Also see: Color, Sound, Lights and Rays
Dzogchen vs Advaita, Conventional and Ultimate Truth
Clarifications on Dharmakaya and Basis by Loppön Namdrol/Malcolm
Clarifications on the Term "Rigpa"
Exhaustion of All Phenomena


In my Facebook group "Dharma Connection" there happens to be many Dzogchen practitioners around so I posted this as it may interest them as I think it may also interest you as a reader. I've also posted some comments by Thusness below. (note: Thusness is not a Dzogchen practitioner so whatever he said need not be indicative of Dzogchen, just the practice and experience between us)
Rainbow Body Might Not Be What You Think It Is!

Since there's lots of Dzogchen practitioners, thought it might be interesting to share this piece of info.

Malcolm: "KDL went though all four visions to the end. He told me this personally. Not only me, but others. He did realize rainbow body. Rainbow body, in Dzogchen, does not mean that your body disappears. This is a huge misconception....it is stupidly simple -- once you reach the end of the fourth vision, everything is a display of the five lights, as it is put in the classical text earth, rocks, mountains and cliffs vanish and instead one sees only the five pure lights.....In other words, rainbow body in essence is actually a realization...."

...

"No, but I have heard (from ChNN among others) that the disappearance of the body is not necessarily a sign of the body of light.

Hindus also gain control over the four elements, also Arhats can gain control over the four elements. Gaining control over the four elements is mundane siddhi, it is not excellent siddhi, nor is it reserved for Vajrayana and Dzogchen people. However, if someone has not studied in detail, they might think that many mundane  siddhis are profound. So yes, what I am telling you is that I do not consider the so called rainbow body to much more than a display of mundane siddhi to create faith.

I am glad you have faith in the teachings, but as I said, I do not derive my faith in the teachings through illusions and phantasmagoria.

N"

....

p.s. with regards to KDL, who is also Malcolm's teacher (he passed away in 2006) and Malcolm has said before that KDL is a fully awakened Buddha,

http://tibetanaltar.blogspot.com.au/2009/10/terton-kunzang-dechen-lingpa-moving.html

"Later when Rinpoche was relaxing in a lawn chair, he said to a few students gathered around him: "You don't realize this, but I am actually Guru Rinpoche and you are his twenty-five disciples. I have reached the stage of exhaustion of phenomena (cho nyi zepa). In truth there is for me no form, no sensation, no perception, no karmic formation, no consciousness, no form, no smell, no sense consciousness or object of sense consciousness and so forth; there is no self or other and no distinction of 'Buddhas' and 'sentient beings'; everything remains in the naturally perfect state of pure equality. From the depths of my heart I wish there were some way you could all be made to understand the truth in this, but you do not see it."

Then Rinpoche went silent and tears fell from his eyes."

Also, maybe not many of you here knows this - Malcolm (Loppon Namdrol) was asked to teach Dzogchen by KDL but he refused.

(Update: The part on malcolm refusing to teach dzogchen is outdated information, as I have learnt that he has recently started teaching and has a small sangha now)

Also, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu writes in his book "Dzogchen Teachings"


It is through this Tsal Energy that our manifestation of pure and impure vision, and our particular karmic vision, arises. We are now human beings, and we have human vision. We perceive our environment dualistically,  splitting  it  into  an  apparent  reality  of  a  perceiving  subject separated from a world of external objects. But in fact everything we perceive is like the rainbow lights, which have their source in the rock crystal when it is struck by the sun’s rays. If we see a five-colored rainbow, this means that we perceive the pure dimension, pure vision. When the essence of the elements combines together with our karma,then  the  elements  manifest  on  the  material  level,  creating  impure  vision. Thus, the source of karmic vision is this aspect of Energy known as Tsal; but this same Tsal Energy, through certain practices particular to the Dzogchen teaching, such as Thödgal and Yangti, gives us the possibility of reintegrating our material existence, and of finally realizing the Rainbow Body.
 

Thusness said to me:

"As I suspected (thumbs up) I mean the rainbow body. That can only be done after realization of twofold emptiness and intensity of luminosity into the three states (waking, dreaming, deep sleep)... you are doing pretty well. The integration has been progressing well of the non-dual bliss into your deep sleep state, in view of the short period after your realization of anatta. The inner core must completely disappear and the intensity of luminosity must heighten... Sensations will become transparent and crystal sharp clear.

At present the core center is gone... You write too much and have too little rest. Your mind must have enough time to rest in non-conceptuality of the 6 entries and exits. Otherwise it will not be easy for you to penetrate further. After realizing the twofold emptying there is no more boundaries between mind, appearances and apparent objects and experience becomes seamless... All is mind or this integrated activity. Then we should actualize and integrate this realization.

In touching, both subject and object are both emptied and deconstructed into a single activity of touch and the intensity of luminous clarity must be strong... is it strong now? Or just like passing thoughts with no intensity.
Now penetration of the 3 states is only supported by the strength of your view and realization, not by the intensity of your non-conceptual experience.

"In essence rainbow body is a realization..." Maybe actualization of realization (would be better), in essence it is an actualized state."


my comment: Dzogchen practitioners use the term 'Realization' differently than I and Thusness, 'Realization' could mean something like full actualization or Buddhahood for them and not just an initial insight/recognition/experience.

Also what Thusness said here may be unrelated to Dzogchen rainbow body and is just a personal advise.
Update:

Someone wrote:

"I believe Malcolm Smith, Many texts state the "physical body reverts to the essence of the elements as rainbow light and disapears." Also there is a great deal of writing by many such as Longchenpa that describe the difference between the "vanishment of the physical body" between trekchod, rainbow body as "jalus" and "phowa chenpo" the Great Transfer. This is the goofiest of Malcolm's posts that I have ever read... Am I missing something?"

Malcolm replied:

"
Rainbow body where the body shrinks and disappears is a sign of incompletely finishing the fourth vision in this life."
 
 
.....
 
 
Kyle Dixon, 2022:


Bodies shrinking isn’t necessarily rainbow body. The actual rainbow body is something that is imperceptible to others. It means the practitioner has completely reverted their five elements into the five lights of jñāna. This cannot be seen by beings like us with afflicted karmic vision. The person who has attained rainbow body, will appear to us, as just a normal person with a normal body.

12


--------


Thrangu Rinpoche Attained Buddhahood / Rainbow Body

 Interesting that Thrangu Rinpoche attained rainbow body/Buddhahood. I enjoy reading his teachings very much.


From an email I received:


     

 

Thrangu Rinpoche's Passing

   

Namo Buddha Publications

The Miracle of Thrangu Rinpoche's Passing

Thrangu Rinpoche was in the hospital in June, 2023 and being quite ill, he asked to return to his Namo Buddha Monastery. There he went into meditation posture and passed away on June 4th doing the Rainbow Body (jalung) which is done only by advanced practitioners. His heart and breathing stopped and he remained in this position for four days. His skin was fresh and there were no signs of deterioration. There are two kinds of Rainbow Body: one in which the lama vanishes into thin air leaving behind only hair and fingernails, and the other is for the body to shrink. Thrangu Rinpoche's body began to shrink in perfect proportion, which included his bones, to less than his half size. These are pictures that I took at Thrangu Rinpoche's cremation on November 4, 2023.

1VRL  Entrance to Namo Buddha complex Photo 1&2. Namo Buddha is about 20 miles from Kathmandu, the capital of Nepal. Thrangu Rinpoche had his attendant, Lekshe buy the land from a Nepali farmer. Namo Buddha is the third most sacred Buddhist spot in all of Nepal where a previous Buddha gave his flesh to a starving tigress.

 

2VR. Namo Buddha  Thrangu Rinpoche's monastery is very large with a large shrine room quarters of over 100 monks. This dining hall is to the left. There were 2,000 persons from all over the world attending the cremation

3VR. Front of Shrine Room Photo 3: This is the large shrine room at Namo Buddha where practitioners went up and made offerings and bowed their head on the edge of the shrine. The kundun with yellow curtains is where Rinpoche’s body is the square box on the shrine which is about two feet square and three feet high.

4VR. Closeup of Kundun Photo 4: This is a close up of the kundun and the yellow brocade was lifted a little on the last day when I took this picture.

 

5VR. Cremation ground Outside Photo 5 This is the outside of the area where the cremation took place. The white coverings were to protect the audience and the four Rinpoche’s from the four lineages who sat in each of the four directions of the crematorium. This stadium had over a 1,000 chairs. This area specially prepared held 2,000 people and was just a short walk from the monastery. You can see trees covering the whole mountain that Vajra Vidya is on.

 

6VR.  Cremation Ground inside Photo 6 I did my knowledgeable estimation of the number who attended and came up with 2,000 people. A staff member who said that is what they also estimated.

 

7VR. Crematorum Photo 7and 8. This is the crematorium which had four opening in each direction. There was a procession of high lamas and monks carrying the kundun in and then placing Rinpoche’s body in the crematorium.

 

8VR. Placing Body in creamatorum Here we can see one of the lamas helping place the body in the crematorium.

9VR. Burning of body Photo 9. At 10:30 the fire was lit and sacred grass, oils, and precious substances were added to the burning body. It burned for about an hour. 3 days later the ashes will be recovered to see if there are any relics among them.

 

10. Body in Crematorium Photo 10: Through one of the four holes in the crematorium, you can see Thrangu Rinpoche’s body. My camera is not that good, but it looks to me like he is facing (north) toward us and has an elaborate headdress on.

 

11VR. Mahkala Rock decorated hoto 11: I almost forgot. There was a large black rock that Thrangu Rinpoche identified as being Mahakala or representing Mahakala (I am not sure) but they dug it up and turned it over and displayed it very prominently at the cremation.

 

It is important that we Buddhist share what we know. If you are really interested, you can email me and I will send you 43 pictures that are 20 inches long and 13 inches wide and of high quality for printing (300DPI) along with 4 short videos (total of 1.6 gigs).

 

Clark Johnson

[EMAIL REDACTED] 

Compose your email here.


Click to view this email in a browser


If you no longer wish to receive these emails, please reply to this message with "Unsubscribe" in the subject line or simply click on the following link: Unsubscribe

Namo Buddha Publications

1390 Kalmia Avenue

Boulder, Colorado 80304-1813

US

Read the VerticalResponse marketing policy.


 Try Email Marketing with VerticalResponse!



——-


John Tan/Thusness talked positively about Thrangu Rinpoche's teachings since the very first year I talked with him, back in 2004. He also recommended me to read his books.

2007:

(10:39 PM) Thusness: there are so many good articles and clarity in writings and explanations by some tibetan guru.

(10:39 PM) AEN: icic like who

(10:39 PM) Thusness: thrangu rinpoche

(10:40 PM) Thusness: there are quite a few but i forgotten who..

(10:40 PM) Thusness: read them b4 on the web.

    Soh Wei Yu
    Jan
    03
    All Thrangu Rinpoche 58 Books at $35 (only 60 cents per book!)
    Tan Jui Horng shared a link.
    Admin
    · tg6678a8063oshlu ·
    Can't remember if this deal was already around when the website was mentioned sometime back. But you can get all of Thrangu Rinpoche's books for $35 now in pdf. Incredible
    ALL 58 OF THRANGU RINPOCHE'S BOOKS (ON SPECIAL DOWNLOAD) [PDF02] - $35.00 : Namo Buddha Publications
    Namo Buddha Publications ALL 58 OF THRANGU RINPOCHE'S BOOKS (ON SPECIAL DOWNLOAD) [PDF02] - Thrangu Rinpoche is author of 60 books on Buddhism. You need only to peruse this book section to see all the different topics Thrangu Rinpoche has taught on. We have made PDFs of each of these books and made...
    2 Comments
    Soh Wei Yu
    Admin
    Thrangu Rinpoche materials are all highly recommended.
    See also Kyle Dixon’s recommendation: https://www.reddit.com/.../best_resources_for_vajrayana.../
    User avatar
    level 1
    krodha
    · 2 mo. ago
    Thrangu Rinpoche’s Pointing out the dharmakāya is good.
    Also Dakpo Tashi Namgyal’s Clarifying the natural state and the associated commentary Crystal clear.
    3
    (Soh's comments: I highly recommend reading the three books recommended by Krodha at least - "
    Thrangu Rinpoche’s Pointing out the dharmakāya is good.
    Also Dakpo Tashi Namgyal’s Clarifying the natural state and the associated commentary Crystal clear.")
    ·
    Reply
    · 7h
    Kyoshu Okan Özaydin
    Soh Wei Yu pointing out the Dharmakaya is really great.
    1
    ·
    Reply
    ·
    · 48m
    Labels: Books and Websites Recommendations, Mahamudra, Thrangu Rinpoche |
    Namo Buddha Publications , Namo Buddha Publications Source of Thrangu Rinpoche's teachings
    NAMOBUDDHAPUB.ORG
    Namo Buddha Publications , Namo Buddha Publications Source of Thrangu Rinpoche's teachings
    Namo Buddha Publications , Namo Buddha Publications Source of Thrangu Rinpoche's teachings

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview

    Love Koh
    Soh Wei Yu Hi Mr Soh 🙏 , Thankyou very much for sharing 👍💎👑✨💟🙏








  • Ugi Müller
    Wow, great to hear! Thanks for sharing. Just checked my mails and found it as well 🙂

    • Reply
    • Edited

  • Norge Leone
    Interesting that there was no real rainbow body witnessed in this century?


    Soh Wei Yu
    Norge Leone Thrangu Rinpoche attained real rainbow body, and several others this century and the last.


  • Love Koh
    Norge Leone There is , in the early 90's , during Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche's parinirvana , he manifested the sign of the rainbow body in which his body shrink in size , due to his Compassionate Bodhicitta to save & benefit sentient being , he has return to his world as the young Khyentse Yangsi Rinpoche 🙏

    • Reply
    • Edited

  • Norge Leone
    Soh Wei Yu no, you obviously don't know what is rainbow body, read the text again. This one is a 'small' rainbow body like all others in this century.


  • Soh Wei Yu
    Norge Leone Dzogchen teacher Acarya Malcolm Smith said before, "Rainbow body where the body shrinks and disappears is a sign of incompletely finishing the fourth vision in this life." " A body disappearing does not equal rainbow body. Often, when people realize rainbow body, their bodies just shrink."
    But as far as I know, all are still rainbow body, regardless of the type. They are all Buddhahood.


  • Soh Wei Yu
    Acarya Malcolm Smith:
    “ Most people who achieve realization from Dzogchen do so in the bardo of dharmatā. Only the best of best obtain rainbow body in this life or have small rainbow body.”
    “The body of light aka rainbow body is simply the body reverting back to the five lights of wisdom. The sign of this is that at death the body shrinks to a very small size."
    " Rainbow body is buddhahood. So any standard description of a Buddha's experience of the inexhaustible ornamental wheel of the body, speech, mind, qualities, and activities of the Buddha would apply. "
    " "Rainbow body" is a name for what happens when the elements of body reverts back to their original nature as pristine consciousness as a result of the process of Dzogchen practice or completion stage practice. A key point of Vajrayāna is that there is no buddhahood that is not grounded in the body. Hence, the attainment of rainbow body, or the body of light, is regarded as proof that a practitioner has attained buddhahood. This is never mentioned in sūtra because sūtra has no methods of practice that involve the body as a vehicle for awakening."
    As for the type of Buddhahood that is the rainbow body where body shrinks vs disappear entirely:
    Someone asked, "I have read of two kinds of rainbow bodies: the one where the body shrinks and the second where the body disappears entirely."
    Acarya Malcolm said, "The first is partial rainbow body."
    Tomamundsen: "Is partial rainbow body the 16th bhumi, buddhahood without remainder?"
    Acarya Malcolm said, "No. It is Buddhahood with signs."





  • William Lim
    Are there photos... as mentioned in the text?


    Soh Wei Yu
    William Lim pass me your email and i will forward you

Labels: , , , |
Thusness, 2005 "A “True experience” is better than a thousand words but it is also the very “true experience” of the Brilliance Bright that has blinded Mystics of all ages. The Brilliance Bright is more vivid then we can imagine. In All IT is seen and In All IT is experienced. Being vividly bright it also serves as the “condition” that obscures its very own Emptiness nature."


Below are excerpts from Thrangu Rinpoche's teaching.

http://www.rinpoche.com/q&a.htm


Q: If the nature of mind is this all-pervading, brilliant union of luminosity and emptiness, ungraspable, how is it that it could be obscured, even for a moment, let alone for lifetime after lifetime?

{Tibetan translation}

A: Because it's too brilliant, that's the short answer. {laughter} It's like this. Luminous, brilliant emptiness, is the nature of mind. And it's been there with us inseparably for beginningless time. But the brilliance is a bit too strong. If you take the two, the factor of luminosity and the factor of emptiness, the former one, the factor of luminosity is a bit strong. A bit stronger. And because it's so strong, we don't see the empty factor. We don't see the factor of emptiness. Because of the brilliance of the mind, all these things appear, and they look so real, and we get so fascinated with it. {laughter} We're really stuck. We're really stuck on them, and we're confused, and becoming bewildered and confused by them, then we don't realize the nature of our minds. We become completely intoxicated with the brilliance and the luminosity, and what all of what it displays to us, and we don't see the emptiness.

Now when Buddhists talk about ignorance, they don't mean some sort of black darkness, just shrouded... they actually mean it's so brilliant. It's so vivid, that we become confused by it. So we have to turn inwards and look, and see the emptiness that we've not been seeing, because we've been following after the luminosity for so long. Good example is a movie, movie comes on, we know it's just a movie, pretty soon {laughter}. We know it's somebody... picture, you know. There's human beings, and there's mountains, and there's rivers, and these wild life and plains, and we're completely drawn to it. And it's just because its brilliance is too strong, that's why we have to turn and look at the emptiness.

{Questioner: Wow. Laugher}



p.s. For those wondering what 'Luminosity' mean, here's a glossary definition by Lama Tony Duff:


Luminosity or illumination, Skt. prabhåsvara, Tib. ’od gsal ba: The core of mind has two aspects: an emptiness factor and a knowing factor. The Buddha and many Indian religious teachers used “luminosity” as a metaphor for the knowing quality of the core of mind. If in English we would say “Mind has a knowing quality”, the teachers of ancient India would say, “Mind has an illuminative quality; it is like a source of light which illuminates what it knows”.

This term been translated as “clear light” but that is a mistake that comes from not understanding the etymology of the word. It does not refer to a light that has the quality of clearness (something that makes no sense, actually!) but to the illuminative property which is the nature of the empty mind.

Note also that in both Sanskrit and Tibetan Buddhist litera- ture, this term is frequently abbreviated just to Skt. “vara” and Tib. “gsal ba” with no change of meaning. Unfortu- nately, this has been thought to be another word and it has then been translated with “clarity”, when in fact it is just this term in abbreviation.

On facebook? You're welcome to join a group I started, Dharma Connection. It's a closed group but if you request to join I can add you.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/dharmaconnection/

"This is a place where the Buddha Dharma (teachings of the Buddha) is discussed. This is a non-sectarian group. Teachings of various Buddhist traditions are welcome as long as they relate to the fundamental core teachings of Buddha. Please keep discussions constructive. Admins reserve rights to delete posts as they see fit."


Here's another passage that Thusness told me to post - this is by Yuan Yin Lao Ren (元音老人). A well known teacher in China with tens of thousands of students who received his teachings, he belongs to a Vajrayana lineage but teaches Mahamudra, Dzogchen, Zen, and Pure Land alike. He transmits the "Heart of Mind's Centre" (心中心) Dharma, and tantric practices involving mudras and mantras. He passed away peacefully into Nirvana in 2000 at the age of 96 in a sitting posture, as predicted by himself five years earlier.

A few excerpts with my translation based on http://club.fjdh.com/html/49/22649-191220.html

16问:什么是心中心法?

16th Question: What is the dharma of the "Heart of Mind's Centre"?



答:全名是“心中心又心”,即假心,真心,真假心都不可得的心,即证悟妙心。心中心法是大圆满法中的精髓,是中心的中心,是借假心打开真心,彻显妙心的无上大法。

Answer: The full name is "心中心又心" (not sure how to translate this), it is the mind whereby false and true minds are not obtainable, it is to attain realization of the marvellous mind. The dharma of the Heart of Mind's Centre is the quintessence of the Great Perfection (Dzogchen). It is the Core of the Core, it borrows the false mind to open/reveal the true mind, revealing the supreme great dharma of marvellous mind.
 

75问:万法皆空,唯有佛性不空。这样的话,佛性与万物岂不看作二物了?

75th Question: The ten thousand dharmas are empty, only the Buddha-nature is not empty. With regards to such a saying, isn't that conceiving Buddha-nature and the ten thousand dharmas to be two things?



答:万物皆空,佛性不空是对初学佛人讲的;万法即佛性是对悟后人说的。二者不可混为一谈。 


Answer: Ten thousand dharmas are empty, Buddha-nature is not empty, such a saying is spoken to beginner Buddhists. That the ten thousand dharmas are Buddha-nature is spoken to realized beings. These two [sayings] should not be muddled up as one.



85问:不忘失本来,就是要在觉知上用功。做事时知是本性的妙用,无事时灵知觉性并不曾减少,自然就随时间因缘而成大道吗?

85th Question: Not forgetting the Original [nature], that is to be diligent/put in effort in the Knowing Awareness. When doing work, Knowing is original nature's marvellous activities, when there is no work, the essence of spirit/intelligent awareness has never decreased, does it naturally accomplish the Great Way in accordance with time and conditions?



答:不对!古人云:“但尽凡情,别无圣解”,你时时执在灵知性上,就是有所住着。须不着一切相,随缘起用才是。灵知觉性亦不可着。在觉知上用功更是大错。


Answer: Wrong! As the ancients say, "only exhausting mundane passion, there is no other sacred understanding". If you always attach onto the essence of spirit/intelligent knowingness, that is to have an attachment. One should be devoid of any attachments to images, and manifest activities according to conditions. Spirit/intelligent awareness cannot be attached to. To put in effort on that aware knowingness is an even greater error.


87问:要归无所得,一切皆了不可得。但是,空空然而有觉知的光景不是还在吗?若将此扫光,岂不断灭了?

87th Question: We should return to non-obtainability, everything is not obtainable. However, even in this state of vacuity, isn't there still a scene of Knowing Awareness? If we sweep away this Knowing Awareness, isn't that the same as annihilation?


答:不是将此灵觉扫光,而是不住此灵觉。以不住故,即无能觉与所觉,故归无所得也。有个觉知的光景,早不是了,还说什么空空然?


Answer: It's not about sweeping away spirit/intelligent awareness, it is about not being attached to this spirit/intelligent awareness. And on the basis of non-abiding, there is neither a subject that is being aware/a knower, nor an object of awareness, that is returning to non-obtainability. If there is still a "scene of awareness", that is already not it, what more about "vacuity"?
 
88问:这个无相的性体,尽管无相,但可以于无念时体会到它。是吗?

88th Question: With regards to this formless nature-substance, despite being formless as it is, nevertheless we can experience it in a state of thoughtlessness. Is that so?



答:不对!不仅于无念时体会,更须于作用事相上体会。因作用与事相皆是自性的显现,相即性,性即相,不可分离。若仅于无念时体会,岂不落死水一潭么?


Answer: Wrong! It is not just about experiencing it in a state of thoughtlessness, it is even more important to experience it in functions and events. This is because functions and events are the display of one's nature, appearance is nature, nature is appearance, it is inseparable. If it is only experienced in a state of thoughtlessness, isn't that to fall into a pool of dead water?


89问:古代禅师开悟偈中曾写到:“渠今正是我,我今不是渠。”又:“春到花香处处秀,山河大地是如来。”这不是空有不二的注脚吗?


89th Question: The ancient Ch'an masters wrote a poem of enlightenment that says, "It is now me, yet I am now not it", and furthermore: "When spring comes the scent of flowers permeates everywhere, mountains and rivers and the great earth are Buddha [the thus come one]". Isn't this a footnote on the non-duality of emptiness and form?

答:不可一概而论。上偈的“我今不是渠”,须认清宾主,不可儱侗颟顸认为是不二。当证体时,一物不立;但启用时,物物显现而不住。证体启用合起来即是“山河大地是如来”了。证体不是住在真如位上不动,死在那里,而是活泼妙用,应物随缘而无所住的。


Answer: We cannot lump different things together. In the poem above, "I am now not it", one should recognise clearly the host and guest, we cannot ignorantly and carelessly treat them as not two. When we have realized the essence, not one thing is established; when giving rise to functions, every phenomena manifest without abiding. Realizing the essence and giving rise to function combined together is "mountains, rivers and the great earth are the Thus Come One". Attaining the essence is not about abiding in the seat of True Suchness without movement, or to die/become rigid/inflexible at that place, instead it is lively, giving rise to marvellous activities, responding with phenomena according to conditions without a place of abidance.

Update 2023:

Thank you “Anonymous” for sending me Marshland Flowers compiled into a PDF file



-----

A student of Archaya Mahayogi Shridhar Rinpoche informed me that Rinpoche has recently revised his article Madhyamika Buddhism Vis-a-vis Hindu Vedanta and uploaded one new article on Nyingma (a school of Tibetan Buddhism)'s view. Rinpoche also personally asked his student to inform me about their free online magazine, I thanked the guru and signed up. I also mentioned that I have dreamt of receiving teachings from him before, perhaps some karmic connection...

After the e-mail I did a little research and found a biography (
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-oveGtYYgU, Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V_MV5aAyZg, http://www.byomakusuma.org/TheVidyadhara.html) of this great teacher Archaya Mahayogi Shridhar Rinpoche. He used to practice the Hindu tantras and Vedanta under a qualified Vedanta teacher for nine years intensely in the cemetaries, etc. Eventually he realized the Atman-Brahman, the ultimate goal of Hinduism, and his realization was confirmed by his Vedantic masters to be correct and profound.

However, still unsatisfied with his realization, he continued searching, first into Zen Buddhism, then later into the teachings of Vajrayana Buddhism, including the Vajrayana Tantras, Mahamudra and Dzogchen teachings, and practiced them thoroughly until he attained realization and was asked to start teaching by his teachers. His main practise is of the Lamdre system of teachings in the Sakya school. Despite having practised the teachings thoroughly and attained realization, he continues to go into deep meditation retreats for over a decade to deepen his enlightenment/experience and was given the title 'Mahayogi' and 'Rinpoche' by
H.E. Chobgay Trichen Rinpoche. He continues to be in practice retreats and share his knowledge with others at the same time.

As one of the few great Buddhist teachers in Nepal where the majority of the population belong to the Hindu faith, a place where myths and misconceptions of Buddhism are abound, he is in a great position to correct all of these misconceptions and do an accurate and unbiased comparison between the teachings of Buddhism vis-a-vis Hinduism due to his deep knowledge and experience of the Buddhist teachings as well as his previous experience with the Hindu tradition. He emphasizes that the comparison was done not in order to demean one system of teaching over another but to provide greater clarity on the essential doctrines of each system so that they could each be understood correctly, as he says, "I must reiterate that this difference in both the system is very important to fully understand both the systems properly and is not meant to demean either system."


Anyway, I looked further into their website and over the past few days I've read through all the articles of Marshland Flowers (from series 1 to 7) and highly recommend them - they deal with several subjects of dharma including anatman (non-self), emptiness, dependent origination, the four noble truths, Buddhism vis-a-vis Hinduism, rebirth, karmic propensities (samskaras), meditation, vipassana (insight meditation), shamatha (calm abiding meditation), siddhis/powers, the tenets of Sravakayana and Mahayana Buddhism, as well as Tantras, Buddhism and science, etc etc. All these articles are of great quality, well written and highly recommended. All in all, it provides a pretty complete overall understanding of the core/fundamental Buddhist teachings. I've added this blog entry to the 'Stickied Posts' section of this blog (see right hand corner).

p.s. I find using Windows Narrator to read aloud long texts online easier for me: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-SG/windows7/Hear-text-read-aloud-with-Narrator


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

http://www.byomakusuma.org/MarshlandFlowers.html

Marshland Flowers


Ratnashree's series articles published weekly in News Front. The articles clarify prevailing misconceptions on Buddhism and help general readers understand authentic Buddhism. The articles first appeared on 16-22 April 2007 issue. News Front is a weekly newspaper that is published every Monday. Read the articles published to date in full.

 https://www.byomakusuma.org/MarshlandFlowers.html

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


Anyway, here's an excerpt from Marshland Flowers Part 5, it is about the subject of Anatman.

136. More on Fallacy of Language and Modern Thinking

Acharya Mahayogi Sridhar Rana Rinpoche

<< Previous Next >> Table of Contents
Continuing with the discussion on the limitedness of language - the very sentence 'I see the table' assumes that the table 'I' see is out there somewhere separate from me. And as a corollary which we will deal with later on, this 'I' which sees really existing is in fact the center of the seeing and the table out there, which 'I' see also really exist.

Let us take another example. We say the lighting flashed, this is similar in structure to I see. This grammatical structure implies that there is a lighting that flashed. The lighting is the subject (like the 'I which sees), which does the action of flashing (verb). This act is different from the lighting. But, and a big but is that is there really a lighting separate from flashing, or is flashing itself lighting? Can we really separate flashing or take away flashing and say - here is lighting that had flashed, which is separate thing from flashing? Can we really do that? If we removed flashing, would lightening really remain per se? But just a few minute ago we thought and felt and experience (or seem to experience) that there is a lighting that had done the action of flashing, didn't we?

Now, let us take this analysis back to 'I see the table'. Some people may say the mind sees the table just to be clever, but really we aren't changing the structure of the language and thus the structure of the experience. We have just substituted the word 'mind' for 'I' and the rest of the implications are still the same. There is a mind which is the subject, which exists independently and it is thus independent and separate mind which does that action of seeing the table, which is the object and which too is independent out there (like the lighting that flashes, the mind or I see). If we look at the seeing out, would there still remain a mind which sees or is the act of seeing itself the .........

Thus, language structure is so much a part of our programming samskara that we do not question the situation out there or the real experience or reality/actuality or fact. It has become so much a part of the way we experience things, a program that was downloaded from the time prenatal/pre-conceptual moment onward or even earlier downloaded in the mother's cellular memory itself. Perhaps that it does not occur to us easily that our experience is molded by this grammatical structure itself.

What we tend to forget is that there is a certain experience going on which the sentence 'I see the table' or 'I see the sound' etc, is trying to point at. It is however never questioned whether the implications evoked from the structure of the sentences is really out there or not, or whether this grammatical structure is coloring and distorting the experience, changing the 'pure experience' into a shape that this grammatical structure demands. Even to question this seems so odd that most people would never even think of it and if somebody raises such a question he/she would be ridiculed by saying 'Are you crazy?' Have you gone off the rocks? But didn't Galileo face the same taunts when he questioned whether the sun really went around earth?

Let us go on a little journey for a short while into the world of Alice in Wonderland, for that is now it would look like to the programmed thinking of most people.

Suppose you have a grown up with a different grammatical structure. We have already said that the sentence 'I see the table' is pointing at a certain experiential act. But the grammatical structure here demands thing are there in the experience. We'll continue with this in the next article.


137. Unchanging 'I' or is it

Acharya Mahayogi Sridhar Rana Rinpoche

<< Previous Next >> Table of Contents
The grammatical structure demands that there is an 'I' or mind that is the subject or the seer, watcher, knower, that this 'I' sees or goes through the action of seeing, which is an action verb, which is different from the 'I' which is a pronoun and there is a different noun, separate from both the verb (seeing) and the pronoun 'I' which is the table. The 'table' is the object, a noun and distinctly separate and independent from the subject and the verb. And this unquestioned programming is so deeply ingrained into our subconscious mind that we can safely say that, that is how everybody experiences the experience of what the sentence 'I see the table' is trying to point at.

Now suppose you had grown up in another grammatical structure. Remember that language is meant to point at an experience. So if an Alice in Wonderland language also pointed equally well at that experience it would fulfill the purpose of language. So we all know that an experience is a process and not really a thing - entity per se. So seeing a table is a process, a verb, and not an entity, a noun. So suppose you had grown up with a grammatical structure which says 'tabling is going on' to point at the same experience which the sentence 'I see the table' is also trying to point at. We can certainly say that the sentence 'tabling is going on' can equally well point at the same experience which the sentence 'I am seeing the table' points at.

Infact, since it is actually a process (this experience), tabling is going on is a more accurate finger to point at it. Now, if you had grown up with this grammtical sturcture, would the experience (and the grammatical structure) imply that there is a separate table (noun-object) from the act of seeing the table (verb)? And would the structure impose an 'I' upon the experience like imposing a separate lightning different from the flashing of the light? Is there a lightning separate from the flashing which does the flasing or is the flashing itself the lightning? But flashing is an action a verb, the lightning is a noun, an object. Or is the 'Light' distinct from the flasing created merely by the langauge? Likewise, is there an 'I' that sees or is the act of seeing specified by the Alice in Wonderland language 'Tabling' itself the 'I' the seer? But I is a pronoun, seer a noun and seeing/tabling are verbs. When I say 'I see', this is a seeing I. This 'I' is defined by the 'seeing'. Now there are two questions here.

The first questions is: Is not this 'I' that sees dependent upon the seeing of the table? Can we really say that the I/seer/watcher/knower that sees will continue to exist even when the seeing stops? If so, we will have a so-called seer who does not see? Can there be a seer that does not see? Is not the seer-I defined by seeing process. Can we really speak of a seer when it is not seeing/tabling? The word Seer would be meaningless without the seeing, wouldn't it? We cannot call the seer a seer if there is no seeing going. If that is true than when seeing stops the seer also stops or ceases to exist.

The second question is that is there is a seer separate from the act of seeing or is it only an illusion created by the language structure, like the lightning and its flashes? Can there be a seer remaining [a noun] which does not see but was the one that did the seeing? Can we really separate the verb of seeing from the seer the noun or is the seer (and therefore the 'I') merely an illusion imposed up the experience?

138. I as 'Seer', 'Watcher,' 'Knower'

Acharya Mahayogi Sridhar Rana Rinpoche

<< Previous Next >> Table of Contents
If you had grown up with the sentence structure 'Table is going on' to point at the same experience, would you be straddled with an 'I-seer' that sees and a table that is seen? Tabling is a process, and actually there is process going on which the sentence 'I see the table' is trying to point at; however like a pair of coloured glasses it imposes a lot of things on the experience which is not really out there even according to quantum physics.

Now we can see that the 'I' is not really such a central figure in our experience, nor is it so stable or permanently unchanging as it seems to be, and secondly, it is more a process, a verb, which is continuously changing than an unchanging noun, which is supposedly the central guy or doll in the experience.

Now let us look at the unchanging 'I' from another angle. When we say this 'I' is unchanging, it also implies that it is the same 'I' always. Unchanging as defined in the Hindu-Buddhist systems of the Indian Subcontinent meant 'remaining the same in all the three times'. As Sankaracharya has defined it 'Kala traya tisthatiti', which means that which remains unchanged in the three times - in all the three times - viz - past, present and future.

Now with this in the background, let us try to see if this 'I', watcher, seer or knower really remains unchanged in the three times. First of all, if we look at the 'I', 'I' continually changes its identity. When I'm in the office I am a manager or an executive at home, I'm a son in front of my father or mother, even if I may be sixty years old. I'm also a brother to my brothers and sisters. Now a wife is not the same as the executive in the office, nor is a son the same as a husband. As we can see this, 'I' is continuously changing and becoming something else according to the situation - or more technically according to the causes or conditions.

Now the question arises which one of them is the real 'I'? We normally have hundreds of 'I' which are normally changing frequently as per the situations, and none of them is the real 'I' in the sense of being the unchanging, permanent 'I'. If this husband 'I' did not change and become a father 'I' in front of his daughter or an executive 'I' in the office, not only would there be trouble (big time trouble to say the least) but we would have to call that person neurotically unbalanced, and normal social or human functions would become tipsy turvy. Yet our experience seems to point at an 'I' that is the same in all three times and therefore real and unchanging. So which of this 'I' is the real one?

Now, let us take this 'I' as the seer, watcher, knower as posited in the Vendantic system and therefore virtually all non-dualist system within Hinduism. They are called watcher (drasta), witness (sakchi), knower (gyata) because this 'I' watches or sees, knows and witnesses. So let us analyze this watcher, seer. It is called a watcher or seer because it sees. If it didn't see or watch something it would not be called a watcher, seer. We cannot have a seer which does not see. If it does not or cannot see anything, it cannot possible be called seer or watcher can we really? We need to distinguish five points we have before we get confused. A seer can see nothing - ie - the absence of things. It still sees the absence (alohara) and that is really not seeing per se. We'll continue this discussion in the next article.



139. Changing or Unchanging 'I'

Acharya Mahayogi Sridhar Rana Rinpoche

<< Previous Next >> Table of Contents
Continuing with the discussion of absence of seeing - for example, if you are in a pitch dark room and I asked you - do you see anything? You would normally say 'I do not see anything'. But this expression is the result of the limitation of language itself, rather than the fact that you do not see. You do continue to see the pitch darkness or the absence of all things or objects. The absence or pitch darkness is also a 'thing' to see, so to say.

Once we have understood this, let us go another step further. We have already said that a seer is defined by its seeing something, even if it is an absence. There is still an absence to see and it is the seer of that absence of the pitch darkness, as the case maybe. So let us take this up. When I say 'I see the table' I am the seer of the table. At that moment, this 'I-seer' is the seer of the table and is defined by the 'table'. If there were no table to see I would not be the seer of the table, that is, I would not see the table and in effect I would not and could not say 'I see the table'. And if I did not see the table I would not be the seer of the table. Now, if this seer of the table or the 'I' was really existing (sat in Sanskrit) and therefore the same and unchanging in all three time, I would in effect be eternally be seeing the table as I or the seer would not change. But no one experiences that. We do not eternally continue to see the table unchangingly and in actuality we as the seer see something else immediately, for instance, the blue sky or the green mountain.

Again, if the seer of the table was unchanging and permanent, it could not stop seeing the table and seeing the blue sky would be a change. But in real life the objects seen by the seer is continually changing and thus also the seer of those objects. However, in the language we continuously use the same word 'I' or the same word seer-watcher-knower for the seer of all those various objects. And that gives us the feeling of the same 'I-seer-watch-knower' being there while the so called seen objects are changing like a table now, a blue sky after that, a home now, etc. etc. As before, the language structure creates an illusion of something which does not really exist out there.

Here again, our memory of I seeing the table etc. also furthers the illusion with 'I' which is based on the memory of the 'I' which had seen the table. Because of this memory, it looks like the same 'I' is seeing the blue sky which had seen the table a while ago. But actually, it is an illusion created by our memory supported by our language structure, thus creating an experience that is not out there as it appears to be. So in effect there seems to be no seer/knower/watcher which remains unchanging as the Vedanta or for that matter what Sankaracharya says in his texts like Discriminating the Watcher And the Watched (Drig Driksya Viveka). Understanding this is the key point in knowing the difference between Hinduism and Buddhism.

It is not a matter of just a difference in words but a matter of seeing two diametrically opposed experiences. One is an experience of validating that this 'I' is not related to this ephemeral world but is an unchanging permanent really existing Self called an Atman in all forms of Hinduism. However, it must be said that only the Atman of Vedantic Hinduism and all those related to the non-dual system of Vedanta (directly or indirectly) is a coherent Atman.

Recently I've been watching snippets of dharma talks by one of the most famous Chinese Mahayana master around today (though probably not popularly known in the west due to the absence of English translations) who lives in Taiwan, Ven. Hui Lü (慧律法師; pronounced as Hui Lyu). He is so popular among the Chinese (especially in Taiwan, China, as well as South East Asia) that sometimes up to 200,000 people would fill the stadium to attend his lectures. Thusness and I thinks his speeches are very good. He is a lineaged Ch'an/Zen master (48th generation lineage holder of the Caodong/Soto school and the 42th generation lineage holder of the Linji/Rinzai school) and his wisdom is exceptional. Not only is he deeply enlightened, he is also very knowledgeable (he read through the whole of Tripitaka at least thrice over a period of 15 years, sleeping only one or two hours at night).

Decided to do some English translations.

p.s. to our Chinese readers, this video is also great but I did not transcribe it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_1TeV5y8eE

---------------------------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4O-gAYr5k0

大 悟之人不见法。他没有任何东西,因为法法本空,法法不相到。也不见身。为什么?四大本空,五阴本来就没有“我”。所以,什么叫做照见五蕴皆空?色即是空, 受想行识即是空。为什么讲色即是空?色即是空,空就是佛性,色就是佛性的展现。所以,真正的悟道的人,他的心性流露在一切缘起法里面,即于生灭,即得不生 不灭的无为法,也没有所谓有为跟无为,刹那即见永恒,永恒就是刹那,平等不二。 因此我们要了解:不见法,也不见身。身,地水火风所构成的,四大本来就空,五蕴——色受想行识,本来就是不可得。一切法,智者了知一切法,本来就无我。这无我里面,当下就是佛性。所以,佛法讲否定的时候,凡所有相,皆是假相。讲肯定的时候,尘尘都是真心,每一个颗粒微尘都是真心的影现,一切法全部都是真。 当他破除无明烦恼、破除执着、破除分别的时候,完全都是真心展现的,尘尘尽是真,没有一法不是真心,这个是站在肯定的角度。站在否定的角度,是凡所有相不 可得。站在本体界的角度,凡所有相,都是本体界的展现,都是清净心的影现,没有一法不是真实。

Those who are greatly realized do not view/conceive of dharmas. They do not have anything at all, because every dharma is fundamentally empty, every dharma is disjointed. They also do not conceive of a body. Why is this so? The four great elements are also fundamentally empty, the five aggregates have always been without a 'self'. Therefore, what does it mean to illuminate/see that the five aggregates are empty? Form is emptiness, feelings, perception, volition and consciousness are also empty. Why do we say that form is emptiness? Form is emptiness, emptiness is buddha-nature, form is the display of buddha-nature. Therefore, for those who are truly realized, [it is seen that] his nature of mind is outpouring within all dependently arisen dharmas, and within the arising and ceasing [dharmas], one attains that not-born and not-ceasing unconditioned dharma, and there is no such thing as [a dichotomy of] 'conditioned' or 'unconditioned'. One sees within a split instant, eternity, and eternity IS this split instant, they are equal without duality.

Therefore we should understand: not conceiving of dharmas, not conceiving of body. Body is composed of [the four great elements of] cohesion (water), solidity or inertia (earth), expansion or vibration (air) and heat or energy content (fire). These four great elements are fundamentally empty, the five aggregates - form/matter, feelings, perception, volition and consciousness, are originally ungraspable/unobtainable. Every single dharma, the wise knows that every single dharma, has originally been without a self. And in this very instant moment of no-self, that itself is Buddha-nature. Therefore, when the Buddhadharma talks about negation/deconstruction, all appearances are illusory false appearances. When talking from the standpoint of affirmation, dust after dust [phenomena] is the True Mind, every single bit of micro-dust is the shadows [appearance/display] of True Mind, every single dharma is entirely True. When it has removed all our ignorance and suffering, broken apart our attachments, removed our discriminations, everything in its completeness is the display of True Mind, every dust turns out to be True, there is not a single dharma that is not True Mind, this is speaking from the standpoint of affirmation. Standing from the perspective of negation/deconstruction, all appearances are ungraspable/unobtainable. Standing from the perspective of the world of fundamental body, every appearance is the display of the world of fundamental body [i.e. dharmadhatu], it is the pure mind's appearance/manifestation, there is not a single dharma that is not true.


---------------------------------

大悟之人,真妄无别,生佛不二,能所皆泯,心境双忘。

Those who are greatly realized [understands] that Reality and Falsity/Illusion are without difference, life and Buddha are not two, subject and object vanishes, mind and state/situation are both forgotten.

真,也不立一个真,妄心本空,真心也不立,这个叫做真正地进入绝对的如来‘常乐我净’的境界。

[With regards to the] Real, there is also no establishment of something Real, false mind is fundamentally empty, true mind is also not established, this is called truly entering into Tathagata's absolute state of "Eternal, Bliss, Self and Pure".

什么是如来的境界?妄,体会妄心本空,绝对不可以 立一个真心,立一个真心就是知见立知。

What is the state of the tathagata? [With regards to] False, [one] experiences that the false mind is fundamentally empty, [but] we absolutely cannot establish a real mind, to establish a real mind is to establish a concept/notion on top of [pure] knowing.

妄心本空,如是体会!法受益就好,仅止于此,进入绝对的智慧,绝对的平等,绝对的自在,这个时候不可以立一个真。若 立一个真,这个真就是妄。所以,不可以头上安头。法受益,仅止于此,内心相应就好,不可以再动一个念头,对法上的执着。所以,真妄无别,生佛不二。我们色身,这个就是佛!为什么?即于五蕴身,就是佛身。诸位!五蕴当体即空,就是如来藏性,就是佛,因此佛也不可以离开当下。

False mind is fundamentally empty, we should come to understand it as such! It is enough to benefit from this dharma, it [should] ends here, entering into absolute wisdom, absolute equality, absolute freedom. At this point in time we must never establish something Real. If we establish something to be Real, this Real will turn out to be [another] illusion. Therefore, we should never "put another head on top of a head", we cannot move another thought or have attachment towards dharma. Gentlemen! Five aggregates in its immediate essence is empty, just that is the nature of the Treasury of Thus Come One, just that is Buddha, therefore Buddha cannot be separated from this instant moment.

---------------------------------

所 以我们修行就是要开悟,证悟到一切法本空,归无所得,当下销归自性,了无所得。本来无生,何其有灭?生灭是对世间讲的,当下就是不生不灭。而不是生灭里面 有一个不生不灭。我们修行人看经典经常误会,以为生灭法里面有一个不生不灭的本性,错啦!而是生灭法当下就是无自性,是这样在体悟本性无生的。要讲生灭当 下缘起、性空、无自性,所以说它是不生、是不灭。要好好地去参悟。

Therefore the purpose of cultivation is to attain enlightenment, to realize that every dharma is fundamentally empty, returning to no-attainment/ungraspability, returning to the nature of self in its immediacy, realizing that there is nothing to attain/grasp. Originally there is no birth, how could there be a cessation? Birth and cessation are spoken to worldly beings, [in actuality] in this instant moment there is already no birth and no cessation. It is not the case that within birth and death, there is something that is unborn and undying. We practitioners that read the sutras are often mistaken about this, thinking that inside the birth and cessation of dharmas there is an unborn and undying basic nature, that is wrong! Actually it is the case that with regards to arising and ceasing dharmas, in that instant moment, there has never been a self-nature, and through this one realizes the basic nature that is not-born. We are saying that the birth and ceasing's very instant is dependently originated, empty in nature, without self-nature, therefore they are without birth, without cessation. We should very well go and ponder and realize this.


---------------------------------

From (for those that can watch Chinese): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDVQVq0UM6U&feature=related

Commentary on the Shurangama Sutra by Ven Hui Lu, on the chapter that discusses "All dharmas are Buddha-nature"

第二章,一切法本如来藏,哪一切法呢?五阴、六入、十二处、十八界,本如来藏,这个作如何解释呢?

Second chapter: Every single dharma is fundamentally the Treasury of the Thus Come One [tathagatagarbha/Buddha-nature], what are the dharmas? Five aggregates, six entries, twelve sense bases, eighteen elements, are all fundamentally the Treasury of the Thus Come One. How do we explain this?

众生位叫做色、受、想、行、识;当第八意识转成大圆镜智的时候,这五阴的名相统统消失,但转其名,不转其体,这个假名转掉了,叫做大圆镜智,色就是佛性;受就是佛性;想就是佛性;行就是佛性;识就是佛性。

What sentient beings call Form/Matter, Feelings, Perceptions, Volition, and Consciousness; when the eighth consciousness transforms into the Great Perfect Mirror Wisdom, the labels/conventional images of these five aggregates completely disappears. Although the names are transformed, its body is not transformed. This false name is being transformed into what is being called the Great Perfect Mirror Wisdom, [hence] Form IS Buddha-nature, feeling IS buddha-nature, perception IS buddha-nature, volition IS buddha-nature, consciousness IS buddha-nature.

换句话说:照见五蕴皆空,当体即空,佛性就显现。也就是说,色就是身,受想行识就是心,身心看得破、放得下的人,而且要完全彻底,那么就是佛,照见五蕴皆空,度一切苦厄。

To put it in another way: by illuminating/seeing that the five aggregates are empty, that its essence is empty, Buddha-nature reveals itself. Therefore it is saying, form/matter is body/matter, feelings, perceptions, volitions, and consciousness is mind. Those who are able to see through/be disillusioned with Body and Mind, are able to let them go, and furthermore are able to be complete [in disillusionment/letting go], precisely that is Buddha, being able to illuminate that the five aggregates are empty, and thus liberate all sufferings.

所以,佛转这个五阴身为金刚不坏身,是指涅磐妙性,而不是指相,释迦世尊在这个相上示现,也有生、有老、有病、有死,那是从相上里面来讲。

Therefore, the Buddha transforms this body of five aggregates into the Indestructible Diamond Body, that is refering to the Marvellous Nirvanic Nature, it is not refering to appearance. Shakyamuni Buddha manifests in appearance birth, ageing, sickness and death, that is speaking from the perspective of appearance.

所谓佛,是离一切相,即名诸佛;如来者,即诸法如义。换句话说:色受想行识无论怎么变化,他的心都是如如不动,起心动念,没有我执,也没有法执,所以叫做五阴本如来藏,妙真如性。

What is termed Buddha, is to leave [all conceivings with regards to] all appearances, that is named as all Buddhas; the Thus Come One means being 'such' with regards to all dharmas. In other words: no matter how form, feelings, perceptions, volition and consciousness changes, his mind is always unmoving in suchness, whenever his mind arises and thought moves, there is no attachment to self, nor attachment to dharmas, therefore it is said that the aggregates are fundamentally the Treasury of the Thus Come One, the marvellous nature of True Suchness.

这个六入:眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意,对这个色、声、香、味、触、法,意思是说:这六入,其实也是如来藏性所在缘起上里面建立的,如来藏性,它看不到、摸不到、嗅不到;但是,它可以起作用。

These are the six entries: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind, being correlated with form, sound, smell, taste, touch, thought, which means: with regards to these six entries, actually they are also manifested through the dependent arising of the Treasury of the Thus Come One. It cannot be seen, cannot be touched, cannot be smelled; however, it can give rise to functions.

凡夫是眼耳鼻舌身意在造业,所以,从这六个地方,来染污我们的清净心;而佛陀这六个地方刚好放光动地,妙用无穷。

Ordinary beings' eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind are creating karma, therefore, from these six entries, it (deluded karmic tendencies) pollutes our pure mind; on the other hand these six entries are for the Buddha exactly the place that illuminates light and moves the earth, its marvellous activities are inexhaustible.

所以,在圣人的角度来讲,叫做六尘不恶,还同正觉,「恶」就是善恶的恶。

Henceforth, from the viewpoint of saints, it is known that "when you are not prejudiced with regards to the six sense-objects, you in turn are in union with true enlightenment."

六尘没有所谓的好和不好,但看你的起心动念,叫做六尘不恶,还同正觉,眼入,就如来讲,入无所入,何以故?

The six sense-objects are absent of what is known as good or bad, however it depends [or is conceived based] on your arising mind and moving thoughts, therefore it is known that the six sense-objects that are not prejudiced is to be in harmony with true enlightenment. As for the entry of eyes, it is as said by the Buddha, what is known as entry has in reality no entry, why is it so?

清净自性没有出和入,没有出和入。

Pure self-nature does not have an exit or an entry, [repeat:] it does not have exit or entry.

我们在中国的大乘佛教,很多,多少,后来的人的注解,因为没有大悟,所以,扭曲了佛陀的意思。

Within our China's Mahayana Buddhism, there are many, in fact the majority of those latter-day commentators, due to not having attained Great Realization, have distorted the Buddha's meaning.

譬如说:释迦牟尼佛从来没有讲过随缘不变,不变随缘,而我们大乘佛法的法师,一直引用这一句话,这一句话是无始无明,是错误的,佛陀从来没有讲过这一句话;佛陀也没有讲过说:真空出妙有,妙有真空,释迦世尊,找遍三藏十二部,佛从来没有讲过这一句话。

For example: Shakyamuni Buddha has never said anything like "while following conditions one is unchanged, one is unchanged while following conditions". That [saying] actually came from our Mahayana venerables, they keep on spouting such saying, such a saying is actually [based on] beginningless ignorance, it is a false understanding, the Buddha has never said such a saying; the Buddha has never said: from true emptiness comes marvellous existence, marvellous existence true emptiness, [I have] searched throughout the entire Tripitaka [the three textual collections of sutras, vinaya and abhidharma] and Shakyamuni Buddha has never ever said such a thing.

佛陀也从来没有讲过说:从假入空,从空出假;不著两边,谓之中道。

The Buddha has also never said: from the illusory one enters into emptiness, from emptiness the illusory is produced; not attaching to either side is known as the middle way.

释迦世尊从来就没有讲过这种话,没有的!

Shakyamuni Buddha has never said such a saying, never!

翻遍三藏十二部经典,没有讲过不变随缘,随缘不变;也从来没有讲过:真空出妙有,妙有出真空;也从来没有讲过说:从假入空,从空出假,不著两边,谓之中道,有出有入,哪里是佛性呢?

I have flipped through the Tripitaka's twelve sections of sutras, it has never ever said anything with regards to "being unchanged while following conditions, following conditions while being unchanged"; it has never said: "true emptiness produces miraculous existence, from miraculous existence comes true emptiness"; and it has never said: "from the illusory one enters into emptiness, from emptiness comes the illusory, not attaching to either side is known as the middle way". Having an exit and entry, how could that be Buddha-nature?

所以,第一句话应该改成:随缘显现。

Therefore, the first saying should be changed into: Appearing according to conditions.

说:不变随缘,随缘不变,我们一般有自性见,认为如来藏性,就是如如不动,如如不动,好像是一潭死水一样。错了!

Those who say: being unchanged by the flow of conditions, the flow of conditions does not change/affect us - we usually have the view of a self-nature, conceiving that the Treasury of the Thus Come One is always unchanging in suchness, unchanging in suchness, like a pool of dead water. Wrong!

它会起妙用的,所以,它随缘可以显现,佛陀说法也在定中,行住坐卧,统统运用,之妙存乎一心,哪有一种东西是不变的东西?

It can give rise to marvellous function, therefore, it manifests according to conditions. When the Buddha preaches the dharma he is also in Samadhi, in movement, standing, sitting and sleeping, the ingenuity in varying usage depends on natural intelligence, how could there be an unchanging thing?

这个随缘不变,会让人家落入:有一种东西不变,一直在找寻有一种东西不变,认为有一种东西叫做永恒。

This "being immutable in the midst of conditions" will cause people to fall into (the conclusion of): there is a kind of "something" that is unchanging, and one constantly seeks after a kind of "something that is not changing", mistaken that there is a kind of "something" that is called "eternal".

他所谓永恒是永远不执著,充满智慧心叫做永恒,不是有一种东西叫做永恒。

[In actuality] what is known as eternal is eternally non-abiding, filled with wisdom-mind - that is called eternal, it is not that there is a kind of "thing" that is called eternal.

要了解,有为法就是无为法,有为法就是缘起生灭无常法;彻底空就是无为法,当体即空,二话不说。

We have to understand, conditioned dharma IS precisely unconditioned dharma, conditioned dharma is the dependently arisen, arising and ceasing, impermanent dharmas; it is completely empty and hence unconditioned dharma, its immediate essence is empty, we do not speak of any dualities.

所以说:随缘显现,才是完全大悟的人讲的话,你随缘不变,哪一种东西不变呢?

Therefore we say: manifesting according to conditions, is what completely and greatly realized people would say, for if you talk about "being immutable in the face of conditions", what is the thing that never changes?

大悟的人知道,佛性像摩尼宝珠,胡来胡现,汉来汉现,它会变的,不变就是一潭死水了,它怎么起作用呢?

Those greatly realized mind knows that Buddha-Nature is like the Wish-Fulfilling Gem, when the Hu man arrives Hu man is made manifest, when the Han man arrives Han man is made manifest, it will always change, if it were unchanging it would be like a pool of dead water, how could it manifest functions?

是不是?如果如来藏不变,那释迦牟尼佛怎么讲经说法呢?

Isn't that the case? If the Treasury of the Thus Come One never changes, then how would Shakyamuni Buddha expound the sutras and preach the dharma?

它不变,一潭死水,释迦牟尼佛讲经说法就是妙用现前,怎么会不变呢?

[If] it is unchanging, [it would be like] a pool of dead water, when Shakyamuni Buddha expounds the sutras that would be the coming forth of marvellous activities, how could it have been that it never changes?

是不是?所以说:佛性是无常的,所谓佛性是无常,是站在妙用的角度讲的;佛性讲常,是站在体的角度讲的,对不悟的众生,只有这样讲。

Isn't that the case? Therefore: Buddha nature is Impermanence. What is known as Buddha-nature is Impermanence, is spoken from the point of view of marvellous activities; when Buddha-nature is spoken as permanent, it is spoken from the perspective of [fundamental] body, when speaking to those who have not realized, this is the only way we can explain.

讲无常,是佛悲天愍人,让你觉悟万法生灭无常,空无自性,所以,释迦世尊不得不讲无常,让你觉悟,提早觉悟。

When speaking of Impermanence, that is due to the Buddha's bemoaning the state of the universe and pitying the fate of mankind, thus letting us realize that the ten thousand dharmas are arising and ceasing in impermanency, empty without self-nature, therefore, Shakyamuni Buddha cannot avoid speaking about Impermanence to let you realize it earlier.

讲常,是因为给二乘人有一个依靠,说我们的如来藏性是常乐我净,二乘人又执著有一种东西叫做常乐我净,又执著一个常。

When explaining Permanence, it is for the purpose of providing something to rely on for the practitioners of the two [lower] vehicles, wherefore we speak of our Treasury of the Thus Come One as Permanence, Bliss, Self and Purity, however the practitioners of the two [lower] vehicles then grasp after a kind of something that is 'Permanent, Blissful, Self and Purity', and thus again becoming attached to an eternal something.

(my personal comments: certainly this issue does not apply to the 'arahants' of Buddhism who have realized anatta or no-soul, maybe the comment is more appropriate for adherents of the non-Buddhist tradition, the term 'two vehicles' originally meant for the arahants and pratyekabuddhas have in latter days of Chinese Mahayana become a very loose term used to imply all and any kind of 'misguided practitioners')

释迦牟尼佛讲无常,是为了破除你的贪;讲常,是为了二乘人有一个依靠,二乘人却执著有一种东西叫做常。

When the Shakyamuni Buddha talks about impermanence, it is meant for severing your craving; when speaking about permanence, it is meant for providing a means of support for the practitioners of the two vehicles, yet the practitioners of the two vehicles then attached to a kind of something that is called 'permanent'.

释迦世尊又告诉我们:讲常乐我净,那是一种善巧方便,它要起变化,它就会无常。

Shakyamuni Buddha tells us: when talking about Permanent, Bliss, Self and Purity, that is just a kind of skillful means, [for] when it arises transformation, then it is impermanence.

讲经说法难道是常吗?

Could expounding sutras and preaching the dharma have been permanence?

它就会无常,无常当体即空,它就是常。

It will change/be impermanent, impermanence in its essence is empty, just that is permanence.

所以,性相本一如,何来常无常?

Therefore, nature and appearance are fundamentally one suchness, where could there be permanence or impermanence?

性相本一如,何来住无住?

Nature and appearance are fundamentally one suchness, where could there have been abidance or non-abidance?

到这个佛的境界,安上任何的知见,统统叫做错,不准你安上任何的知见,一法不立,这个才是正法。

When reaching the state of the Buddha, if we impute a view then it is completely wrong. Imposing any kind of view is not allowed, not one dharma is established, only then is this the true Dharma.

佛陀从来没有讲过真空出妙有,妙有真空,这一句话是中国的祖师注解所讲的。

Buddha has never talked about true emptiness producing marvellous existence, or marvellous existence [comes] true emptiness, this is a commentary from China's patriarchs.

佛陀也没有讲说:从假入空,从空出假,佛陀有讲:不二法门,你要搞清楚啊!

The Buddha has also never said: from the illusory enters emptiness, from emptiness comes the illusory, the Buddha has said: Not-two dharma door [the Dharma of Non-Duality], you have to be clear about this!

所谓不二法门,心境不二,是不是?

What is known as the dharma door of non-duality means Mind and Situation are not two, isn't it so?

缘起等於性空,不是缘起另外有一个性空。

Dependent arising is equivalent to empty nature, it is not that apart from dependent arising there is another empty nature.

缘起另外有一个性空,缘起就是随缘,另外有一个性空叫做不变。

Or that apart from dependent arising there is another empty nature, dependent arising is going in accord with conditions, and apart from that there is an empty nature that is known to be permanent.

是不是?那就打成二段了,这个就不是不二法门了。缘起当体即空,就是性空;生死当体即空,就是涅磐,生死涅磐无距离,菩提由来无一物。

Isn't it the case? Then that would be splitting it into two, then this is no longer the dharma door of non-duality. Dependent arising is fundamentally empty, just that is the empty nature; birth and death are fundamentally empty, just that is Nirvana, birth and death and nirvana is without distance, Bodhi [enlightenment] is originally not one thing.