xabir2005
-
Content count
2,119 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Everything posted by xabir2005
-
A question to the Buddhist schollars.
xabir2005 replied to Seth Ananda's topic in General Discussion
Seeing is not just seeing (no independent essence, dependently originated), therefore it is seeing. As Diamond Sutra keeps saying over and over again with countless examples: A is not A, therefore A is called A. It is the entire universe manifesting this seeing - the whole body-mind, which means, the eyes, the trees, the space, the wind, everything! You can never hope to experience D.O. if you don't realize and experience this: Zazen is “mustering the whole body-mind (the whole of existence-time, inclusive of “A” and “not-A”) to look at forms and listen to sounds,” which is described by Dogen as “direct experience.” p.s. Maha is not an experience, but the natural state of seeing, hearing, smelling, moving your hands, walking. When walking, the universe walks. There is no point in time where it isn't actually Maha. And yes, concepts don't fit, but it isn't enough just to say concepts don't fit... you need to realize and experience what dependent origination is in real time and at that point concepts do not apply. Even those in I AM stage says "concepts don't fit" and "this is about YOU", "look at YOURSELF", etc. But they know nothing about non-dual, Anatta, D.O., etc. Non-conceptuality per se doesn't liberate, the realization does, it liberates you from extreme views. -
Actually what Vmarco realized is important, but it is only Stage 1 or maybe 2 of Thusness Seven Stages of Enlightenment: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html It is the realization of 'I AM'... I have tried to point out other aspects like non-dual but I don't think he sees it yet. (of course even non-dual is not yet anatta or shunyata)
-
A question to the Buddhist schollars.
xabir2005 replied to Seth Ananda's topic in General Discussion
Actually, I do experience the entirety and not just the 4th line, non-conceptually. There are a few experiences involved: Maha, Disjoint and unsupported, and Anatta. The aspect of dependent origination is Maha... this is a non-conceptual experience. Apparently you experience Disjoint and unsupported, and Anatta, but you did not realize dependent origination or experienced Maha otherwise you wouldn't say they are conceptual. This also explains why in the earlier part of the post you insisted on impermanence and denied D.O. When you experience Maha, everything is a process of everything coming together to manifest this moment without agency. Rebirth totally makes sense in this (non-conceptual) perspective. You will totally understand what Dogen meant by: Zazen is “mustering the whole body-mind (the whole of existence-time, inclusive of “A” and “not-A”) to look at forms and listen to sounds,” which is described by Dogen as “direct experience.” If you read Dogen stuff, you will know that the most important thing he keeps emphasizing is Maha. -
How to determine someone's level of enlightenment?
xabir2005 replied to goldisheavy's topic in General Discussion
1st July... lets see... 23rd July and still going -
How to determine someone's level of enlightenment?
xabir2005 replied to goldisheavy's topic in General Discussion
Yes. Just a matter of pure and impure vision. -
How to determine someone's level of enlightenment?
xabir2005 replied to goldisheavy's topic in General Discussion
If you view them to be unestablished, you see them to be unestablished. If you view them to be established, they are seen to be established. You should not infer that therefore, they are real... the experience is vivid, apparent, seems very real... thats all you can say. Because it is only a matter of perception, there is no reality to it. -
How to determine someone's level of enlightenment?
xabir2005 replied to goldisheavy's topic in General Discussion
Ah yes. I get it... Was just reminded: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/07/view.html?showComment=1311329371153#c2942766163699014504 Anonymous July 22, 2011 4:37 AM When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. An Eternal Now July 22, 2011 6:09 PM Sorry I misread your message earlier. Indeed, what you have in view is what you see. -
How to determine someone's level of enlightenment?
xabir2005 replied to goldisheavy's topic in General Discussion
What you said is mostly in accord with what I said... except that I wouldn't even say 'you do not observe reality but observe that observation of reality' - it implies there is a reality apart from observation. i.e. there is a real santa claus out there apart from your perception of santa claus? p.s. I don't mean that therefore, observation and mind has inherent reality... everything is utterly unestablished, from santa claus, self, things, to mind. -
How to determine someone's level of enlightenment?
xabir2005 replied to goldisheavy's topic in General Discussion
I'm tired of explaining what I already said so I will simply quote Namdrol again: At base, the main fetter of self-grasping is predicated upon naive reification 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." ... "In other words, right view is the beginning of the noble path. It is certainly the case that dependent origination is "correct view"; when one analyzes a bit deeper, one discovers that in the case "view" means being free from views. The teaching of dependent origination is what permits this freedom from views." In daily life I do not hold onto a concept of Emptiness, but everything is experienced and realized to be like an illusion, just the magic of empty-luminosity, with the mind released from 'is' and 'is not'. Imagine: you were once deluded that there is a windness behind blowing, then suddenly you woke up and realized there is just insubstantial blowing activities... you no longer cling/be deluded by notions of 'windness' or even the notion 'no wind', you simply experience blowing without clinging. -
How to determine someone's level of enlightenment?
xabir2005 replied to goldisheavy's topic in General Discussion
The observation and investigation leads to the realization. Yet, emptiness is the nature of all thoughts and perceptions, whether you realized it or not, whether you observed it or not. If for example you imagine or visualize santa claus, it does not mean that santa claus is truly existing - it simply means there is a mental perception of santa claus and that is void of any substance, and that voidness is a fact or nature of the perception of santa claus. Even if you deludedly perceive that santa claus is real, doesn't make it so. Therefore emptiness is taught in the teachings as 'the nature of things', it is not a state or a perception. It is not a fabricated perception, but by investigating into the nature of everything, the nature of emptiness is being 'discovered', 'realized'. "Anger's nature is not rendered empty by looking; it was already empty and always will be. As anger is empty in essence, it cannot be changed or transformed in any way whatsoever. As anger, or any other thought or emotion, has no concrete nature, by looking into it and recognizing it, it naturally subsides. Only ignorance, the failure to know this fact, can sustain it." - Thrangu Rinpoche " Anatta is a seal, not a stage. Awareness has always been non-dual. Appearances have always been Non-arising. All phenomena are ‘interconnected’ and by nature Maha. Emptiness is the ground of all experiences." ~ Thusness -
How to determine someone's level of enlightenment?
xabir2005 replied to goldisheavy's topic in General Discussion
It can be realized and experienced (not as in experiencing an object per se, but the realization and experience of groundlessness, non-locality, non-abiding and utter release). Everything is magically apparent and yet ungraspable, unlocatable, and seeing this is amazing. Thusness: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/03/on-anatta-emptiness-and-spontaneous.html If we observe thought and ask where does thought arise, how does it arise, what is ‘thought’ like. 'Thought' will reveal its nature is empty -- vividly present yet completely un-locatable. It is very important not to infer, think or conceptualise but feel with our entire being this ‘ungraspability’ and 'unlocatability'. It seems to reside 'somewhere' but there is no way to locate it. It is just an impression of somewhere "there" but never "there". Similarly “here-ness” and “now-ness” are merely impressions formed by sensations, aggregates of causes and conditions, nothing inherently ‘there’; equally empty like ‘selfness’. This ungraspable and unlocatable empty nature is not only peculiar to ‘thought’. All experiences or sensations are like that -- vividly present yet insubstantial, un-graspable, spontaneous, un-locatable. -
How to determine someone's level of enlightenment?
xabir2005 replied to goldisheavy's topic in General Discussion
Emptiness is simply the absence of anything concrete or graspable that can be conceptualized. -
How to determine someone's level of enlightenment?
xabir2005 replied to goldisheavy's topic in General Discussion
Mind is not source of emptiness, emptiness is not source of mind. Luminosity and emptiness are inseparable, it would be meaningless to split them up. All phenomena are illusory displays of mind. Mind is no mind--the mind's nature is empty of any entity that is mind Being empty, it is unceasing and unimpeded, manifesting as everything whatsoever. http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/search/label/Karmapa%20Rangjung%20Dorje -
I am using the term 'Mind' and 'heart-mind' synonymously.
-
Have you realized Mind? Is Mind truly located inside the body? Does mind have a location?
-
A question to the Buddhist schollars.
xabir2005 replied to Seth Ananda's topic in General Discussion
Firewood becomes ash, and it does not become firewood again. Yet, do not suppose that the ash is future and the firewood past. You should understand that firewood abides in the phenomenal expression of firewood, which fully includes past and future and is independent of past and future. Ash abides in the phenomenal expression of ash, which fully includes future and past. Just as firewood does not become firewood again after it is ash, you do not return to birth after death. ~ Dogen Note: 'you do not return to birth after death' is not the denial of rebirth, it is the denial of the notion that a soul reincarnate, but the assertion that rebirth is the continuity of a causal process, neither same nor different Do not suppose that ash is the continuation of firewood, but do not suppose that firewood would simply annihilate suddenly either. Not finding entities but seeing dependent origination, one becomes free of extremes of eternalism and nihilism. -
A question to the Buddhist schollars.
xabir2005 replied to Seth Ananda's topic in General Discussion
is there no cause for this arising? If you think arising arise without cause, then there is no rebirth. If there is, then there is rebirth. In other words, a process of causal continuity. -
A question to the Buddhist schollars.
xabir2005 replied to Seth Ananda's topic in General Discussion
the arising of memory is rebirth The karmic tendencies, habitual tendencies manifesting is rebirth How obvious rebirth is right now -
A question to the Buddhist schollars.
xabir2005 replied to Seth Ananda's topic in General Discussion
Yes. What I meant is that rebirth shld more accurately be a verb, just like awareness should more accurately be called awaring, just as wind is actually the blowing, etc. -
A question to the Buddhist schollars.
xabir2005 replied to Seth Ananda's topic in General Discussion
by the way rebirth is the continuity of a causal process... Happening even now, and occuring even at death as of course the process of karma cannot stop having effect until the process of karma creating stops. Rebirth is not the passing of a static noun entity or soul. As such, rebirth is also a verb: rebirthing. -
A question to the Buddhist schollars.
xabir2005 replied to Seth Ananda's topic in General Discussion
the realization of the twofold emptiness releases the mind from the views of "is" and "is not", and without such clinging naturally there is just an ungraspable verb - direct experiencing - the magic of empty-luminosity - emptiness is form -
A question to the Buddhist schollars.
xabir2005 replied to Seth Ananda's topic in General Discussion
i actually posted my line of inquiry and reflection on my bahiya sutta commentary... From "in seeing just seen" to no subject, object, distance, the concept of awareness and so on. "In seeing just the seen" has nothing to do with faith (and neither has it to do with logical conviction derived by analysis like madhyamika philosophy)... I can believe this is so (and I actually have deep faith in buddha from the beginning and knew about this sutra for years)... But unless I truly see that this is so, it wouldn't make sense to me experientially. You need to contemplate until realization occurs. -
A question to the Buddhist schollars.
xabir2005 replied to Seth Ananda's topic in General Discussion
Rebirth is relative right view like dependent origination is relative right view. Since what dependently originates is realized to be empty, this ends all views. The relative truths are not clung too either as even karma is ultimately empty. But we need to recognize karma on the relative level as we need to recognize d.o. -
A question to the Buddhist schollars.
xabir2005 replied to Seth Ananda's topic in General Discussion
actually I have talked about it a couple of times and adviced you to do the same but perhaps you didn't pick up... Direct path anatta contemplation ala bahiya sutta style (in contrast to more gradual methods like actualism) My anatta realization happened in october last year when I was still doing bmt (basic military training). I was at the one mind phase at that time. Since I was busy with bmt and didn't have much time to talk with thusness, he communicated important points about non-dual, total transparency, the mind-body dropoff and anatta to me in dreams (he later informed me it was his intentions to let me know certain important pointers in my dreams, and that it was possible for him to communicate in this way as we had some deep connections, sort of like a guru-student mind connection). Two weeks later I was contemplating on "in seeing just the seen, in hearing just the heard" while marching and it suddenly clicked. I realized anatta and actualized whatever was communicated to me in my dreams. The first article I wrote afterwards was this: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2010/10/my-commentary-on-bahiya-sutta.html?m=0 -
A question to the Buddhist schollars.
xabir2005 replied to Seth Ananda's topic in General Discussion
As a matter of fact the Buddha had taught that view of rebirth is right view and the view of annihalation is wrong view. ... And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view.