How to determine someone's level of enlightenment?

[Lucky7Strikes]

This is a brilliant explanation. Many bows to you Lucky.

[Vajrahridaya]

Inadvertently screwed this post up.

Edited July 18, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[thuscomeone]

You also see non-division through division. It's in this very reply. "Distinguish division from non-division." Distinguish is a divisive word and view.

 

*I don't think this much of a thoughtful reply to all that I wrote .

Right, that's what I just said. You can only see non-division and division through division -- concepts, logic. Distinguishing requires division. Like I said before, you are caught up in logic/intellect itself and can't see what it is pointing to. You are looking at a wave (the divisive content of thought) and can't see the ocean (the non-dual way thoughts manifest, without a controller). You have to use the wave to see the ocean, but you won't let go of the wave. I can tell from the extremely intellectual nature of yours and GIH's posts that this the problem with both of you.

 

Could you give me a clear explanation of what this awareness is? Is this awareness "aware of" something?

 

Actually, let's move this out of the realm of theory and into real life. Wherever you are, right now, describe to me this awareness in that moment.

Edited July 18, 2011 by thuscomeone

[Vajrahridaya]

I don't think it's right say "it's all awareness." Maybe it's all "in awareness." Like I wouldn't say these group of objects are all space. They are all in space. Awareness seems like a primordial dimension of existence. And this dimension seems to be alive and creative.

 

They are all in each other and outside of each other. You're still thinking top down dimensionally.

 

The primordial dimension of experience is consciousness and the radiance's of the elements, intermingled and inter-influencing, but it's consciousness that motivates the elements to manifest, even though it's the fermentation of the elements that manifest the consciousness at the same time. See it's not top down as if all things arise from one single transcendent non-thing, it's sideways but as a sphere, "all" created "all" since beginningless time. No single point of origin. You can't say for sure that consciousness created the elements and you can't say for sure that the elements created consciousness. But the elements also bounce off each other, like for instance, you throw a ball, but the ball and the elements intermingle in a way that is not necessarily the will of the consciousness. Then there are those conscious beings who can will deeper than apparent matter into the radiance's and influence from there, thus doing things deemed as magic. Like for instance siddhi's.

 

It's more accurate to say consciousness' and matter's in the plural. All connected due to inter-dependency and emptiness flowing without beginning. If you are looking for a single point of origin, you won't find one. The inter-mingling is without beginning. Your experience of the alayavijnana is still your experience of it, though here differences between the infinite mind streams is less dense, it's still not all just one big mind stream with a cosmic Self identity.

 

I'm not saying anything. I'm just asking questions rising from logical inconsistencies in your interpretations. I don't know, but what your saying doesn't make much sense.

 

Interpretations differ according to how one internalizes the concepts or the statements as a whole. You may go back and re-read what was said and understand it in a way that you didn't before, and then it might make sense. Maybe, maybe not. Misunderstanding happens a lot when talking about spirituality because we are using crude matter to point to what is subtler and more dynamic than the crude forms of matter these symbols appear as and through. But, they are also empty and can be slightly redefined subjectively.

Edited July 18, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[goldisheavy]

Actually the Rainbow body makes it easier for a Buddha to interact with those without the merit to communicate with Buddhas in the Sambhogakaya. Also, just because one has attained the Rainbow Body, doesn't mean one can't still project incarnations of enlightened physical activity, such is the case with Norbu.

 

Your state of mind influences the types of realms you can readily experience. Because I don't exist as an inherently real object, each being who interacts with me perceives an ever-so-slightly different version of me. None of those versions are the real me and none of them are not me. Instead all those versions of me are valid for those who interact with them. This is a consequence of multiple mindstreams and beings not being objective.

 

Beings are neither real nor not real, this goes with my lineages.

 

Beings are real in the sense that they are experienced. Beings are unreal in the sense that the ignorant conclusions about them are wrong.

 

Your confidence is entirely inborn, without support from true Master Buddhas who have gone before you, thus it's more like a mirage that you tell yourself is reflective of total realization without actually having it.

 

Everything you say about my confidence is also true about your confidence.

 

You need guidance, you don't really know what's up, but you're just too chicken to bow to a real Master in utter self offering humility.

 

A person tells you, "I am not hungry." You say, "No brother, you are hungry, I know you better than you know yourself." Do you know what this is? It's both ignorance and arrogance. It means you've picked up a burden that isn't yours.

 

Sure, you have insight, but not Buddhahood, nor are you qualified enough to teach what you haven't received,

 

Let's flip this around. Various masters around the world are not qualified to teach things I haven't transmitted to them. It's more valid to say it this way. Contemplate this.

 

such as Dzogchen or Mahamudra teachings. This is where you faulted and this is where you do a great disservice. Telling people to listen to you over going to a genuine Master with lineage that has actually attained the Rainbow Body, with practices that actually work for it's realization of complete Buddhahood and physical integration.

 

I don't tell people to listen to me over someone else. I tell people to question everyone equally. I've corrected you on this many times, but you persist in this folly. There is no need to keep lying to people Vajra.

 

So you claim to be a Master without the credentials, basically.

 

That's correct. I am not conventionally recognized as a master. I could join a lineage, rise through the ranks, and attain conventional recognition, but I see no point in it. It wouldn't be for my benefit. It would only be to fool others into following me slavishly. So it wouldn't be for the benefit of others. Since me joining a lineage benefits no one at all, not me and not others, I don't join.

Edited July 18, 2011 by goldisheavy

[goldisheavy]

Right, that's what I just said. You can only see non-division and division through division -- concepts, logic. Distinguishing requires division. Like I said before, you are caught up in logic/intellect itself and can't see what it is pointing to. You are looking at a wave (the divisive content of thought) and can't see the ocean (the non-dual way thoughts manifest, without a controller). You have to use the wave to see the ocean, but you won't let go of the wave. I can tell from the extremely intellectual nature of yours and GIH's posts that this the problem with both of you.

 

Could you give me a clear explanation of what this awareness is? Is this awareness "aware of" something?

 

Actually, let's move this out of the realm of theory and into real life. Wherever you are, right now, describe to me this awareness in that moment.

 

You won't get the kind of "clear" explanation you want. You expect an objective explanation of awareness. In other words, you want people to explain to you the location and functioning of awareness as an object among objects. When that's done, you'll accept it as a clear explanation, and then you'll proceed to use the logic that stresses ultimate nonexistence of objects to stress that awareness is also ultimately nonexistent. This is what you want, but you won't have that kind of satisfaction.

Edited July 18, 2011 by goldisheavy

[goldisheavy]

phenomena neither physical, nor non-physical.

 

Phenomena are definitely not physical in the way physicalists understand the meaning of the word "physical."

 

Like a dream, not really a dream.

 

Yes.

 

Experienced my own body dissolving into rainbow light, it was a bit scary at first and I could feel the death process setting on, then Ganesh sat on my chest, held me down and turned into Rinpoche, repeated a mantra then disappeared and my physical constituents coagulated (sort of speak) again into physically felt peace and calm. It was quite astounding. Many, many other things have happened as well to show me the validity of the Jalus.

 

That's good. So you can see at least one way how such an experience could potentially unfold. If you weren't scared, and if you were resolved on it completely, you could have remained in that state indefinitely.

 

A good contemplation would be to sit down and bring up that fear you felt during the vision you describe. Once you allow yourself to feel that fear again, look into its causes. You'll see right away what is holding you back. I do this kind of fear examination process myself all the time and I highly recommend it. Eventually you'll rise above all fear, there is no doubt.

 

This was just while laying in bed I had many other visions while in between waking and dreaming. Stuff like this happened many times for the first few years after my first transmission from Norbu in order to show me various direct insights about the tradition of Dzogchen that is both unique and beautiful.

 

All that is wonderful. However you do see how attached you are to the idea of an objective world, right? You get very personally inflamed when I talk in ways that contradict the validity of the conventional reality. You should ponder on that.

 

During a Jnana Dakini transmission, a female Buddha of the Dzogchen tradition:

Making sense of Tantra: Berzin Archives.

"Because the audience for Buddha's teachings consisted of a variety of beings, not only humans, some of them safeguarded material for later, more conducive times. For example, the half-human half-serpent nagas preserved The Prajnaparamita Sutras in their subterranean kingdom beneath a lake until the Indian master Nagarjuna came to retrieve them. Jnana Dakini, a supranormal female adept, kept The Vajrabhairava Tantra in Oddiyana until the Indian master Lalitavajra journeyed there on the advice of a pure vision of Manjushri. Moreover, both Indian and Tibetan masters hid scriptures for safekeeping in physical locations or implanted them as potentials in special disciples' minds. Later generations of masters uncovered them as treasure-texts (terma, gter-ma). Asanga, for example, buried Maitreya's Furthest Everlasting Continuum, and the Indian master Maitripa unearthed it many centuries later. Padmasambhava concealed innumerable tantra texts in Tibet, which subsequent Nyingma masters discovered in the recesses of temples or in their own minds."

 

Anyway, I saw her in the room, my third eye filled with blissful light, she was just made of light and smiling, such bliss and wonder. It was very nice. Norbu said after the transmission that it's possible to see Jhana Dakini, as a confirmation of this experience.

 

Again, that's a wonderful experience. Just make sure you don't grasp that experience as absolutely real. It's somewhat real and the experience of this Earth is also somewhat real, just like that Dakini vision. The difference is that you have a huge habit and belief system supporting this Earth vision while only a modest habit and belief system supporting the Dakini vision. Moreover, you are not yet consciously in charge of your own realm. You are like a drunk captain whose hands are tied to the steering wheel, yet who is afraid to steer his ship and due to fear imagines oneself to be doing something or other in some cabin on the ship. So your hands are on the wheel, but your mind is elsewhere.

 

Sure, but it's more nuanced than that. Have you read Norbu's Kunjed Gyalpo?

 

It's not really Norbu's. Yes, I've read it.

 

You only have an idea, but you don't know directly.

 

Wrong.

 

Your lack of humility reveals that lineage can offer far more than you.

 

I don't really lack humility. You just wish I was a bit more afraid. I am not going to play your game Vajra, but you are going to play my game as long as you mentally fight me using naive and ignorant methods.

[Vajrahridaya]

Your state of mind influences the types of realms you can readily experience. Because I don't exist as an inherently real object, each being who interacts with me perceives an ever-so-slightly different version of me. None of those versions are the real me and none of them are not me. Instead all those versions of me are valid for those who interact with them. This is a consequence of multiple mindstreams and beings not being objective.

 

Still, because you are turning your physical constituents into an elongated expression of the sambhogakaya past the appearance of physical density, the karmic connections with beings on this plane of existence is as well elongated.

You have to understand this intuitively, as if you make any one of these statements above really solid, or completely not solid, you are missing the point.

 

Beings are real in the sense that they are experienced. Beings are unreal in the sense that the ignorant conclusions about them are wrong.

 

Including your conclusions of the intentions of various Masters of antiquity.

 

Everything you say about my confidence is also true about your confidence.

 

No, the difference is that my confidence is brought forth from within me by empowered lineage, while yours is not.

 

 

Let's flip this around. Various masters around the world are not qualified to teach things I haven't transmitted to them. It's more valid to say it this way. Contemplate this.

 

Such arrogant BS. Do you think you are some sort of Avatar? Some supreme godhead manifest? Krishna's new form or something?

 

I don't tell people to listen to me over someone else. I tell people to question everyone equally. I've corrected you on this many times, but you persist in this folly. There is no need to keep lying to people Vajra.

 

 

You flatter yourself too much, as you think your words are like golden gods.

 

That's correct. I am not conventionally recognized as a master. I could join a lineage, rise through the ranks, and attain conventional recognition, but I see no point in it. It wouldn't be for my benefit.

 

It would help you gain more recognition thereby reaching more people with your "wondrous" message of independent thinking.

 

It would only be to fool others into following me slavishly. So it wouldn't be for the benefit of others. Since me joining a lineage benefits no one at all, not me and not others, I don't join.

 

You're like the reincarnation of Jiddu Krishnamurti.

 

Whatever dude.

Edited July 18, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[thuscomeone]

You won't get the kind of "clear" explanation you want. You expect an objective explanation of awareness. In other words, you want people to explain to you the location and functioning of awareness as an object among objects. When that's done, you'll accept it as a clear explanation, and then you'll proceed to use the logic that stresses ultimate nonexistence of objects to stress that awareness is also ultimate nonexistent. This is what you want, but you won't have that kind of satisfaction.

No, I know that words are limited. But words can point. If you can't even communicate about something/point to it clearly, what is the point of saying it is there? If you can't even talk about it clearly, it's just nonsense.

 

I don't want to prove its non-existence. I want to prove its dependent arising. And you say I put words in your mouth?

 

If you can't even describe/point to awareness in your current moment, its not even sensible. Like I said, its just obscurantism.

 

Look, I can easily describe to you awareness in my current moment. I am watching TV and typing on the computer. Awareness here seems to be independent from the computer, the TV and my body. In other words, there seems to be separation between "seeing" and "seen." That's one level.

 

But if I investigate, I can see that awareness in this moment is actually produced by a combination of things. This moment of seeing/awareness requires the physical and the non-physical. It requires the eyes, the body, the awareness, etc. So ultimately, to call this moment of seeing "awareness" is wrong. It is a combination of mind and matter. To call it solely either one would be to limit it. To call it mind would be to deny matter. To call it matter would be to deny mind.

 

True non-dualism is not "all is mind." "All is mind" is another ignorant assertion that there is some separate, independent thing called "mind." True non-dualism is seeing that mind is dependent on matter and vice versa.

Edited July 18, 2011 by thuscomeone

[thuscomeone]

Don't compare him to Krishnamurti. Krishnamurti had deep insight into "anatta." Probably more too. He just wasn't a very good communicator. He would condemn the kind of arrogance GIH shows. Comparing K to GIH is an insult to K.

Edited July 18, 2011 by thuscomeone

[Vajrahridaya]

 

All that is wonderful. However you do see how attached you are to the idea of an objective world, right?

 

No, I just see it's validity.

 

You get very personally inflamed when I talk in ways that contradict the validity of the conventional reality. You should ponder on that.

 

Actually, I really don't. I find you far more reactive when I challenge your statements of you being so hard headed about qualified lineages with much higher realization than yourself.

 

 

 

 

 

It's not really Norbu's. Yes, I've read it.

 

No, it's not really his, he just commented on it in that version.

 

Wrong.

 

No, I'm right. There are plenty here that can see this as well. Of course, you'll say they are caught up in this or that mental dogma... whatever. Why not write a book, get it published, and reach many people if you're so realized? Or, is this the one manifestation that is the super pundit here on TTB's only and you have other incarnations doing other things simultaneously teaching in other ways? Actually, don't answer that, I'm pretty sure you'll say yes.

 

I don't really lack humility. You just wish I was a bit more afraid. I am not going to play your game Vajra, but you are going to play my game as long as you mentally fight me using naive and ignorant methods.

Oh GIH, you're so high, so realized, I'm so ignorant, I should learn from you and listen to you, meanwhile, please, bash all my lineages and teachers, they are crap compared to you GIH. You are the true holder of wisdom that they are not qualified to teach!

 

Get a life dude. Seriously. Self proclaimed Godman.

[Vajrahridaya]

Don't compare him to Krishnamurti. Krishnamurti had deep insight into "anatta." Probably more too. He just wasn't a very good communicator. He would condemn the kind of arrogance GIH shows. Comparing K to GIH is an insult to K.

 

K does garner more respect from me.

[thuscomeone]

K does garner more respect from me.

I often think that he knew much more than he said. He's also a testament to why a teacher is really useless if they have insight but can't communicate it to people in a way they can understand. He had his faults, sure. He also did speak highly of the Buddha on more than one occasion.

[Vajrahridaya]

I often think that he knew much more than he said. He's also a testament to why a teacher is really useless if they have insight but can't communicate it to people in a way they can understand. He had his faults, sure. He also did speak highly of the Buddha on more than one occasion.

 

Yes, he did. I also agree with the communication part. He could have learned a few things from lineage transmission on how to communicate his realization better. This is why in Vajrayana, even masters go to get transmissions over and over again from different masters, all sharing techniques and methods with each other for the sake of posterity and helping other beings.

[goldisheavy]

Still, because you are turning your physical constituents into an elongated expression of the sambhogakaya past the appearance of physical density, the karmic connections with beings on this plane of existence is as well elongated.

You have to understand this intuitively, as if you make any one of these statements above really solid, or completely not solid, you are missing the point.

 

I do understand this. I am telling you that if you want this process to be smooth, or even to proceed at all, you have to let go of physicality altogether.

 

Including your conclusions of the intentions of various Masters of antiquity.

 

Various masters of antiquity are my emanations. If you say the same thing, you will be correct. So I am not saying this from an exclusive point of view, as in, they're mine and no one else's emanations. I don't make ignorant conclusions about any master, past, present or future.

 

No, the difference is that my confidence is brought forth from within me by empowered lineage, while yours is not.

 

That's not true Vajra. Your confidence is self-arisen in the same sense you claim mine is. The lineage impresses you only insofar you want to be impressed and create conditions for that to happen. You are involved in the process even if you are not conscious of it yet.

 

Such arrogant BS. Do you think you are some sort of Avatar? Some supreme godhead manifest? Krishna's new form or something?

 

Nope. I am just me.

 

You flatter yourself too much, as you think your words are like golden gods.

 

That's not exactly true.

 

But even if it were, we each have a right to experience this kind of pure vision.

 

I believe my words are both true and useful to more than just me alone, but to say that I see them as golden gods is an exaggeration.

 

It would help you gain more recognition thereby reaching more people with your "wondrous" message of independent thinking.

 

But when people listen to my message for the wrong reasons they can't hear the message.

 

You're like the reincarnation of Jiddu Krishnamurti.

 

Whatever dude.

 

My, my. Someone is not happy.

[Vajrahridaya]

I do understand this. I am telling you that if you want this process to be smooth, or even to proceed at all, you have to let go of physicality altogether.

 

 

More like see through it and see that physical is not really physical but not necessarily not physical either.

 

 

Various masters of antiquity are my emanations. If you say the same thing, you will be correct. So I am not saying this from an exclusive point of view, as in, they're mine and no one else's emanations. I don't make ignorant conclusions about any master, past, present or future.

 

Oh boy.

 

 

That's not true Vajra. Your confidence is self-arisen in the same sense you claim mine is. The lineage impresses you only insofar you want to be impressed and create conditions for that to happen. You are involved in the process even if you are not conscious of it yet.

 

I know I'm involved in the process, I always had the potential, but my understanding of it and the transmissions of mind to mind that helped me experience it for myself come from lineage empowerments.

 

 

Nope. I am just me.

 

But so are those various masters of antiquity, eh?

 

 

 

That's not exactly true.

 

But even if it were, we each have a right to experience this kind of pure vision.

 

I believe my words are both true and useful to more than just me alone, but to say that I see them as golden gods is an exaggeration.

 

Not from the way you are talking here.

 

 

My, my. Someone is not happy.

 

Actually, I'm absolutely fine. Do you see how subjective reading on these boards are? Anyway... go write a book, get it published, reach a large audience. Or just keep chatting on here. Whatever, but I will challenge your lineage bashing and extreme negative view of religion.

 

If you are so highly realized, you should intermingle with people more, get out more, hang out with sanghams and affect people with your personal self transcending presence. Widen your field of influence.

Edited July 18, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[goldisheavy]

Why not write a book, get it published, and reach many people if you're so realized? Or, is this the one manifestation that is the super pundit here on TTB's only and you have other incarnations doing other things simultaneously teaching in other ways? Actually, don't answer that, I'm pretty sure you'll say yes.

 

There are many truly excellent books in this world. For example, Kunjed Gyalpo and Nang-jang are truly superb, superlative books. And there are many many more. If I wrote a book, it would just be another great book in the sea of great books. This is why I am not in any hurry to write books. If I wrote a book it would be more about my own self-expression than about filling a void. Those who are determined will find more than enough books to do whatever they want to do.

 

The real value I bring is that I am a living presence. Unlike with a book, you can ask me questions and I can answer them.

 

Oh GIH, you're so high, so realized, I'm so ignorant,

 

You're not all that ignorant. I never said that. You're pretty wise yourself.

 

I should learn from you and listen to you, meanwhile, please, bash all my lineages and teachers, they are crap compared to you GIH. You are the true holder of wisdom that they are not qualified to teach!

 

Lineages bring harm in a political and social sense Vajra. Some people who participate in the lineages really do have wisdom worth learning. In other words, even a thief who does harm by stealing can sometimes be wise enough to teach you a thing or two. But just because you learned something worthwhile from a thief does not mean you should embrace the thieving lifestyle wholesale. It's OK to reject some things and accept others.

 

I accept wisdom and reject certain attitudes and social practices inherent in various lineages.

 

Get a life dude. Seriously. Self proclaimed Godman.

 

[Vajrahridaya]

There are many truly excellent books in this world. For example, Kunjed Gyalpo and Nang-jang are truly superb, superlative books. And there are many many more. If I wrote a book, it would just be another great book in the sea of great books. This is why I am not in any hurry to write books. If I wrote a book it would be more about my own self-expression than about filling a void. Those who are determined will find more than enough books to do whatever they want to do.

 

The real value I bring is that I am a living presence. Unlike with a book, you can ask me questions and I can answer them.

 

You're not all that ignorant. I never said that. You're pretty wise yourself.

 

Lineages bring harm in a political and social sense Vajra. Some people who participate in the lineages really do have wisdom worth learning. In other words, even a thief who does harm by stealing can sometimes be wise enough to teach you a thing or two. But just because you learned something worthwhile from a thief does not mean you should embrace the thieving lifestyle wholesale. It's OK to reject some things and accept others.

 

I accept wisdom and reject certain attitudes and social practices inherent in various lineages.

 

 

Who knows, maybe aspects you don't accept now you might accept later as wisdom deepens.

[goldisheavy]

More like see through it and see that physical is not really physical but not necessarily not physical either.

 

Not exactly. You're describing a vacillating and wobbly state of mind. You'll need to reject physicality completely if you want rainbow body.

 

I know I'm involved in the process, I always had the potential, but my understanding of it and the transmissions of mind to mind that helped me experience it for myself come from lineage empowerments.

 

You're involved in more ways than you realize. You think you're just caught up in the process. I am saying you've actually engineered the process.

 

That's not exactly true.

 

What's not exactly true?

 

Whatever, but I will challenge your lineage bashing and extreme negative view of religion.

 

That's fine.

 

If you are so highly realized, you should intermingle with people more, get out more, hang out with sanghams and affect people with your personal self transcending presence. Widen your field of influence.

 

So I should widen my field of influence by believing I need to stand right next to the person I want to affect?

[goldisheavy]

Who knows, maybe aspects you don't accept now you might accept later as wisdom deepens.

 

There is no doubt about that. I think my wisdom is nowhere near perfection. In other words, I can easily imagine someone who is wiser than myself. I am never happy with my level of understanding, that's why I seek to understand more and more. Maybe some day I will become happy with what I understand, but I don't see that day coming soon.

[Vajrahridaya]

Not exactly. You're describing a vacillating and wobbly state of mind. You'll need to reject physicality completely if you want rainbow body.

 

 

No, see through it, not reject it. It's the physical constituents one is reverting into pure expressions of the sambhogakaya without being hampered by dense limitations.

 

You're involved in more ways than you realize. You think you're just caught up in the process. I am saying you've actually engineered the process.

 

No, that would be independent origination, or solipsism. I am a product of inter-influencing both including and beyond myself.

 

 

What's not exactly true?

You said that, I just neglected to put the quote box around it.

 

 

That's fine.

 

Then maybe people will get a broader view, seeing that they are not always completely negative and not always completely positive.

 

So I should widen my field of influence by believing I need to stand right next to the person I want to affect?

 

It helps, there is a power about that which makes the experience of another persons state of being more visceral.

[Lucky7Strikes]

Actually, let's move this out of the realm of theory and into real life. Wherever you are, right now, describe to me this awareness in that moment.

I'm alive.

[Vajrahridaya]

There is no doubt about that. I think my wisdom is nowhere near perfection. In other words, I can easily imagine someone who is wiser than myself. I am never happy with my level of understanding, that's why I seek to understand more and more. Maybe some day I will become happy with what I understand, but I don't see that day coming soon.

 

Anuttarasamyaksambodhi Buddhas are extremely rare within the history of Earth. I wouldn't know what that would be like either.

 

"Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi - Supreme, unexcelled, perfect and equal enlightenment. The perfect wisdom which comprehends truth that is attained only by a Buddha, in contrast to the different grades of enlightenment attained by Bodhisattvas and Arahants."

Edited July 18, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[goldisheavy]

No, I know that words are limited. But words can point. If you can't even communicate about something/point to it clearly, what is the point of saying it is there? If you can't even talk about it clearly, it's just nonsense.

 

I don't want to prove its non-existence. I want to prove its dependent arising.

 

When you say that awareness is dependently arisen, you are putting awareness on the same level as causes and conditions. Doing so denies the visionary nature of causes and conditions.

 

Causes and conditions affect the specifics of whatever manifests. Awareness as a general fact that some kind of cognition is always taking place is not dependent on anything.

[Vajrahridaya]

When you say that awareness is dependently arisen, you are putting awareness on the same level as causes and conditions. Doing so denies the visionary nature of causes and conditions.

 

Causes and conditions affect the specifics of whatever manifests. Awareness as a general fact that some kind of cognition is always taking place is not dependent on anything.

 

Awareness arises due to causes and conditions as well.

 

Nagarjuna:

 

“No existents whatsoever are evident anywhere that are arisen from themselves, from another, from both, or from a non-cause.”

 

or

 

“Neither from itself nor from another,

Nor from both,

Nor without a cause,

Does anything whatever, anywhere arise.”

Edited July 18, 2011 by Vajrahridaya