[2:27 PM, 6/14/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Chapter 25
Engaging in Discernment
25.­1

“Young man, how do bodhisattva mahāsattvas who practice that discernment of phenomena, who view phenomena as phenomena, attain the highest, complete enlightenment?

“Young man, bodhisattva mahāsattvas who practice that discernment of phenomena, who view phenomena as phenomena, do not perceive enlightenment as other than form. They do not approach enlightenment as other than form. They do not seek enlightenment as other than form. They do not attain enlightenment as other than form. They do not inspire beings to an enlightenment that is other than form. They do not see a tathāgata as other than form. They see a tathāgata in this way: ‘The Tathāgata is the fearlessness that is the nature of form.’ They do not see the tathāgata as other than form, as other than the nature of form. They do not see the nature of form as other than the tathāgata. The nature of that which is called form and that of the tathāgata are nondual. The bodhisattva mahāsattvas who see in that way are engaging in the discernment of phenomena.

[long quote cut https://read.84000.co/translation/toh127.html ]
[2:36 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: What do u understand from it?
[5:23 PM, 6/14/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Now looking at the thousands on droplet on window.. each reflecting all surroundings... nothing has inherent essence besides the merely dependently originating appearance.. pure appearance is like mere designation without referent like chariot. Means appearing without core or essence just like designated entities are designated dependent on various conditions without essence
[8:47 PM, 6/14/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Also i see why you said a thought or phenomena is neither arising nor non arising but nonarising due to dependent origination.. for example a form that depends on eye and other countless conditions cannot be said to come from anywhere, go anywhere or have come into being anywhere. Its nature is just like chariot.

Such a form is only merely designated and appearing in dependence on all those factors.. have no real existence of its own, not truly originated, coming or going

It is not arising or truly existent, it is also not non existent or totally nonarising, but rather it is phenomena that is free from existence or nonexistence or inherent production but dependently originating

It is also not about it being dreamlike or merely appearing, rather it is about the essencelessness of dependent origination
[8:50 PM, 6/14/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Therefore to truly comprehend the nature of form is to comprehend its dependent origination and emptiness simultaneously
[8:51 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: Because of the sutra?
[8:51 PM, 6/14/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Was contemplating just now and occurred to me
[8:52 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: What about ur experience?
[8:54 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: What about the spontaneous display when expressed conventionally is DO and emptiness. How do u understand spontaneous display as DO and emptiness? How do u relate convention and the ultimate?
[9:03 PM, 6/14/2020] Soh Wei Yu: The spontaneous display is what i had in mind when i say nature of form is dependently originating and empty.. the vivid vision of red flower is not located inside the flower, in the eye, in anywhere.. it is not truly arisen but is a vivid presence that is free of extremes and expressed conventionally as DO

All phenomena are conventionally dependently originating, ultimately empty clarity free from extremes
[9:10 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: Quite good.
[9:15 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: Try not to be too intellectual now, feel everything with ur whole body mind naturally.
[9:17 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: Don't feel with ur head or ur eyes...lol. feel with ur whole body. That is ur mind too.🤣 



................................

“Thoughts (and whatever else that appears in one’s experience) are neither arising and ceasing, nor non-arising and non-ceasing… ...Whatever manifests (dharma/appearances/phenomena/pure sensory experiences) is directly realized to be non-arising because of dependent origination.” - John Tan, 2014

 

 “I pay respect to the best among speakers who, having attained Enlightenment, has taught relative origination (Pratītyasamutpāda) which is no-cessation, no-origination, no- annihilation, no-abiding, no-one-thing, no-many-thing, no-coming-in, no-going-out; being the termination of linguistic description (Prapañcopashamam), it is the good (Shivam)” -  Nagarjuna [Ram Candra Pandey & Mañju, 1999, pp.1].

 

"The perfectly enlightened buddhas-proclaimed, 'What is dependently created is uncreated.'"

- Candrakīrti

 

"Whatever is dependently originated does not truly arise."

- Mañjuśrī

 

"What originates dependently is unoriginated!"

- Nāgārjuna

 

"That phenomena are born from causes can never be inconsistent [with facts]; since the cause is empty of cause, we understand it to be empty of origination. The non-origination of all phenomena is clearly taught to be emptiness."

 

- Nāgārjuna

 

“Neither from itself, nor from another, nor from both, nor without a cause, does anything, anywhere, ever, arise” (MMK I:1) - Nāgārjuna

 

“That which originates due to a cause and does not abide without [certain] conditions, but disappears when the conditions are absent: How can it be understood to ‘exist?’” - Nāgārjuna


...............

[11:33 PM, 6/14/2020] Soh Wei Yu: i think mmk is a little confusing to navigate to treat it like a koan.. anatta is very simple because its just bahiya sutta, or two stanzas, more focused lol
[11:33 PM, 6/14/2020] Soh Wei Yu: mmk has like so many reasonings
[11:33 PM, 6/14/2020] Soh Wei Yu: dunno what to focus on 🤣

[11:34 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: Yes. I m thinking of writing something about it.. lol to get ppl into orientation.
[11:38 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: Mmk is a bit clumsy and many sees the purpose as cessation of conceptualization. However I treat it as koan triggering insight that can b authenticated in real time. For those that has not idea of how anatta can b triggered from the 2 stanza, it will b unfamiliar to them.
[11:39 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: But mmk is a very thorough deconstruction teaching.
[11:39 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: Many only sees emptiness and not see DO. They treat DO arising only when ignorance is present.

[11:52 PM, 6/14/2020] Soh Wei Yu: “I pay respect to the best among speakers who, having attained Enlightenment, has taught relative origination (Pratītyasamutpāda) which is no-cessation, no-origination, no- annihilation, no-abiding, no-one-thing, no-many-thing, no-coming-in, no-going-out; being the termination of linguistic description (Prapañcopashamam), it is the good (Shivam)” - Nagarjuna [Ram Candra Pandey & Mañju, 1999, pp.1].

[11:52 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: Yes
[11:53 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: The last sentence being the termination of linguistic description ...many take it to mean doing away of conceptualization.
[11:56 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: U must intuit the spontaneity of this manifestation, this display...from no where and does not go anywhere...
[11:57 PM, 6/14/2020] John Tan: These continuously springing out...DO is the koan of this authentication.

[12:08 AM, 6/15/2020] John Tan: Sentient being see production from cause and conditions but they do not see non-production, they see true production.
[12:09 AM, 6/15/2020] John Tan: When it is non-origination is realized from origination in dependence, that is DO.

0 Responses