xabir2005

I have seen many Buddhist teachers and scholars who hold false views, many no different from eternalists. And many hermit non-scholarly Buddhists who are truly realized. So it's not like having a Ph.D in Buddhism is definitely going to help you get enlightened.

Oh, why?

basically what you are talking about is not emptiness per se, but how conceptual constructs and view (i.e. a belief and assertion about reality in terms of existence or non-existence) project reality to conventions, like mistaking appearances like cataracs to be truly existing objects such as falling hairs, while in truth all appearances dependently originates and are empty of inherent existence. e.g, when looking at a reflection in a mirror, to a cat or ignorant animal, the reflection is projected to be located inherently 'inside the mirror' as an independently existing being whom it can interact with while we know that actually the reflection is a merely dependently originated appearance that cannot be pinned down as 'existing inside the mirror' further, if it were the case that reflections exist inside the mirror, if we moved left and right, the reflection will have stayed static and not 'moved' along with our own movements. as such D.O. appearances are empty of inherent, locatable, fixed, independendent existence similarly, the entire experiential universe, is just like 'reflections in a mirror' because everything dependently originates and are empty of an independent, locatable existence or characteristic. or as Thusness gives an analogy about the red flower being red to humans, black to dogs, and others to others, characteristics being posited as inherent and located somewhere due to false cognition of independent existence is the source of our entire projected sense of a real self and a world. through correct cognition of d.o. and emptiness, such views dissolve, and one views all appearances are being illusion-like All that does not deny reality as we observe it, nor to say that there’s no reality outside the mind, but simply that no ‘reality in itself’ exists. Phenomena only exist in dependence on other phenomena.

The negation of the four extremes (existence, non-existence, both, neither) is automatic through emptiness, and all Mahayana Buddhists agree. As for Theravadins the negation of the four extremes of selfhood is automatic through anatta.

The four extremes are negated not by Tsongkhapa alone but by all Madhyamika.

Yes indeed... non-conceptual experiences are unable to remove our deep-seated views. Only the realization of the twofold emptiness will liberate.

Basically, what I consider as emptiness simply means that what dependently originates is empty of an independent, inherent, locatable existence. All appearances lack self-being and hence while appearing is fundamentally empty, thus being like illusions, like a dream, a mirage, etc. The teaching of emptiness due to dependent origination is peculiar to Buddhism alone.

If you are interested in learning Buddhism, you should begin with an introductory book such as http://www.amazon.com/dp/0767903692/ref=rdr_ext_tmb Buddhism is a practical teaching. Try to get familiarized with four noble truths and eightfold path.

I'm pretty sure Gorampa stresses the realization of emptiness.

There will be no Nagarjuna if there were no sutras. Nagarjuna simply explains the sutras.

The only freedom comes from realizing the twofold emptinesses which liberates the view of inherency. In other words it does not just come from merely sustaining a non-conceptual state (like being bare and naked in awareness), but from realizing the twofold emptinesses which liberates from extreme views.

Your post may present an understanding of the aspect of view, but not the realization. The realization is as Namdrol describes how the view dissolves into a wisdom that perceives all appearances as being like a magician's trick, like mirage, dream, form, bubbles, etc. The view aspect is as I describe here: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/07/view.html The View Posted by: An Eternal Now Just posted in The Tao Bums a week ago: I have just come to a new realisation of the implications of views in daily life. I could have misunderstood what goldisheavy meant but I think it has to do with the fields of meaning. I have realised how ideas, beliefs, notions, views pervade our life and causes attachment. I now see that every single attachment is an attachment to view, which, no matter what it is, comes to two basic clinging: the view 'there is' and the view 'there isn't'. I started by noticing how in the past I had a sense of self, body and awareness... That these all seem so real to me and I kept coming back to that subjective sense and this is no longer the case now: I don't even have a sense of a body nowadays. Then I realized that all these clingings are related to view. The view of There is.... Self, body, mind, awareness, world, whatever. Because of this clinging on to things as existent, they appear real to us and we cling to them. The only way to eradicate such clingings is to remove the root of clinging: the view of 'there is' and 'there isn't'. The realization of anatta removes the view of 'there is self', 'there is awareness' as an independent and permanent essence. Basically, any views about a subjective self is removed through the insight that "seeing is just the seen", the subject is always only its objective constituents. There is no more sense of self, body, awareness, or more precisely there is no clinging to a "there is" with regards to such labels. It is seen that these are entirely ungraspable processes. In short the clinging and constant referencing to an awareness, a self dissolves, due to the notion "there is" such things are being eradicated. The realization of dream-like reality removes the view of 'there are objects', the universe, the world of things... One realizes what heart sutra meant by no five skandhas. This is basically the same realization as anatta, except that it impacts the view "there is" and "there isn't" in terms of the objective pole, in contrast to the earlier insight that dissolves "there is" of a subjective self. What I have overlooked all these while is the implications of views and how the thicket of views cause all clingings and suffering and what underpins those thicket of views, and how realization affects and dissolves these views.

I don't see a need to compare his description to your incomplete explanation.

Thusness does not teach the view of substantial nonduality ala Advaita Vedanta. Thusness talks about anatta, dependent origination/emptiness. His map distinguishes the experiences he had gone through, from I AM to substantial non-dual (prior to realizing Buddhist view) to anatta and emptiness/dependent origination (stage 5 and 6). Thusness's map is highly related to my own personal progress: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2010/12/my-e-booke-journal.html

I have already commented on your points - there is something missing. As for C., obviously, realization of emptiness frees one from grasping to the three minds. This is standard prajnaparamita stuff, in Diamond Sutra (the past, present and future mind are ungraspable), etc, so it goes without being said. Plus, Thusness Stage 6: "Emptiness will reveal that not only is there no ‘who’ in pristine awareness, there is no ‘where’ and ‘when’."

Yes, I state that what Thusness writes is a true depiction of Buddhist sunyata. You disagree, so be it.

Oh yeah so what? Did I said otherwise? So you are a buddhist teacher and a scholar?

Whatever you think.

No need. I have no doubts about my realization.

Uhuh, and I never said otherwise. (Namdrol) ...At base, the main fetter of self-grasping is predicated upon naive refication of existence and non-existence. Dependent origination is what allows us to see into the non-arising nature of dependently originated phenomena, i.e. the self-nature of our aggregates. Thus, right view is the direct seeing, in meditative equipoise, of this this non-arising nature of all phenomena. As such, it is not a "view" in the sense that is something we hold as concept, it is rather a wisdom which "flows" into our post-equipoise and causes us to truly perceive the world in the following way in Nagarjuna's Bodhicittavivarana: "Form is similar to a foam, Feeling is like water bubbles, Ideation is equivalent with a mirage, Formations are similar with a banana tree, Consciousness is like an illusion."

Thusness Seven Stages makes perfect sense to me. "Everything appears as mere thoughtforms (conceptual constructs)" - actually, not all appearances are conceptual. There are conceptual (ideas, etc) and nonconceptual appearances (sense perceptions), all are equally empty. So emptiness isn't just about realizing the illusoriness of concepts, it is about realizing the illusion-like nature of all appearances be it conceptual or non-conceptual. At this point one realizes all appearances (conceptual and non-conceptual) to be empty, like a dream, like a mirage, like a magician's tricks, etc. Otherwise, there is nothing much I disagree with your statements. update: (Namdrol) ...At base, the main fetter of self-grasping is predicated upon naive refication of existence and non-existence. Dependent origination is what allows us to see into the non-arising nature of dependently originated phenomena, i.e. the self-nature of our aggregates. Thus, right view is the direct seeing, in meditative equipoise, of this this non-arising nature of all phenomena. As such, it is not a "view" in the sense that is something we hold as concept, it is rather a wisdom which "flows" into our post-equipoise and causes us to truly perceive the world in the following way in Nagarjuna's Bodhicittavivarana: "Form is similar to a foam, Feeling is like water bubbles, Ideation is equivalent with a mirage, Formations are similar with a banana tree, Consciousness is like an illusion."

Wow, your reference to me is pretty random. There is nothing that I said that is misleading.

actually there is a world of difference. Divine sight can be cultivated in shamatha and is common to all unliberated celestial beings or devas. No wisdom at all is necessary as this is just a mundane worldly phenomena, a mundane manipulation of one's energies and channels so that one can have extrasensory perception. Wisdom eye however is not derived from mundane worldly phenomena or manipulation or cultivation. It is derived from insight meditation on the ultimate nature of reality leading to a supramundane realization that liberates. You can cultivate shamatha and forever get stuck in samsara or the formless jhanas, unless you practice vipassana. Buddha's former teachers taught him formless jhanas, but they are just more mundane states that don't liberate, so he left those teachers in dissatisfaction. And as the scriptures clearly state as I said - no mundane powers are necessary nor are mundane powers helpful for liberation. The supramundane siddhi is simply insight discernment that results in liberation.

Love and desire are not necessarily the same. The Buddha teaches the cultivation of positive qualities like loving kindness and compassion, and the liberation and abandonment of afflictions such as desires, hatred, and so on.