John Tan
12:14am
John Tan

Now in hearing, there is only sound. In total exertion, not only the ears heard, the eyes, the hair, the entire body hears...there is no eye, no ear, no body...all six entries are one function and even that act of hearing is profoundly deconstructed.

Or let's say just anatta, in hearing there is only sound. If u search for
"sound", u can never find it. If u try to find the line of demarcation
that separates sound and the conditions that give rise to it, can u find that line?
Soh
12:19am
Soh

nope
John Tan
12:23am
John Tan

In non-conceptual mode of anatta, just a dimensionless sphere of clear "tingsss" and even saying that is too much. Is there separation of the bell, the ear, the stick, the air...etc? All is profoundly exerted into the suchness beyond speech. However when u expressed conventionally, must u not see the dependent arising, the causal dependencies?
Soh
12:25am
Soh

oic..

yea
John Tan
12:25am
John Tan

So u must know at the ultimate it is expressed as if there is no sound, no conditions but at the conventional it is expressed as DO.
Soh
12:27am
Soh

ic..
John Tan
12:31am
John Tan

Therefore if one does not see DO, he will not see the ultimate correctly. To teach emptiness is to to see DO and to see DO is to see emptiness. Appears therefore empty, empty therefore appears. There is no emptiness without appearance and no appearances that is not empty.
John Tan
1:02am
John Tan

Just read Greg's comments. He pointed one imp point that is mutual dependency. In Prasangika, this mutual dependency is quite unique and important but not in the sense that they affect or produce each other but they (cause and effect) are mutually dependent for their conventional existence. For example we normally think sound is causally dependent on its causes and conditions for its arising but in Prasangika, sound is dependent on its conditions and the conditions r also dependent on sound for their existence. Why so? This is important to understand total exertion.
Soh
1:16am
Soh

its like without sunlight, the sun would not be the sun... sunlight makes sun what it is conventionally.. sound actualizes a bell, and blowing wind actualizes a fan
John Tan
1:22am
John Tan

(thumbs up)
Soh
1:27am
Soh

interesting.. if we think of computer screen as an entity, then the images on the screen and the screen is only a one way dependency. the images are dependent on the screen and the screen is not dependent on the images... the screen will always be the screen (until it gets 'destroyed') and the images come and go, shows on and off. but seeing the lack of intrinsic existence of screen and image... then its like water pouring into water, screen and image co-emerge in total exertion... its not youtube happening on a screen... the screen is manifested through youtube and it is youtube-screen. the same goes for consciousness... thats why buddha said consciousness is reckoned by its conditions (reference: http://www.leighb.com/mn38.htm)...

(comments by Soh: The same can be said in many other examples: Plane and Flying (we may think of 'flying' as something that 'plane' is 'doing', but what does the co-emergence of plane and flying and the lack of intrinsic identity of both tells us?), Subject-Action-Object, etc...)
John Tan
1:37am
John Tan

Well said. The heart of total exertion and emptiness...feel it. U r beginning to bring the taste of total exertion into "view". Even in conventionality and conceptuality, the experience of "water pouring water" in meditative equipoise can b brought into actual taste. +A and -A can b integrated.
Soh
1:38am
Soh

oic..



p.s. This excerpt by Dogen is worth repeating: “Birth is just like riding in a boat. You raise the sails and row with the pole. Although you row, the boat gives you a ride, and without the boat no one could ride. But you ride in the boat and your riding makes the boat what it is. Investigate such a moment.”

Also, अष्टावक्र शान्ति posted nice quotes from Dalai Lama:

"Something is not a cause in and of itself; it is named a “cause” in relation to its effect. Here the effect does not occur before its cause, and its cause does not come into being after its effect; it is in thinking of its future effect that we designate something as a cause. This is dependent-arising in the sense of dependent designation." - H.H Dalai Lama


"But when you take it further, the dependent-arising of cause and effect comes because of dependent designation, which itself indicates that cause and effect do not have their own being; if they did have their own being, they would not have to be dependently designated." - H.H Dalai Lama



HHDL's explanation on dependent designation is very clear! Funny how I didn't see it in the past though I read through his book before:

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=kqvlPsyV33IC&pg=PA190&lpg=PA190#v=onepage&q&f=false

Dependent Designation is a key teaching of Madhyamika:

"Whatever is dependently co-arisen
That is explained to be emptiness.
That, being a dependent designation
Is itself the middle way.
Something that is not dependently arisen,
Such a thing does not exist.
Therefore a non-empty thing
Does not exist. " 


-- Nagarjuna



..........

Wrote more: 21/12/2014:
Water pouring into water may be understood as mere non-division of subject and object, in fact you hear descriptions of how the realization of Atman-Brahman is like pouring a drop of water into the great ocean, and so on.

However, the water pouring i
nto water in Madhyamika has a more subtle meaning. The subject and object, realization and object of realization, etc etc is released like water pouring into water. This means seeing the selflessness, the emptiness of self and object, screen and images, plane and flying, car/driver/driving, etc etc leads to the taste of empty and non-dual seamless exertion.

For example now you no longer see yourself as an independent driver existing independent of the driving (driver is dependently designated in dependence of driving and car), driving a car which is mistakenly seen to exist independent of the driver and driving. Neither are you saying the driver collapses into the car or the car collapses into the driver. Rather, by seeing how driver, car and driving are dependent and empty, then car, driver, driving, environment 'melts' into empty, non-dual seamless exertion. Your riding makes the boat what it is.

In this case, subject and object are non-dual like Advaita but not really the same in view, because you are not collapsing one pole to another but releasing them into non-obstruction.
0 Responses