Showing posts with label Death. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Death. Show all posts

 

    Coincidentally, I was talking to William Lim this issue when we met yesterday... Haha:
    Where did the flame go when it dies out?
    Where do we go after our death?
    But I don't really like the answer that "nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed." 🤪🤦
    Silly but honest question,
    when we delete stuff from a computer (or other equivalent devices), where does it go to?
    Is it a case of something becoming nothing? 🤔

    20 Comments


    Yin Ling
    What would u answer to
    “Where do we go after our death?”😁


  • John Tan
    Yin Ling don't tell u🤪




  • John Tan
    Yin Ling We project svabhava onto what appears where it actually lacks. The way of "logical" reasoning that is based on the PARADIGM of "thingness" and duality needs to be corrected with dependent orgination and emptiness, the PARADIGM has infiltrated into every cell and every quantum mind-moment of our body-mind. This cognitive fault based on wrong and faulty premise needs to be replaced by dependent arising and emptiness.

    • Reply
    • 1d
    • Edited

  • Yin Ling
    John Tan thank you 😁😁😁


  • John Tan
    Yin Ling don't under-estimate the "spell" despite clear insights and experiences.

    • Reply
    • 1d
    • Edited

  • Yin Ling
    yes it is very deep imprints. The doubt when facing situations already tell me how deep it is.


  • Yin Ling
    John Tan sometimes I wish there’s a “Buddha spectacle” once u put on will show u the vision ,
    So the mind and body can be washed clean thoroughly of stains 😝😂🤦🏻‍♀️
    Someone need to invent that thing


  • William Lim
    Since anatta realization sees through the illusion of the self, does awakening eliminate the fear of death?


  • Yin Ling
    William Lim for me not yet lol. I still scared die.
    John tan maybe different level d.


  • John Tan
    Yin Ling I worry more about losing sight of anatta, dependent arising, emptiness, freedom from all elaborations, total exertion. To me that is "death". Life without such wisdom is "death" (imo).

    • Reply
    • 1d
    • Edited

  • Yin Ling
    John Tan that is truly scary 😭


  • John Tan
    Yin Ling yes for "life and death" orignates from ignorance.


  • Yin Ling
    John Tan powerful insight thanks 😊







  • Stian Gudmundsen Høiland
    Here’s good old Buddhaghosa in his Visuddhimagga:
    > He understands thus: "There is no heap or store of unarisen mentality-materiality [existing] prior to its arising. When it arises, it does not come from any heap or store; and when it ceases, it does not go in any direction. There is nowhere any depository in the way of a heap or store or hoard of what has ceased. But just as there is no store, prior to its arising, of the sound that arises when a lute is played, nor does it come from any store when it arises, nor does it go in any direction when it ceases, nor does it persist as a store when it has ceased, but on the contrary, not having been, it is brought into being owing to the lute, the lute's neck, and the man's appropriate effort, and having been, it vanishes—so too all material and immaterial states, not having been, are brought into being, and having been, they vanish."


  • Soh Wei Yu
    Just yesterday i was re reading this article from hong wen liang, v clear:
    真正的无所从来是什么?一块木头着火,火烧起来了,火从哪里来?从木头里来的吗?木头有火吗?但是的确是这一块木头把火烧起来的呀,不是别的木头烧的呀。明明是这一块木头,但是这个火你可以讲是从这一块木头来的吗?人间的说法可以这么讲,但真正的这个火无所从来!木头里头有火吗?躲在哪里呀?火有自性吗?有叫做这个火的吗?明明是这一块木头烧了变成这一把火,不是另一块木头烧变成火,这一把火是这一块木头烧出来的,知道它有所从来——那是人间的学问概念,这是我们的概念!真正是怎样呢?把这一块木头烧了,火出来了,真正的这个火是怎么来的?性空真火,性火真空,无所从来。你讲什么是从这个木头烧出来的。我们就是犯这个毛病,所以看不懂佛法。无所从来的意思懂了吗?
    明白恁么用。那么你就知道,我们都是缘起性空,性空缘起的。你该哭的时候哭,该痛的时候痛,该感冒的时候就感冒。明白恁么用就是弄清楚了,心没有生,就没有法,体得了无心道。无心体得无心道,体得无心道也休。刚刚我举的那个例子大家再想想,拿一块木头去烧,起了火了,你说这个火是这块木头烧的,不是另外一块木头来的,人间这么说话可以。但是真正呢?你没有迷本随情的话,你不会认为这个火是从这一块木头来的。清楚了这个,明白恁么用,触处生涯随分足。该感冒就感冒,该拉肚子就拉肚子,该高兴就高兴,该舒服就舒服,该有钱就有钱,该倒霉没有钱就没有钱,就是这样。安乐于缘起,一切都是缘起的实在的样子。有的时候讲任运随缘,这里讲明白恁么用,都是一个意思。不是有一个“你”清清楚楚我要向左转才是天国,向右转是阿修罗道,这个叫做明白恁么用。不是这个意思!该要投胎到牛胎里头去了,他也是安住在这个牛胎里头,这个叫做明白恁么用。一切都是无自性,没有一个“我“那个中心的在动!刚刚我举那个烧木头的例子,你不要认为这个火是这一块木头生的,这个弄清楚了就没有事了嘛。
    本无所从来,明白恁么用,那么简单的几个字,很多人读经,读语录读了那么多,听了那么多,还是自己解释自己的佛法。为什么?很少去盘腿呀,很少去静静坐在那里,让你的六根,你不要加什么法,减什么法,六根本身照宇宙的那个律动在动嘛。它难道不动吗?动啊!心脏动,呼吸动,血液循环,新陈代谢都在动。是你去动它的吗?你坐在那里手结印,嘴巴闭起来,六根都如实地替你动啊——不是“替你动”,它是做主人的事情。平常我们这个假主人把它赶下舞台了,自己以为是“我”在活到。
    本无所从来,明白恁么用。你就是知道前一辈子再前一辈子,上一次再上一次……几千万次以前的来由你都知道,那也是无所从来耶。如果你能够知道这个了,便于一切时一切处。脱彻无依。在一切时一切处,包括临终的时候,有各种境界出现,可怕的境界出现,可喜的境界出现,眼睛闭了,六根门头已经不起作用了,但是会显很多的中阴境界。因为你知道我们本无所从来,明白恁么用的关系,安乐在当下的那个境界,在地狱里头也成佛。这个才是佛法!脱彻无依是什么意思?缘起无自性就是无依嘛,我们用学问话解释无依就是缘起无自性。我喜欢拿《参同契》里头的例子,那个火大、地大、水大、风大,四大从哪里出来?我们用火举例大家就比较清楚。烧木材火出来了,这是火大,烧完了,火消失了。火大从哪里来?火大又消失到何方去?熄火了就灭,灭到哪里?你可以找到那个灭到哪里,归到哪里,回到哪个家吗?木头已经烧成灰了。火哪里出来?消失在哪里?我们就是地水火风啊,这些东西好像从木头冒出来的火一样的。我们觉得火是从木头里烧出来,那只是一个代表,有一个具体的东西让大家比较容易了解。其实呢,从哪里冒出来的地水火风?脱彻无依就是本来无一物,所以才有那么多无边无量的相,无边无量所以随缘就显各种各样不同的样子出现,无边无量同时就是能够显现在有限的样子。你的样子不是有限吗?你跟我不一样,跟他不一样,各种情绪不一样,寿命也不同,聪明才智的,笨的什么都不一样,心地硬软都不一样。不一样的样子是不是无限?是无限。现出来是不是有限?那个样子就有限了嘛。没有限你怎么知道你个性怎么样?无限等于有限,有限就是无限。明中有暗,暗中有明。同就是不同,不同就是同。有就是没有,没有就是有。你看,释迦牟尼佛讲的法是这么真实,但是转成了我们的概念,就是“有就是有,不是没有”。这个都弄不清楚就根本不要学佛了。
    火大是真的有存在吗?但是会出来有光有热的作用嘛。会讲话会思想就跟光和热一样嘛,我们的四大聚起来就能够思想能够动情绪呀。烧完了消失何方?哪里去了?找不到来处,找不到去处。所以是无限无边无量的各个样子都会出现,但是来头呢?你去找来头,找不到!只是那个样子就是来头。本就是末,末就是本!你要用那个二分法去想,就又搞糊涂了:“本就是本不是末,末就是末不是本。”二分法就是我们头脑的一个杯弓蛇影的样子,这个你弄不清楚那实在摸不到释迦牟尼讲什么,摸到了你就是悟了,除了这个以外没有什么东西可悟的。
    参禅一段事-洪文亮老师开示
    AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
    参禅一段事-洪文亮老师开示
    参禅一段事-洪文亮老师开示

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 1d

  • Soh Wei Yu
    “所谓来无所从。去无所至。恁么来就恁么去。怎么恁么来?无所从来就是恁么来。去呢?无所去!有人听到这里,问我还不知道怎么去,那真是不会听了,真是没有办法,平常不用功,讲了这么多还傻傻的问:依旧恁么去,老师到底怎么去呢?坐火车,坐飞机去吗?还是走路去呀?戴帽子吗?要不要穿鞋子呀?还是头上要插草去吗?所谓来无所从,还是那个烧木头的例子,一点火,扑棱棱火来了,火哪里来的?无所从来。烧完了,烧成灰,火熄掉了,去到哪里?去无所至。但是缘到了又扑棱起火了。我们用那个柴呀什么东西的,那是打比方用的,法界连这个都不要。所以说无心体得无心道,体得无心道也休。六祖也讲本来无一物。这些都是缘起的幻相,四大五蕴都是幻相啊。你不知道这个是幻相,把它当真在那里修半天。但是,你不要说知道了这个是幻相,所以我不理了——我问你,谁不理呀?你那个四大五蕴主张说:那我就不理这些了,管他饿死就饿死——那个是谁在主张啊?那还是五蕴在主张啊。所以听法不彻底,马上又用自己的想法去推想佛讲的话。


    John Tan
    Soh Wei Yu but all these enquiries must be integrated into the insight that what originates in dependence is non-originated. Otherwise it can be skewed towards nihilism if understood from a "materialistic" view. Dependent arising also implies the 8 negations of Nagarjuna.

      • Reply
      • 1d
      • Edited






  • Anna Mukherjee
    Reminds me of Dogen's beautiful teaching : "Firewood becomes ash, and it does not become firewood again. Yet, do not suppose that the ash is future and the firewood past. You should understand that firewood abides in the phenomenal expression of firewood, which fully includes past and future and is independent of past and future. Ash abides in the phenomenal expression of ash, which fully includes future and past. Just as firewood does not become firewood again after it is ash, you do not return to birth after death."


  • Anurag Jain
    I would say "Nothing is born and nothing dies even when appearances inconceivably arise and dissolve".

  • Reply
  • 1d