xabir2005

Rinpoche: Although interdependence is itself conditioned, in reality it is unborn and empty; its true nature is unconditioned. But this is not an unconditioned reality like Brahma but an unconditioned truth i.e. the fact that all things are in reality empty, unborn, uncreated.

What prevents it? Why can't it be put into words? Every religion uses words, including Advaita. Of course, understanding the words is still not the same as direct experience or realisation.

Which I have said many times to be not true. One who realises dependent origination sees it without concepts or relying on any theory which Buddha have said. It is a non conceptual intuitive knowing. It is not dependent on frameworks. It is only when you are not yet enlightened, that you see it in terms of theories and concepts. 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." As Thusness said many years ago: ...This last part must be understood in terms of emptiness, no point of origination and no where found. The characteristics of dharma seal. The Dharmakaya itself must be understood in Samsara then it is considered right view in Buddhism. However the true essence of emptiness requires no establishment of views, itself is empty. There is no conventional understanding, there is just emptiness happening. That is sufficient. -- There is no teaching of it. There is no hearing about it. There is no knowing about it other than by actually experiencing it or realising it. However, through first conceptually understanding D.O. is still important as a raft and skillful means to lead to the non-conceptual experience and realisation of D.O. and emptiness.

BTW just want to clarify I'm not trying to start a comparison between Taoism and Buddhism, and have said previously that me, my friend Thusness, my Buddhist Master, and many other ancient and modern Chinese Zen Masters and Tibetan Rinpoches consider Lao Tzu as enlightened. However just like to clarify that the practice is different between the two traditions, and also, do not mistaken the state of nothingness as the realisation of no-self or emptiness. The insight is the realisation into the ever-present seal or nature of reality or no-self and the nature of awareness, it is not about a purest state. One who have experienced the 'state of nothingness' may want to look into the non-dual nature of awareness and no-self.

BTW one more point to add to my previous post. We still have to have the conceptual understanding of dependent origination and emptiness first -- it serves as a condition (but not the only condition) for the non-conceptual, direct intuitive insight and awakening to the truth of emptiness. See my 2nd previous post for details... It's talking about different things. As Thusness said: Yes Bob, I understand what you meant. Very often it is understood that beingness is in the experience of "I AM", even without the words and label of "I AM", the 'pure sense of existence', the presence still IS. It is a state of resting in Beingness. But in Buddhism, it is also possible to experience everything, every moment the unmanifested. The key also lies in 'You' but it is to "see" that there is no 'You' instead. It is to 'see' that there is never any do-er standing in the midst of phenomenal arising. There is just mere happening due to emptiness nature, never an 'I' doing anything. When the 'I' subsides, symbols, labels and the entire layer of conceptual realm goes with it. What is left without a 'doer' is a mere happening. And seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting and smelling and not only that, everything appears as purely spontaneous manifestation. A whole Presence of the manifold. Next: Emptiness is not talking about a formless essence. It's saying that all forms, though vivid, is empty of inherent independent existence being interdependently originated. It is not talking about a formless essence. As Heart Sutra said: Form is Emptiness, Emptiness is Form. In other words, Phenomena are Empty, Emptiness is Phenomena. We do not talk about emptiness being empty of phenomena since that would be a false separation. As such, we must know that there are many kinds of insights, and we must not mix up one with another.

Obviously there is a difference between realisation and insight and theoretical knowledge. Theories are not the same as realisation. Realisation has nothing to do with conceptual understanding which many have. But few are enlightened to, i.e. directly seeing for yourself, the truth of dependent origination and emptiness. When it is realised, then it is non-conceptual direct intuitive insight. Only before it is realised then it is only understood conceptually. Buddha: The Perfect One is free from any theory, for the Perfect One has understood what the body is, and how it arises, and passes away. He has understood what feeling is, and how it arises, and passes away. He has understood what perception is, and how it arises, and passes away. He has understood what the mental formations are, and how they arise, and pass away. He has understood what consciousness is, and how it arises, and passes away. Therefore, I say, the Perfect One has won complete deliverance through the extinction, fading away, disappearance, rejection, and getting rid of all opinions and conjectures, of all inclination to the vainglory of I and mine. - Majjhima Nikaya, 72

Precisely and this is what dependent origination is talking about. You only register the sounds that conditions have given rise to. You do not register sounds that there is no conditions to give rise to -- such as sounds with a frequency higher than humans can perceive. Furthermore a person can be seeing a red flower, a dog can see a black flower, other animals and realms may see something totally different -- which shows that there is no truly 'red flower' 'out there', or a truly 'black flower', or even a 'flower' -- if you see its quantum characteristics it's mostly void. Our vision is simply dependently originated, without any substance or inherency in here or out there. That is why the principle of conditionality as taught by Buddha is as such: When there is this, that is. With the arising of this, that arises. When this is not, neither is that. With the cessation of this, that ceases. Dependent Origination is not a theory -- but the teachings of Dependent Origination is important so that we can replace our deeply inherent and dualistic framework. It is actually not a framework but a framework dissolver. The right view of D.O. dissolves all views into viewlessness. Since it is not a theory you don't have to make sense of it. It's not about making sense of it but realising it as a fact, a truth. Whatever you are seeing, hearing, etc, is already dependently originated and naturally occurring due to causes and conditions (and thus nothing inherent can be found) whether you know it or not -- however, without realising this it makes no difference. Everything is already empty and dependently originated, it's only our notion that self and objects exist inherently and independently that is a framework, an unfounded concept, that upon observation and analysis is found to be unfindable and baseless.

Of course you would register the sound, but you will not label it. You don't need to identify it's a bell for the sound of bell to occur. It's a natural occurrence. A person who realises dependent origination does not dependent on words and concepts and frameworks. There is just intuitive awareness that everything is seamlessly unsplit with all causes and conditions. Everything is naturally and spontaneously arising due to causes and conditions. When condition is, Presence-Awareness Is, awareness shines without a center and is not bounded within a space-time continuum. Nothing inherent in here or out there. http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/200...-dependent.html "...It is therefore advisable to replace our existing inherent and dualistic framework with Dependent Origination. If Dependent Origination simply remains as a form of knowledge, then it defeats the purpose. It must pervade our entire being so that we can feel, experience and understand deeply how Dependent Origination is not limited or constraint by space, time, self, any centricity or point of references...."

You don't need to identify phenomena in order for dependent origination to function. I hit the bell, you hear it. Dependent origination. No thinking or identification needed. This is, that is. Everything is just seamless interdependent origination -- everything you see, hear, smell, taste, feel, thought, everything is dependent origination. You cannot separate the hearing sound from my hitting bell. Awareness and conditions are inseparable. This is, that is. Totally naturally occuring -- when condition is, you have NO CHOICE but to hear it. If someone farts, you have no choice but to smell bad air. You can't choose not to. Dependent Origination has nothing to do with identifying or categorising. It's a natural occurrence.

Posted last month: Gaps and ThoughtsGaps and Thoughts Based on some conversations earlier this year and last year by Thusness/PasserBy which I have slightly edited: When we discriminate between awareness from thoughts, awareness appears as the 'space' behind and between thoughts. And because of discriminating awareness and content thinking, the behind background reality is preferred over content, so background awareness appears as 'awakening' -- but it is really only treating a particular speck of dust as mirror and thus unable to see all as mirror... and so instead of being 'awakening' it is actually being 'lost'. That experience is just a dimension of Presence... but due to deeply rooted habitual tendencies to grasp dualistically, one tightly clings to the 'background subject'. But it is not the entirety of Presence -- the aspect of non-dual, Anatta (no-self), Emptiness and Dependent Origination are not included. Because of this, it is difficult to see that the five aggregates (the 'heaps' of experiences that are designated as 'self': forms, feelings, perceptions, volition and consciousness) are Buddha-Nature. When we talk about naked awareness it is not a state where not even a single thought arise. When it is taught about the gap between 2 moments of thought, it is to first have an experience of the nakedness of awareness. To touch just that aspect of awareness. When we extend the gaps, our thoughts become less and clarity becomes more obvious. However it will come to a time that no matter what is done, how much effort is being invested, how long, the other aggregates do not subside. This then is the crucial moment whether one can break through into non-duality (of subject and object). Awareness is a seamless experience that is non-dual in nature. In this seamless experience, there is no boundary whatsoever, no experiencer experiencing experience; whatever arises is experience, is awareness -- as the sound of birds chirping, as words appearing on the screen, as the thoughts itself. There is no separate hearer, seer, watcher, observer, thinker. Everything is shining, self-felt, self-luminous, without a center. It is always just spontaneous arising and ceasing. There is no center, agent, boundary, inside or outside... merely a seamless whole experience. Whether perception or no perception, whether momentum or no momentum, whether there are thoughts or no thoughts, it doesn't matter. That is the arising of the non-dual wisdom, with the understanding that the transience are the Presence. Then no thoughts and thoughts are thoroughly understood. When no thoughts and thoughts are clearly understood, it becomes Gap-less. That is true effortlessness and is the pathless path without entry and exit. Going before the arising of thoughts and perception and have a glimpse of that luminous nature is simply just a glimpse. If a practitioner mistakes it as the entirety of Buddha Nature by maintaining the mirror bright and attempt to go after that particular state, it will eventually proof futile. If we see only the realm of no-thought, then the gap between two moments will eventually becomes an obstruction. Then the practice becomes the thought moment between two moments of gaps. To experience that luminous empty essence of that thought. It is in essence clarity, awareness itself, and is empty. The waves and the ocean are one and the same. All waves are One Taste. Experiencing Isness as an ocean and shunning away thoughts and manifestation is equally lost, the further insight (insight into non-duality) is the insight into everything as self-luminous awareness or Mind. smile.gif However, start by practicing the gap between 2 moments of thought and expand it but with the right understanding of no-self/non-duality. Then when the luminosity shines, it will gradually understand because it knows what blocks. When it try all its best to do away the transients and yet the transients persist, one will have to wait for the right condition to come. Such as having someone to point out or some verses that serves as a condition for awakening. So first experience the Isness of the gap between 2 moments of thought, then the Isness of the thought between 2 moments of gap.

If non-dual simply means no subject/object division, then Buddhism is non-dualistic. If non-dual means merging with Brahman or realising one's identity as Universal Brahman, then nope. And anyway that is more of monism than non-dualism.