage 6 Shunyata is the same between 1st bhumi to Buddhahood. It is just that different levels of afflictions (for sotapannas, etc, and bodhisattvas) and obscurations of knowledge (for bodhisattvas) are removed.

Anatta and shunyata is simply a truth that is always already the case, that is being realized. No literal merging is required: since there is no 'self' to merge or an existent objective 'truth' to merge with. Subject and object are both empty. Instead, you simply realize that no-self and emptiness is always already the case. You do not go from existence into non-existence. As the Buddha would say, there is no 'self' entity that could be pinned down in or apart from the five aggregation to begin with, i.e. an existent cannot be pinned down as a truth to begin with, less for 'it' to go into non-existence. Always already: in seeing only the seen, in hearing only the heard, no seer, hearer, perceiver, agent. Anatta is thus a dharma seal, to be realized, and not a stage of experience.

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. - Rob Burbea, http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/07/realizing-nature-of-mind.html

I don't see it this way. I see awareness/luminous clarity as manifestation, and manifestation dependently originates. What dependently originates is empty, hence no arising or cessation.

Not in a nihilistic way like saying car don't exist, rivers don't exist or weather don't exist - such positions don't make sense because obviously, you don't deny the phenomena of rivers, weather, etc. There just isn't a core or inherent existence to it. The same applies to awareness and knowing, and it can be directly realized by contemplating on Bahiya sutta.

Go contemplate non-dual, and then followed by Bahiya sutta. I've been there, done that. From I AM to non-dual to anatta to shunyata. Thusness 7 stages is precise, I know from experience.

Emptiness is not a position. Emptiness simply means empty of inherent existence, i.e. self. Like there is no windness of wind, carness of car, weather-ness of weather, river-ness of river.

If by scrubbing you mean removing afflictions, then yes, after realizing emptiness you still need to do it until 8th bhumi. When you reach 8th bhumi the stage of immovable, you will no longer be tempted or deceived by the senses.

Good points. Yes, refuge is an obvious distinguishing feature too - and unfortunately, there are a lot of westerners nowadays that teaches "Dharma Lite" rather than "The Real Thing" Dharma stripped off the aspects like refuge, rebirth, karma, etc: http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/en/archives/approaching_buddhism/introduction/dharma_lite.html

Because people ask about it and a discussion starts. Without these conditions, no conversations about it could begin. As I said - Buddha simply negates existents without asserting non-existence. We simply don't make a position out of it. Secondly, the Buddha goes as far as to say that no self or tathagata could be pinned down as a reality in or apart from the five skandhas. And he is always denying or negating a self.

Possibility of what? Tempted or deceived by what?

I don't cling to "a prospect of no-self" just as I don't cling to a position of "no santa claus". I simply negate self, but I do not make a position out of it. In every moment experience: in seeing just the seen, in hearing just the heard. No self, and no no-self either. I only negate self to others, for the purpose of pointing out something to them. In normal life I don't have a thought about self or no-self.

It depends what you mean by scrubbing. When you realize emptiness (aka path of seeing, 1st bhumi), you no longer can fall into the erroneous view of self and objects as inherent. However, afflictions still arise, until the end of the 7th bhumi. Therefore the first seven bhumis are called impure bhumis, simply because afflictive obscurations are still present to varying degrees. So there are stages in which afflictions are progressively cleared.

Emptiness cannot be clung to, since it simply denies existents without asserting non-existence:"The great 11th Nyingma scholar Rongzom points out that only Madhyamaka accepts that its critical methodology "harms itself", meaning that Madhyamaka uses non-affirming negations to reject the positions of opponents, but does not resort to affirming negations to support a position of its own. Since Madhyamaka, as Buddhapalita states "does not propose the non-existence of existents, but instead rejects claims for the existence of existents", there is no true Madhyamaka position since there is no existent found about which a Madhyamaka position could be formulated; likewise there is no false Madhyamaka position since there is no existent found about which a Madhyamaka position could be rejected." - Namdrol Emptiness cannot be obtained, since it is not an object. Emptiness is not a state either. But emptiness (the absence of inherent existence) can be realized. Emptiness is not a metaphysical position, and cannot be clung to. When realized, all views are liberated. If there is an object of clinging, that is not emptiness proper, if someone so called "clings to emptiness", that is not emptiness but an incorrect view of emptiness.

The emptiness of self is not just about realizing no separation of subject and object. You can realize no separation, and yet you still cling to the notion of an inherent knowing. If for example, you think that there is a substance of knowing, like a mirror, which nevertheless is inseparable with its reflections, or can only be known through its reflections, and therefore is not separated... you see through the separation, but you still cling to an inherent substance of knowing. So the view of duality is gone, but the view of inherency is in tact. The view of inherency is only removed after realizing anatta and shunyata. The view of inherency is twofold: the view of inherent self, and the view of inherent object. When you realize anatta, you realize that 'in seeing just the seen, seeing is just the seen', you no longer see a mirror that is inseperable from its reflections. At this point it is no longer about the inseparability of subject and object: rather, there is no subject, the subject is empty. You realize: all along no mirror, reflections alone is, i.e. all alone no subject, manifestation alone is. The process itself rolls and knows, no knower is necessary or exists. At which point, you move from Thusness Stage 4 into Thusness Stage 5. But there is still the view of inherent objects - a subtle trace of grasping at phenomena as 'truly there'. This is removed through having right view and penetrating into dependent origination and emptiness. You can only be truly clear about dependent origination after you realize anatta - as the Buddha teach, I do not say 'I see' but 'with what condition does seeing arise?'. Anatta allows you to overcome the dualistic view, then with the right pointers, teachings and learnings, one enters into　ｔｈｅ non-dual, non-local　ｖｉｅｗｌｅｓｓ view of dependent originated activities and processes. At one point, all phenomena becomes realized as a shimmering mirage and display of D.O. - nothing truly there. Like a magic show, like an illusion, like a dream, yet vivid and clear.

The two emptinesses can simultaneously authenticated, however, there are two steps to the realization. In other words, you first realize emptiness of self in atman, before you realize emptiness of phenomena. Realizing the emptiness of subject (a perceiver, seer, doer, etc) is not the smae as realizing the emptiness of objects (realizing that all phenomena dependently originates, are empty, like a magical illusion). There are those who realize the emptiness of a subject, and still hold that dharmas/phenomena have intrinsic existence. For such persons, even though they do not see an agent behind phenomena, phenomena cannot reveal its 'illusion-like and empty' nature. It is said that Arhats only realize the first emptiness, while bodhisattvas realizes both. So these are two different levels of views - the view of a subjective self, and the view that objects have its own existence, and both views must be liberated through the insights into the two emptinesses.

There are two emptiness: Emptiness of self in person (as in atman, soul, independent self, agent, perceiver, controller, etc), Emptiness of self in phenomena (self in phenomena means seeing mental and material phenomena as having independent, inherent existence)

I can't say it cannot be distinguished. If you say it cannot be distinguished, then people will get confused into thinking that experiencing bliss would be the same as realizing or recognizing awareness, which isn't the case. Many meditative states are blissful but does not bring one closer to the realization of awareness. However when you realize and experience non-dual awareness, it is bliss.

In Dzogchen, since you mentioned Rainbow Body, the realization of the two emptiness* is achieved at Third Vision at which point you become an awakened 1st Bhumi bodhisattva. From Third Vision to Fourth Vision you traverse 1~7 bhumi, and then 8~16 bhumis in the fourth, after which you achieve rainbow body and become a fully enlightened Buddha. This is not exactly 'celestial enlightenment' since it is nothing 'celestial' (celestial realms are still part of samsara), rainbow body happens when the elements of the body revert into wisdom light. *two emptiness: there are two levels of realizing emptiness, one is the emptiness of self, one is the emptiness of phenomena

Self-inquiry will take you to self-realization. This is a permanent realization and not a transitory state. You'll discover what the Advaita calls, sat-chit-ananda, which means beingness-consciousness-bliss, you'll realize your fundamental identity. But self-realization is not the end of the path, at least for me and Thusness, after which one will further that experience, and then move on to deeper insights and contemplations.

Oh incidentally, recently I was practicing metta (for the first time, lol) and noted this: I wrote to Thusness some time ago: I was reading the book 'beyond mindfulness' by bhante gunaratana, its a book about jhana practice. He recommends either metta or breathing mindfulness to reach jhana. He said metta can lead to jhana cos the feeling of metta is very close to jhanic bliss. I didn't understand this until I practice metta today... Just thinking over, may others be well, happy, and free from afflictions... Then there's this feeling of metta like emanating from the heart region and its blissful, I can definitely see how this can lead into jhana. There is also a freedom from all unwholesome mental states, aversions, etc... Even tho I wasn't practicing that in a meditation setting, just standing. When you experience metta, everyone who do harm to you, you don't feel a bit of aversion at all - you see the worse person as friend. There is an uber transcendence from all mental afflictions - its almost a kind of altered state, but not really. You need to truly experience this. p.s. Thusness said, " Yes and indeed an important practice. Do not think of the experience of jhana but rather relax and with utmost sincerity practice and metta. May others be well, happy and free from affiictions. "

Maybe just vedanta discussion would do. Since Buddhism has its own 'yogas' and 'tantras', Vedanta has its own 'yogas' and 'tantras', it might be a good idea to distinguish them.

Actually not my main point - I'm saying, bliss and awareness cannot be separated. Oh yes and of course emptiness too. p.s. the bliss of nondual awareness is actually unimaginable until you experience it.