'No self' my experience so far...

[C T]

Sure. But I'm pointing to something which is beyond words. You, like xabir, no offense, are just pointing toward more words.

Now you are sounding ass-like. No offense.

 

Although i'm still inclined to agree with most of what you posit, if that's any consolation.

[xabir2005]

@ Xabir,

 

Hey, um mister mirage...uh, ok to see what dependently originate out of you now, I want to ask.

 

Do you feel genuine love and compassion. Did that experience arise in your, um, d.o. machine? NOt intellectually or conceptually. Do you feel a sense of love radiating out? Be honest. Well, I don't know if you can, because you don't have a will. But hopefully something honest dependently originates.

Here's the first post I wrote after the realization:

 

"Yes, indeed emptiness is the freedom from all extreme views like existence and non-existence. Emptiness does not deny five skandhas, the reality as we observe it, as insight into anatta reveals all transient phenomena to be pristine awareness itself and thus utterly vivid, intimate, actual and seemingly real. But the further realisation of emptiness shows how all phenomena are void of inherent existence in and of itself, independent of conditions. There is the insight into how the entire experiential universe, the five skandhas as we experience it - is empty, void, coreless, substanceless - that it is like the magician's magic tricks, a magical apparition that is substanceless behind its appearance. being a magical luminous display that cannot be pinned down or located, it far transcends view of existence, nonexistence, birth, abiding, and death. the unborn nature of dharmas is realised.

 

i wrote an email to thusness titled "the unborn dharma":

 

 

 

In attempting to find and locate where thought comes from, reside, and go to, it is realised that thought is ungraspable, unfindable, unfathomable... A magicians magical apparition, like everything (the experiential universe) is... A wonderful display of luminous emptiness, dependent origination. Yet after this is seen, it is nothing resembling nihilism or non-existence... When someone lights up his lighter to burn an innocent ant, compassion just arise... A magical universe demands magical response and compassion from no one to no one[/i]

[xabir2005]

And I also found something relevant from the blog http://luminousemptiness.blogspot.com/2007/11/gampopa-and-compassion.html :

 

 

Deepening Compassion

I thought I'd therefore share some further reflections on Gampopa's threefold classification of Compassion (from The Jewel Ornament of Liberation).

 

White TaraGampopa's first category - 'Compassion with reference to Sentient beings' is simply the desire to help beings when we see that they are suffering. However, due to our level of understanding and practice, we ourselves suffer alongside those who wish to help. Our compassion, (but lack of wisdom and skillful means) leads us to pain, as we don't have sufficient understanding to help without causing ourselves pain. It's worth noting that this wouldn't be a reason for us to not help! It's still important as a means to develop further compassion and wisdom, and also to actually alleviate suffering, that we do reach out to others, even if that causes us pain :-)

 

The second form of Compassion that Gampopa notes is that of 'Compassion with reference to the Dharma'. Here we have a deepened level of understanding. As a result, we 'understand' something of the causes of suffering, due to our increased 'understanding' of Dharma. So, when we see suffering, and our desire to help arises, we know that this suffering arises from causes. We know the suffering arises from attachment, from craving and ill-will, and ultimately, from ignorance (of how things really are). We understand something of the Four Noble Truths, and we know something of causality - of Dependent Origination. As such, when compassion arises, and we seek to help others, we suffer less, as we are less inclined to attach, or to crave whilst helping.

 

For example, we don't get so caught up in results, in needing to 'solve' the others' problem. So we can help, to our utmost, but let go of results, let go of having to take things through to a solution. Sometimes it's not possible to solve the other persons problem (they might have an incurable illness, for example) and in this case, we can help to our utmost, without causing ourself suffering at not being able to control the outcome.

 

Another aspect here is that now that we've generated some understanding of how suffering comes about - its causes and conditions - we sense that those we see suffering do *not* know what is causing their suffering. We see that they live life only wishing to be happy, but that their very actions are the cause of their suffering. As such, that recognition of their situation is the cause for a much stronger compassion to develop.

 

The third form of Compassion Gampopa talks about is that of 'Compassion without Reference Point'. This is where we have developed sufficiently that we see something of the true nature of things. We have some experience of Shunyata, of Emptiness, and therefore we no longer cling to the notion of person, of illness, of helping as solidly existent 'things'. As a result of seeing the play of mere appearances in mind, we don't attach to these illusory notions, and therefore we don't suffer whilst helping alleviate suffering. We see this play of appearances, which are ultimately empty, but at the same time, we recognise that the 'person' before us does not see this.

 

We also see that the difference between seeing things as they are, and of grasping onto the solidity or reality of things, is, in a sense, razor thin. The difference is so slender between seeing, and not seeing.

 

When the experience of emptiness arises, we see that seeing how things are, and seeing with ignorance is the most subtle shift, in a sense, (and yet the most enormous shift, in another sense!!!!). We see how easy it is to lose this 'view', both during, and between meditations. We slip into it and out of it so easily. So, we have an appreciation of how small a shift it is, in a sense, and how 'easy' it could be for those suffering beings to see in accordance with the nature of things, to act in accordance with the nature of things, and therefore not suffer. That recognition of how 'easy' it would be for them to not suffer becomes the cause for a great compassion to arise in us. The recognition of how unnecessary that suffering is, indeed, how unnecessary and how easily thrown off.

 

Further, the recognition from the previous stage (and classification) that we ourselves self-cause our own suffering is deepened here - with the addition of now seeing the potential 'ease' of throwing it off.

 

At this stage, our compassion arises without having an object, as we no longer 'see' any being to be the object of our compassion. Indeed, we no longer see 'ourselves' as being compassionate, nor see the 'act' of compassion either. We see the play of empty appearances - and yet, and yet ... we act. How is this? How can we act, when we no longer see sentient beings, as such? Well, from my very limited experience, this Compassion is the natural response, the natural outpouring of the mind that sees things as they are. It's as if when we take all this mistaken understanding and seeing out of the way, what lay beneath - the sun behind the clouds - can pour forth its energy, which had been previously obscured and dammed up.

 

- an attempt to clarify in my own mind my own confusion, and previous potentially confusing post ... in the hope it might also be of help to others -

 

may we all give rise to the Compassion that has no reference point ...

[C T]

And I also found something relevant from the blog http://luminousemptiness.blogspot.com/2007/11/gampopa-and-compassion.html :

 

 

Deepening Compassion

 

....may we all give rise to the Compassion that has no reference point ...

Nice reminder. Thanks for the effort Xabir. _/\_

[xabir2005]

Sure. But I'm pointing to something which is beyond words. You, like xabir, no offense, are just pointing toward more words.

You are clinging to a 'something beyond words'. Be careful not to fall into the 'disease of non-conceptuality'.

 

Via wisdom, I abandon clinging to words and wordless but am free to use them.

 

I do not point to more words, but the empty and luminous nature of reality... of mind, thoughts, and sense perceptions.

Edited August 6, 2011 by xabir2005

[Informer]

You are clinging to a 'something beyond words'. Be careful not to fall into the 'disease of non-conceptuality'.

 

Via wisdom, I abandon clinging to words and wordless but am free to use them.

 

I do not point to more words, but the empty and luminous nature of reality... of mind, thoughts, and sense perceptions.

 

Xabir, the only ultimate truth, that which may encompass truth on every level and perspective is water.

 

Sure you can put into a mold and it will take that shape, but is that all that it is? Just the mold that it was put into?

 

 

Who are you on ruthless truth anyway?

[xabir2005]

Xabir, the only ultimate truth, that which may encompass truth on every level and perspective is water.

 

Sure you can put into a mold and it will take that shape, but is that all that it is? Just the mold that it was put into?

 

 

Who are you on ruthless truth anyway?

Your analogy posits an independent substance...

 

I am 'AnEternalNow'. I am one of the blue statuses there but rarely participate in their discussions. I am more active in other forums like my own Buddhist forum: http://buddhism.sgforums.com and this forum, of course.

[thuscomeone]

You are clinging to a 'something beyond words'. Be careful not to fall into the 'disease of non-conceptuality'.

 

Via wisdom, I abandon clinging to words and wordless but am free to use them.

 

I do not point to more words, but the empty and luminous nature of reality... of mind, thoughts, and sense perceptions.

No I am not clinging at all. I am recognizing suchness, the undeniable fact of what is. Clinging is not in that suchness. Clinging is in defining that suchness. This is what you fail to understand.

 

Don't flatter yourself, buddy. Even now you are desperately clinging to words.

Edited August 6, 2011 by thuscomeone

[Informer]

Your analogy posits an independent substance...

 

I am 'AnEternalNow'. I am one of the blue statuses there but rarely participate in their discussions. I am more active in other forums like my own Buddhist forum: http://buddhism.sgforums.com and this forum, of course.

 

If you want to say that you could, maybe "like water" would be better.

 

This was even hinted at in the buddhist story of the girl seeking enlightenment, she was looking at the reflection of the moon in a pale of water before the bottom broke out. Then she looked at the moon.

 

Water is not any particular form yet all of them.

[xabir2005]

No I am not clinging at all. I am recognizing suchness, the undeniable fact of what is. Clinging is not in that suchness. Clinging is in defining that suchness. This is what you fail to understand.

 

Don't flatter yourself, buddy. Even now you are desperately clinging to words.

When realization of twofold emptiness arises, the views of inherency is dissolved, leaving unreified experiencing of suchness without constructing a seer and something seen, as described in kalaka sutta.

 

Before the realization however, the views of inherency is not dissolved, and the practitioner desperately cling to a non-conceptual state of perception, saying that this is 'suchness', and fearing to go into concepts. In truth, they are still clinging to inherent views, which they try to remedy through 'non-conceptuality' but this is not resolving the issue really.

 

As for you... I don't think you are really clear about the implication of views on daily experience. Why does a normal, deluded sentient being not see this? It is simply because of views, clinging to selfhood, body, subject, object, etc, as being inherent...

 

They don't verbalize or define their attachment, they don't say 'I am my body' but they do cling to that body-sense. They don't say 'I am' but they cling to the sense of self. They cling to something unchanging and permanent due to the view of inherency.

 

But this is not enough. You really need to see how every clinging is the manifestation of view in action.

Edited August 6, 2011 by xabir2005

[thuscomeone]

If you want to say that you could, maybe "like water" would be better.

 

This was even hinted at in the buddhist story of the girl seeking enlightenment, she was looking at the reflection of the moon in a pale of water before the bottom broke out. Then she looked at the moon.

 

Water is not any particular form yet all of them.

My take on that particular story is that she was always only looking at the reflection of the moon (her thoughts) and never the actual moon (actual reality).

 

Xabir, you are the girl in this story.

Edited August 6, 2011 by thuscomeone

[thuscomeone]

When realization of twofold emptiness arises, the views of inherency is dissolved, leaving unreified experiencing of suchness without constructing a seer and something seen, as described in kalaka sutta.

 

Before the realization however, the views of inherency is not dissolved, and the practitioner desperately cling to a non-conceptual state of perception, saying that this is 'suchness', and fearing to go into concepts. In truth, they are still clinging to inherent views, which they try to remedy through 'non-conceptuality' but this is not resolving the issue really.

 

As for you... I don't think you are really clear about the implication of views on daily experience. Why does a normal, deluded sentient being not see this? It is simply because of views, clinging to selfhood, body, subject, object, etc, as being inherent...

 

They don't verbalize or define their attachment, they don't say 'I am my body' but they do cling to that body-sense. They don't say 'I am' but they cling to the sense of self. They cling to something unchanging and permanent due to the view of inherency.

 

You have not realized the meaning of emptiness. As is clear by your words.

 

This is not clinging to a self. This is the fact of what is before the self -- and it isn't permanent, impermanent, empty, non-empty. It's a fact. It's just being.

 

Now you are just coming across as nihilistic. Now you are saying that there is literally nothing here? No body, no mind?

Edited August 6, 2011 by thuscomeone

[xabir2005]

My take on that particular story is that she was always only looking at the reflection of the moon (her thoughts) and never the actual moon (actual reality).

 

Xabir, you are the girl in this story.

Haha... there is no me.

[xabir2005]

You have not realized the meaning of emptiness. As is clear by your words.

Think whatever you wish, what is clear is clear to me.

[C T]

More 'freeing' words:

"The view of the inner tantras, and particularly of Atiyoga, is the actual indivisibility of cause and result. While the outer tantras are more concerned with indivisibility than the sutric teachings, the inner tantric yanas are superior to the outer ones in this respect. Therefore, the sutric yanas are known as the yanas of causation, since the practitioners train in the path as the cause to attain the goal as the result. The tantric yanas are called the resultant yanas because by using the realization of primordial wisdom, which is the significance of empowerment and which is transmitted at the time of empowerment, tantrists perceive the world and beings as the Buddhas and Buddha-fields, and they develop and perfect the realization. Tantra perfects the result in a short time by using the state of the 3 Kayas as the path of training by profound skillful means.

 

Tantra is a path of transformation of unenlightenment and defiling emotions as the Buddha-essence and Buddha-virtues. But this is not a transformation of something into something else, like iron into gold, as some recent scholars have understood; it is transforming, purifying, or perfecting something which is stained into its own pure state." - - Pema Ledrel Tsal

 

(If ultimately causes and conditions cannot be transcended, such transformations would not be achievable.)

 

 

 

According to Longchenpa:

 

"The sutric teachings of Bodhisattvayana (or Mahayana) assert that (beings) possess the Buddha-essence (Tathagatagarbha). With the Buddha-essence as the seed and with training on the two accumulations, the accumulations of merits and primordial wisdom, as the conditions during numerous lives, the Buddha-essence will blossom, and (as a result) fully enlightened Buddhahood will be achieved. It is called the 'Yana of causation' since it asserts that cause and result are successive.

 

In the tantric view (wherein cause and result are indivisible) the Buddha-essence is naturally present in all living beings with its virtues complete, like the sun with its lights, and that is the 'basis of purification'. The eight consciousnesses with appearance {percepts}, like clouds, which obscures the Buddha-essence, are the things 'to be purified'. Empowerments and meditation on the development and completion stages causing, as clouds are dispelled by air, the obscurations to be purified and light of virtues to shine forth, are the 'means of purification'. Thereby, the attainment of the absolute universal ground shining forth, as it is, like the sun, is the 'result of purification'. At that time, since there are no longer the previous defilements, although the names and habituations of the universal ground have been transformed (as Buddhahood and its virtues), in reality they manifest without differentiation or succession (meaning ultimately there are in fact no causes or conditions)."

 

 

 

From the Hevajratantra:

 

"Beings are the very Buddha (in their true nature),

But their (nature) is obscured by adventitious obscurations.

When the obscurations are cleansed, they themselves are the very Buddha."

[thuscomeone]

You don't even know what the seer/observer is, do you xabir? It's attachment to the content of thought. Not to replace one thought with another. Thought is what observes/interprets/distorts.

 

If you try and accuse me of clinging, you're wrong. Like I've said, there isn't nothing because one can obviously see presence. But there isn't something because all "things" are created by thought and have no basis.

 

It's a much more subtle version of the middle way.

Edited August 6, 2011 by thuscomeone

[xabir2005]

You don't even know what the seer/observer is, do you xabir? It's attachment to the content of thought. Not to replace one thought with another. Thought is what observes/interprets/distorts.

There is no seer, observer, but there is the attachment to the content of thought which means to treat the observer or seer as something real to be clung to.

 

It is to cling to this sense of an inherent awareness, seer, background behind things (which is itself a thought).

 

Even though this is a thought, why is it being treated as something real? Because of views, the view of 'is' and 'is not', the view of inherency.

 

The purpose therefore, is not to replace one thought with another, but to realize emptiness which dissolves ALL views without replacing one with another.... as said earlier, Madhyamika denies existents without asserting the non-existence of existents.

 

Thought itself is not a problem, but the attachment to thoughts due to delusion/clinging to views.

 

Enlightened people are not enlightened or liberated by thoughtlessness (in fact they still think), but by wisdom that dissolves ignorance.

 

 

p.s. Just like the thought 'santa claus' is not a problem unless you are deluded into thinking them as real. If you realize the unreality of santa claus, you are free to think or not think about it, in any case you are not deluded or attached to the notion or reality of it.

Edited August 6, 2011 by xabir2005

[thuscomeone]

Again, you don't understand. I'm not talking about cultivation of a thoughtless state. Far from it. This is your wrong assumption.

[xabir2005]

Again, you don't understand. I'm not talking about cultivation of a thoughtless state. Far from it. This is your wrong assumption.

As a matter of fact you cling to non-conceptual presence without understanding that what liberates is simply the investigation and realization of the twofold emptinesses that dissolves inherent view.

 

It is therefore not non-conceptual perception that liberates - Eckhart Tolle, and many others always talk about suchness too. You can remain in non-conceptual experiencing, but still the views of inherency will not be dissolved until the realizaton of anatta and shunyata has arisen and deeply sinks in to replace all our views.

 

You can talk about suchness all day but you can't overlook latent tendencies and the implications of views.

 

And as Thusness have warned about the disease of non-conceptuality.

 

https://sites.google.com/site/dharmadepository/translations/examination-of-the-five-aggregates

 

This is a line by line translation of the Huayan Patriarch Cheng'guan's work.

 

五蘊觀

Examination of the Five Aggregates

沙門澄觀述

Written by Śramaṇa Chéngguān

問。凡夫之人欲求解脫。當云何修。

It is asked, “The common person seeks liberation. How should he practise?”

答曰。當修二觀。

We respond saying that one should practise the two examinations.

二觀者何。一人空觀。二法空觀。

What are the two examinations? The first is the examination of the emptiness of persons. The second is the examination of the emptiness of phenomena (dharma).

夫生死之本莫過人法二執。

The root of birth and death – nothing goes beyond the two attachments of persons and phenomena.

迷身心總相。故執人我為實有。

One misunderstands the body and mind's characteristic of totality and thus grasps the self of the person as an actual existent.

迷五蘊自相。故計法我為實有。

One misunderstands the five aggregates' individual characteristics and thus conceives the self of a phenomenon as an actual existent.

計人我者。用初觀照之。

For the conception of the self of person we utilize the first examination and investigate it.

知五蘊和合假名為人。

We then know the five aggregates come together and are provisionally called a person.

一一諦觀。但見五蘊。求人我相終不可得。

Each are carefully examined. We only see the five aggregates. We seek out the self-characteristic of the person and in the end it cannot be found.

云何名為五蘊。色受想行識是。

What are called the five aggregates? They are form (rūpa), sensation (vedanā), perception (saṃjñā), volitional formations (saṃskāra) and consciousness (vijñāna).

云何觀之。

How does one examine them?

身則色蘊。所謂地水火風是。其相如何。

The body is the aggregate of form. This is said to be earth, water, fire and wind. What are their characteristics?

堅則地。潤則水。煖則火。動則風。

Solidity is earth. Moistness is water. Warmth is fire. Movement is wind.

觀心則四蘊。所謂受想行識是。其相如何。

In examining the mind there are four aggregates. These are said to be sensation, perception, volitional formations and consciousness. What are their characteristics?

領納為受。取相為相。造作為行。了別為識。

Feeling is sensation. Apprehending characteristics is perception. Creating actions is volitional formations. Cognition is consciousness.

若能依此身心相。諦觀分明。於一切處但見五蘊。求人我相終不可得。

If we rely on these characteristics of body and mind, carefully examine and see clearly, then in all places we only see the five aggregates. We search out the self-characteristic of the person and in the end it cannot be found.

名人空觀。乘此觀。行出分段生死。永處涅槃。名二乘解脫。

We call this the examination of the emptiness of persons. If one utilizes this examination then one departs birth and death within the six realms and forever abides in nirvāṇa. We call this the liberation of the two vehicles.

計法我者用後觀照之。知一一蘊皆從緣生。都無自性。求蘊相不可得。則五蘊皆空。

For the conception of the self of a phenomenon we utilize the later examination and investigate it. We then know that each of the aggregates all arise from conditions and all are without self-essence. We seek out the characteristics of the aggregates and they cannot be found and so the five aggregates are all empty.

名法空觀。若二觀雙照。了人我法我。畢竟空無所有。

We call this the examination of the emptiness of phenomena. If we investigate with both examinations we understand the person's self and the phenomenon's self are ultimately empty without existence.

離諸怖畏。度一切苦厄。出變易生死。名究竟解脫。

Free from all fears, crossing over all pains and emerging into existence as a Bodhisattva – we call this ultimate liberation.

問。夫求解脫。祗是了妄證真。但能契真如理。寂然無念則便離縛。何假興心觀蘊方求解脫。豈不乖理哉。

It is asked, “Seeking liberation is only just understanding delusion and realizing the truth. It is merely being able to realize the principle of tathātā – in quietude without thoughts and then binds are removed. How does one provisionally arouse the mind, examine the aggregates and then seek liberation? Is this not in opposition to the principle?”

答。離蘊真妄約何而立。且五蘊者身心之異名。行人若不識身心真妄。何能懸契。

We answer: with what do you stand without aggregates, truth and delusion? For the moment the five aggregates are a different name for the body and mind. Supposing the practitioner is not aware of the truth and delusions of body and mind, how could they completely understand them?

不達真妄之本。諸行徒施。

They do not reach the source of truth and delusion and practises are vainly undertaken.

故經云。若於虗空終不能成。斯之謂也。

Thus the scripture states, “It is like in emptiness ultimately nothing being able to be established.”

且計人我者。凡夫之執也。計法我者。二乘之滯也。

The conception of the self of the person is a delusional attachment of the ordinary person. The conception of the self of a phenomenon is a hindrance of the two vehicles.

故令修二觀。方能了妄證真。豈可離也。

Thus we have them practice the two examinations and then they are able to understand delusion and realize the truth. How could you do without this?

Edited August 6, 2011 by xabir2005

[Lucky7Strikes]

Here's the first post I wrote after the realization:

 

"Yes, indeed emptiness is the freedom from all extreme views like existence and non-existence. Emptiness does not deny five skandhas, the reality as we observe it, as insight into anatta reveals all transient phenomena to be pristine awareness itself and thus utterly vivid, intimate, actual and seemingly real. But the further realisation of emptiness shows how all phenomena are void of inherent existence in and of itself, independent of conditions. There is the insight into how the entire experiential universe, the five skandhas as we experience it - is empty, void, coreless, substanceless - that it is like the magician's magic tricks, a magical apparition that is substanceless behind its appearance. being a magical luminous display that cannot be pinned down or located, it far transcends view of existence, nonexistence, birth, abiding, and death. the unborn nature of dharmas is realised.

 

i wrote an email to thusness titled "the unborn dharma":

 

 

 

In attempting to find and locate where thought comes from, reside, and go to, it is realised that thought is ungraspable, unfindable, unfathomable... A magicians magical apparition, like everything (the experiential universe) is... A wonderful display of luminous emptiness, dependent origination. Yet after this is seen, it is nothing resembling nihilism or non-existence... When someone lights up his lighter to burn an innocent ant, compassion just arise... A magical universe demands magical response and compassion from no one to no one[/i]

No this is not the experience I was looking for. This is not pure compassion/love.

 

When the heart begins to open the flow of love inherent in awareness becomes inseparable. You feel more and more awake. More awake than you could have possibly imagined you could be. The very though of sleep disappears, and one realizes that to be aware is to be compassionate. That compassion is our very being. It's different from bliss states.

 

I was awake for almost a week. My brain began to literally melt as the sutures lined up. I had no sense of movement or locality.

 

In those stages there was no recollection of "I" or other. Everything felt connected and whole, and as if the polarities of existence, day and night, began to merge together. I could feel the joy and the pains of those around me, as if they were in me.

 

For some reason your path, although I've practiced accordingly, does not line up with mine. Insights and experiences revealed to me during practice took different directions. I did not feel ungraspability, but creativity.

Edited August 6, 2011 by Lucky7Strikes

[xabir2005]

[thuscomeone]

I didn't say there was something or there was nothing. Again, the middle way. If you actually took the time to read my last post, you would see this.

 

Careful, eckhart tolle may be much more enlightened than you and you might not even know it.

 

I understand the implications of attachment to views as it relates to the four noble truths. Can't say the same for you.

Edited August 6, 2011 by thuscomeone

[xabir2005]

I didn't say there was something or there was nothing. Again, the middle way. If you actually took the time to read my last post, you would see this.

 

Careful, eckhart tolle may be much more enlightened than you and you might not even know it.

Eckhart Tolle still clings to I AM.

[thuscomeone]

Eckhart Tolle still clings to I AM.

And you still cling to emptiness and d.o. Congratulations.

 

And you tell me I'm too focused on maps.

 

You wrongly conflate non-conceptual presence with "I am."

Edited August 6, 2011 by thuscomeone

[Informer]

Your analogy posits an independent substance...

 

I am 'AnEternalNow'. I am one of the blue statuses there but rarely participate in their discussions. I am more active in other forums like my own Buddhist forum: http://buddhism.sgforums.com and this forum, of course.

 

I think this shows you to be looking at the mold, rather than the properties.