xabir2005

A self that can be stable or unstable, can it be found anywhere? Relative labels like 'I am xabir' is fine. But like the word 'weather' does not refer to a findable entity but a process, same applies to 'self' which is simply an empty label for an ungraspable process. You may argue there are certain traits that define a person. But this is not an argument as there are certain traits that define cars, but no car essence can be found inside or outside its constituents. You can apply antidotes but when realization of anatta arises, one naturally is free from all extremes and will not err to any side. Otherwise it is an endless process of neti neti without end to the loop.

The emptiness of self is not a view as it does not assert or negate something about something. When realized there is a freedom from views relating to self. Simply put the non inherency of a self or agent lets us see 'there is' or 'is not' do not apply to subject, self, body, awareness etc. It is not a view to be clung to. It is simply the way things are - the way seeing is - without inherent seer. It should lead to comfort resting as the ungraspable stream of transient experiencing without clinging to an experiencer. Everything dependently originates relatively and thus are ultimately empty, including causes and conditions, therefore cause and effect are also like an illusion and utterly unestablished. I think vajrahridaya posted something about dzogchen teaching how cause and effect is illusory. Therefore shurangama sutra refutes the establishment of causes and conditions and causeless independent spontaneity. As lankavatara sutra says: "the unreality of their psychosomatic aggregates and the interacting conditions of the three planes of cosmic existence as originating from their deluded mind" In short whatever arises relatively does so via dependent origination, and are ultimately empty, non-arising, non-ceasing, non-abiding, unlocatable, ungraspable, including apparent causes and conditions. Simple jack said here http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/06/unborn-dharma.html?m=1 : I would usually sum up what's being said in this entry like this: Each moment is interdependently originated and inherently empty. Awareness and it's "knowing" aspect is also interdependently originated and inherently empty. At this phase there is no longer any association with an absolute arising, abiding, or cessation of "self" and phenomena. So each moment that arises according to causes and conditions, is self-perfected. The extremes of subject/object, self/other, existence/non-existence, etc. at this phase give way spontaneously to the "middle way;" because there is no longer an association with an absolute arising, abiding, or cessation of "self" and phenomena at this phase. Due to having insight into the unborn dharma: "By perceiving the unreality of phenomena, they brought about the cessation of the outflowing sensory consciousness. Because they cognized the unreality of their psychosomatic aggregates and the interacting conditions of the three planes of cosmic existence as originating from their deluded mind, they saw external and internal phenomena as devoid of any inherent nature and as transcending all concepts." What's your experience with the last paragraph? -SJ I replied: Hi, Everything is ungraspable, unlocatable, un-pinnable as a solid entity... Like weather, you can't say 'weather is located there' - weather is really not findable as an entity. Since there is no 'the weather' as such, you cannot say the entity 'the weather' is existing somewhere, or that 'the weather' is non-existent, since both claims predicate an existent entity. So 'it is', 'it is not', the four extremes, concepts about a substantial entity, as well as concepts about its birth, abiding, cessation, simply do not apply to all external and internal phenomena, which are simply an empty cognizance vividly shining yet located nowhere... transcending all concepts... just a magical, shimmering, luminous and empty mirage. i.e. The mirage of an island off shore on a sunny day looks there, but there is no core that can be found or located - similarly all experiences are apparent yet coreless, beyond concepts like 'it is there' and 'it is not there', it is unfathomable (since you cannot fathom a true existent entity 'there'). Since everything is an empty cognizance, there is nothing out there, or in here, or anywhere in between, therefore the cessation of the 'outflowing sensory consciousness' (I take it to mean projecting a solid world out of empty perceptions). The deluded mind is what projects inherent nature to the aggregates and the interacting conditions. Since all that dependently originates are like magical appearances, without a real place of origin, abidance, and destination, there is no true interaction of different entities - and therefore seeing from the perspective of this natural state of interconnectedness, all is self originated. What's your experience with it? ..... Haha... just saw that you wrote about your previous paragraphs. (I read backwards) Not very different from what I said.

Different causes and conditions give rise to different mental experiences. That is why we differ relatively speaking. We are not some cosmic soul.

Of course I was going to get to that. Mindstreams are diverse, but minds are empty of self, or seers. It would be more accurate to say there are different streams of seeing, different minds (note: mind does not imply self or seer, minds are empty of selves and are simply a process of thinking, seeing, etc). But ultimately there are not even 'minds' as 'minds' too are utterly unestablished unlocatable. In other words there are diversity of appearances but no independent essence found anywhere.

by saying there is a seer, you have fallen into the extreme of self view and eternalism plus you have asserted the dichotomy between subject and object. Seeing is simply a process, not an entity or perceiver. You assert a 'there is' while I do not assert a 'there is' or 'is not'. Just for sake of argument what do you think is the seer? P.s. Read this especially padmasambhava quote: Rigpa and Aggregates Posted by: An Eternal Now (Also see: Dzogchen, Rigpa and Dependent Origination) From Dharma Overground, Dharma Dan (Daniel M. Ingram): Dear Mark, Thanks for your descriptions and analysis. They are interesting and relevant. I think of it this way, from a very high but still vipassana point of view, as you are framing this question in a vipassana context: First, the breath is nice, but at that level of manifesting sensations, some other points of view are helpful: Assume something really simple about sensations and awareness: they are exactly the same. In fact, make it more simple: there are sensations, and this includes all sensations that make up space, thought, image, body, anything you can imagine being mind, and all qualities that are experienced, meaning the sum total of the world. In this very simple framework, rigpa is all sensations, but there can be this subtle attachment and lack of investigation when high terms are used that we want there to be this super-rigpa, this awareness that is other. You mention that you feel there is a larger awareness, an awareness that is not just there the limits of your senses. I would claim otherwise: that the whole sensate universe by definition can't arise without the quality of awareness by definition, and so some very subtle sensations are tricking you into thinking they are bigger than the rest of the sensate field and are actually the awareness that is aware of other sensations. Awareness is simply manifestation. All sensations are simply present. Thus, be wary of anything that wants to be a super-awareness, a rigpa that is larger than everything else, as it can't be, by definition. Investigate at the level of bare sensate experience just what arises and see that it can't possibly be different from awareness, as this is actually an extraneous concept and there are actually just sensations as the first and final basis of reality. As you like the Tibetan stuff, and to quote Padmasambhava in the root text of the book The Light of Wisdom: "The mind that observes is also devoid of an ego or self-entity. It is neither seen as something different from the aggregates Nor as identical with these five aggregates. If the first were true, there would exist some other substance. This is not the case, so were the second true, That would contradict a permanent self, since the aggregates are impermanent. Therefore, based on the five aggregates, The self is a mere imputation based on the power of the ego-clinging. As to that which imputes, the past thought has vanished and is nonexistent. The future thought has not occurred, and the present thought does not withstand scrutiny." I really found this little block of tight philosophy helpful. It is also very vipassana at its core, but it is no surprise the wisdom traditions converge. Thus, if you want to crack the nut, notice that everything is 5 aggregates, including everything you think is super-awareness, and be less concerned with what every little type of consciousness is than with just perceiving them directly and noticing the gaps that section off this from that, such as rigpa from thought stream, or awareness from sensations, as these are golden chains.

you are talking about dependent origination. I am talking about anatta. This is not a contradiction if you understand it from context. When I said seeing is seen, I don't mean the seen exists independently. I mean there is no seer seeing the seen. There is no agency behind seeing. This is anatta. The experience of dependent origination, of the universe manifesting this moment, action and experience, does not deny the previous insight of anatta. In fact it requires it. For how can you experience dependent origination if you think that an agent, perceiver or controller is behind things instead of simply a process of d.o.? So d.o. Does not contradict anatta but requires it.

to form a view about things is to land in the extremes of affirmation and negation... As you need to affirm something about something, it does not go beyond the extremes of 'there is' and 'is not'. Everything is a magical display, utterly unestablished and dream-like, from samsara to nirvana, apples, dependent origination, emptiness. While empty it vividly appears. This is not a contradiction but simply the way things are. To cling to wisdom and right view means you have established that there is wisdom, there is right view. Heart sutra says, no attainment, no suffering and end of suffering, no ignorance and no wisdom. Not even an emptiness. Just a magical display... Where is and is not do not apply.

Yes and this is deeply peaceful as you said... There is simply enjoying seeing, tasting, touching, without a need to rest in a view or experience, while at the same time not forming views like 'there is' or 'is not' with regards to everything - there is simply that ungraspable magic show displaying free from affirmation and negation. Actually to cling to view is still false view. To cling to view means one holds on to a 'there is' with regards to a view, experience, or state. As I said... ALL clingings without exceptions are a manifestation of view. The right view is simply no view...

I told Thusness what I said here and he seems to suggest I understood what he is getting at.

Selves and things are empty of inherent, independent and permanent existence... Yet while being empty, they vividly appear as sheer luminosity. Take some time to read this to understand more about emptiness: http://www.heartofnow.com/files/emptiness.html

well said...

I am simply pointing out that one should understand how view, experience and realization are interconnected... Previously the dream-like realization arose but it didn't occur to me its implications on view. So I missed the essence and purpose of prajna wisdom, how it leads to liberation...

It is possible to eradicate the view 'there is' and 'is not'. How? Through the realization of the twofold 'non-inherency'. For example before anatta one clings to a sense of an inherent awareness. One keeps referring back to an awareness that appears very real and is 'always here'. One keeps coming back to that sense... Why does this clinging keep arising? Simply speak: it is the view 'there is' an awareness, as an inherent, independent and permanent reality. This view is the cause of clinging and referencing back to an awareness. But it is possible to forever stop refering back to an awareness or background. It is the realization that 'seeing is just the seen' - awareness is simply all self-luminous transient manifestation. As such there is no longer clinging to the notion of 'there is' with regards to awareness. 'There is' cannot apply to awareness because awareness is an ungraspable process, it is not an entity. As such, a burden is lifted, a tendency to cling is released via realization. Anatta releases the view 'there is' or 'is not' with regards to a subjective self, body, awareness, etc. Similarly the realization of the emptiness of objects further releases various clingings on things simply by seeing how 'there is' does not apply to reality. Everything is dream like and apparitional, like a magic show. So you see, it is entirely possible to be free from views of 'there is' and 'is not'. In fact if you still believe that there is inherent awareness after anatta, something is very wrong. It probably means you experienced no-mind but the realization of anatta hasn't arisen. When you contemplate on the implications of view, you will come to a realization of how pervasive view is, and what is the fundamental core of view (is and is not) and how every suffering and clinging is simply a manifestation of view. Thusness has been hinting at me what I missed (he told me I haven't realized what view is but did not tell me what it was as he wanted me to find out for myself)... I considered deeply before realizing what it is about.

only the fundamental view of 'there is' and 'is not' is eradicated. Making view substantial is part of it.

Differences are relative... Ultimately everything is dream-like and empty, including nirvana. Nothing whatsoever is attained. The Diamond Sutra says arhat is no arhat therefore arhats are called arhats. Same cld be said about view, view is no view therefore its called view. Today I entered a cool state (actually it is becoming increasingly common) where I lucidly projected myself into a semi dream-state where everything I think becomes a visual (even auditory) reality and I could walk through walls etc fearlessly as I knew it is my projection. Everything I think becomes 'real'. From this it is seen that dreams are no different from waking life really. Indeed everything is just like a dream! I still can't walk through walls in waking life tho but maybe when my realization deepens I hope I wld lol

The ignorant clings ignorantly to 'there is' or 'is not', lost in clinging and suffering. The practitioner establishes 'right view' which is still a conceptual understanding of teachings, but this is a necessary step. The liberated is freed from all views of 'there is' or 'is not' and realizes that the right view is simply no view. Oh yes, what dependently originates is empty and therefore transcends extremes of 'is' or 'is not.

Actually there isn't a right view. If there is a right view, you are clinging to a 'there is' and falling into the same trap. All attachments come down to a basic 'there is' or 'is not'. The right view is simply a total eradication of views without remainder. The right view is no view. One is free from extremes of 'there is' or 'is not' and thereby all confusions, clinging, seeking and suffering.

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 view causes all clingings and suffering and what underpins those thicket of views, and how realization affects and dissolves these views. Related stuff: A view is a fundamental belief one holds about reality. For example, "everything exists" (sarva asti) .... The root of both these mistaken positions is "is" and "is not" -- for example "I exist now, and I will continue to exist after death" or "I exist now but when I die I will cease to exist". ~ Loppon Namdrol And http://nickdowntherabbithole.blogspot.com/2011/07/conversations-breakthrough.html#more

bump for goldisheavy

Indeed. Why get lost navigating yourself when you have access to living teachers and lineages backed up a history of countless experienced and enlightened yogis to support your path and realization (including texts, songs, advices, pithy instructions, time-tested techniques and practices, etc).

Can you give an example of the field of meanings?

Good stuff. Have you realized this yourself?

You need an experienced meditation teacher who can guide you on how to realize truth in experience, which is not as simple as understanding things merely intellectually.