From Eihei Dogen: Mystical Realist by Hee Jin Kim:


It was also in the context of the present time that Dögen's critique of the commonsense view of time as uniformly and one-directionally flowing and "coming and going (korai became most severe. For him, the first step toward the analysis of time was to understand the traditional Buddhist dictum: "Everything perishes as soon as it arises" (setsuna-shömetsu). However, the ordinary person was not aware of this truth, according to Dögen. Hence:
You should take note that the human body in this life is formed temporarily as a result of the combination of the four elements and the five skandhas. There are always the eight kinds of suffering [birth, old age, sickness, death, separation from the beloved, union with the hated, frustrations, and those sufferings caused by clinging to the five skandhas), not to mention the fact that life arises and perishes instantaneously from moment to moment and does not abide at all, and the fact that there are sixty-five seisuas bom and annihilated in one tanji, yet the ordinary person does not realize this because of his/her own ignorance. Although one day and one night are comprised by 6,400,099,980 setsunas, and the five skandhas appear and disappear, he/she does not know these facts. Pity those who are altogether unaware of their own births and deaths!161
For Dogen, to investigate this aspect of impermanence was crucially important, philosophically and religiously. In short, the tenet "Everything perishes as soon as it arises" denied duration: The ultimate limit of momentariness was a lack of duration as well as an absence of coming and going. The commonsense view failed to see this.
Dögen analyzed the problem as follows:
When firewood becomes ash, it can no longer revert to firewood. Hence, you should not regard ash as following and firewood as preceding (as if
they formed the continuous process of a self-identical entity). Take note that firewood abides in its own Dharma-position (hot), having both before and after. Although there are before and after, they are cut off (zango saidan seri) (so that there remains only middle or present, i.e., the Dharmaposition of firewood). Likewise, ash resides in its own Dharma-position, possessing both before and after. Just as firewood does not revert to firewood again after having been burnt to ash, so death is not transformed into life after the individual is dead. Thus, do not hold that life becomes death; this is an authoritative teaching of the Buddha-dharma. Accordingly, call it nonlife (fisho). Buddha's authentic sermon proclaims that death does not change to life, accordingly, call it nondeath (fumetsu). Life is a position of total time, death is a position of total time as well. They are like winter and spring. We do not think that winter turns to spring or that spring turns to summer. 162
Firewood and ash, life and death, winter and spring all have their own Dharma positions that are absolutely discrete and discontinuous. Each has its before and after but is cut off from those Dharma-positions preceding and following. Because of its central importance to Dögen's mystical realism, we shall attempt to delve into the problem of abiding in the Dharma-position (jii-hoi) in some detail now.
First, a Dharma-position is composed of a particular here and now (a spatio temporal existence in the world); hence, it is inevitably comprised of the existential particularities biological, psychological, moral, philosophical, religious, and so forth-that are observed, compared, judged, and chosen in the dualistic scheme of things. That is to say, the existential particularities of a given moment constitute a particular position of time, which in turn is a Dharma-position. What makes a particular position of time a Dharma-position is the appropriation of these particularities in such a manner that they are seen nondualistically in and through the mediation of emptiness. As such, the significance of the existential qualities and phenomenalities of things and events is by no means minimized; on the contrary, they are reconstituted, without being naively phenomenalistic, in their true aspect of thusness. "Dharma abides in a Dharma-position" tho wa hot ni Misuru nari), therefore, it does not imply that the Dharma-position is in any way a self-limiting manifestation or a temporal instance of eternity. To abide in a Dharma-position should not be construed as instrumental or subsidiary to some idea of eternity, but rather as an end in itself as eternity in itself. Thus, the act of eating, for example, is viewed as self-sufficient in itself, it is the kōan realized in life (genjo-koan).
Second, such a particular here-and-now is also the bearer of the total situation in which it is lived. Dogen frequently used the expression he was so fond of "the total exertion of a single thing" (ippo-gujinor simply, "total exertion" (gjin). He wrote, for example:
Those who know a speck of dust know the entire universe; those who penetrate a single dharma penetrate all dharmas. If you do not penetrate all dharmas, you do not penetrate a dharma. When you understand the meaning of penetration (ts) and thereby penetrate thoroughly, you discern all dharmas as well as a single dharma. For this reason, while you study a speck of dust, you study the entire universe without fail.163
Elsewhere, related to the idea of the total exertion of a single thing, Dogen had this to say: "When one side is illumined, the other is darkened" (ippo o shasuru toki wa ippo wa kurashi). As I noted in the foregoing, when one eats, eating is the total activity at that particular moment and nothing else. All other things remain in darkness, so to speak. This does not mean, however, that this affirmation of eating is achieved through the negation of the existence of the "hidden" such would be dualistic. On the contrary, eating is enacted in such a way that it embodies, nondually and undefiledly, both the disclosed and the concealed, the part and the whole, microcosm and macrocosm. The activity of eating is, according to Dögen's favorite expression, the whole being of emptiness leaping out of itself" (honshin-chashursu). When part and whole are simultaneously and unobstructedly realized in the act of eating, it is the moment when the whole being of emptiness leaps out of itself, "mustering the whole body-mind" (shinjin o kashitet another favorite expression of Dögen. This is precisely what Dögen meant by "total realization" or "total function" (enki). As I intend to discuss this matter in a different context later, I shall quote just one passage in connection to this:
Life is, for example, like sailing in a boat. Although we set a sail, steer our course, and pole the boat along, the boat carries us and we do not exist apart from the boat. By sailing in the boat, we make the boat what it is. Assiduously study (such an example of this very moment (sholdimmol). At such time, there is nothing but the world of the boat. The heavens, the water, and the shore-all become the boat's time fue no jisetsw): they are not the same as the time that is not the boat. Hence, I make life what it is: life makes me what I am. In riding the boat, one's body and mind, and the self and the world are together the dynamic function of the boat (ime no kikan). The entire earth and the whole empty sky are in company with the boat's vigorous exertion. Such is the I that is life, the life that is 1.165
Third, a Dharma-position does not come and go, or pass, or flow as the commonsense view of time would assume. This is a radical rejection of the flow of time, or the stream of consciousness, or any other conceptions of time based on the idea of continuity and duration. That is, time is absolutely discrete and discontinuous. This characteristic was primary to Dogen's thought. His thesis, however, was not based on any quantitative or atomistic consideration of time, that is a theoretical concern, but rather on qualitative and practical reflections on his existential and religious experiences of the present. As he probed the "reason of total exertion" (gujin no ri), he could not help but come to the idea of the radical discontinuity of the present.
Though the expressions themselves of "abiding in the Dharma-position" and "the total exertion of a single thing" were by no means Dögen's own invention, the ideas themselves nevertheless bore the imprints of typical Dögen-like mystical realism, as epitomized in Dogen's statement the English translation of which hardly does justice to the spirit, cloquence and force of the original Japanese):

A wonderful Mahamudra text, taught by a great teacher.

KHENCHEN THRANGU RINPOCHE WILL TEACH ON:

Teaching subjectClarifying the Natural State by Dakpo Tashi Namgyal



See http://www.rinpoche.com/boudha19.htm
Also see: Greg Goode on Advaita/Madhyamika

The 7 stages do not unfold in the same exact linear steps for everyone. For some, it is the reverse. For some practitioners, they may have certain insights into emptiness and dependent origination but lack the direct realization of appearances as one’s radiance clarity. And hence for these people, John Tan said, “...empty clarity is highest teaching. To me [that] is peak of [stage] 5. Post 5 [i.e. stage 6] is [about] knowledge of Dependent Origination and emptiness, which I think is more [of a crucial] key. Roaming in Conventional world in freedom requires deep wisdom that is not covered in the insight of clarity.”. However as John also pointed out, lacking the insights into 5, the understanding of dependent origination and emptiness tends to be intellectual. For these people, a separate pointing to recognise all appearances as one’s empty radiance clarity may be necessary.


“From anatta to the natural state of spontaneous perfection is essentially to understand the breadth and depth of what hinders and is meant by being "natural". The journey is effectively how an immature mind that is full of all sort of artificialities frees itself into its primordial natural condition that is boundless and free.


Why are there stages? There are stages because it is based on a proliferated mind. The fragmented mind creates stages as that is how it understands and works, it separates and re-connects what that has never been separated. Realizing the illusion of separation, there is no re-connection either. So the self is empty, the other is empty, the line that demarcates them is also empty.


As for investigation into the nature of appearances, perhaps you can elaborate more on what do you mean by appearances?


I think we must also separate direct knowledge of one's empty clarity from the relative conceptual knowledge of mind and how are they "linked". Can Madhyamaka bring about direct recognition of one’s radiance clarity? If not, what is the role of mmk (mulamadhyamakakarika)?


...


In my previous message, I mentioned about anatta and spontaneous perfection as returning to one's natural and authentic condition because I hope you can see it from another angle.


To some, in the seen, just the seen sounded like a perfect state of concentration through long period of training and practice. To me however, the taste of anatta is the birthright, primordial and natural condition of one's clarity.


Seeing is just seen, no seer; Hearing is just sound, no hearer. It is the gateway to realize that the mundane is precisely where one's natural radiance is fully expressed. Nothing hidden, nothing beyond and fully manifested.


What does freedom from reification entail? It is to get rid of all "beyonds", all "backgrounds", all constructs so that we can recognize "face to face" of what's seen, heard, touched... etc as one's empty clarity, not to bring us to an unreachable la la land. So wherever and whenever I see dependent arising and emptiness, I see one's empty clarity.


Some can realize directly one's empty clarity through seeing emptiness, just like case of the insight of anatta, but some can't. If this isn't obvious, then separate pointing is necessary.


Lastly the true practice is in ceaselessly meeting conditions and situations, without that, there is no genuine actualization.


Good luck!” - John Tan 2018


...


"When one says mind or basis or clarity or presence, it is only conventional expression. If we mistaken there is anything to grasp or anything beyond or ineffable, it is immediately mistaken. However if we just stop there it becomes nihilistic. Because the purpose is to allow one to clearly and fully realize, feel and taste the moment to moment of manifestation. To clearly see and understand the nature of what is felt, seen, taste, heard and thought. It is not only no seer, but in the seen just the seen. However in the seen just the seen can be seen as a form of focus shamatha concentration. Therefore I always say it is the natural state." - John Tan 2018


It should however be understood that recognition of all appearances as one’s empty-clarity is not the insight of Stage 6. As John Tan said, “They [Gelugpas/Emptiness teachings] do not require a ground foundational consciousness, do not seek presence, what do they rely on to release?

Soh: The release of the sense of phenomena truly there that can be found when sought, existing with Essence, by itself or on its own side. The conventions are seen to be empty

John Tan: 👍 So in phase 6, don't talk about presence.  Talk about the general dependent origination into emptiness.  In terms of experience, fully refine +A and -A.”



Zen Master Bernie Glassman passed away yesterday. What a loss.

He is a living example of a great Bodhisattva living his life actualizing anatta and Maha total exertion in activity, integrating Zen practice with social action, benefitting many sentient beings.

Zen master Bernie Glassman, "Instructions to the Cook: A Zen Master's Lessons to Living a Life That Matters"
PROLOGUE PREPARING THE MENU
When I first began to study Zen, my teacher gave me a koan, a Zen question, to answer: “How do you go further from the top of a hundred-foot pole?”
You can’t use your rational mind to answer this koan—or any Zen question—in a logical way.
You might meditate a long time and come back to the Zen master and say, “The answer is to live fully.”
That’s a good beginning. But it’s only the rational, logical part of the answer. You have to go further. You have to demonstrate the answer. You have to embody the answer. You have to show the Zen master how you live fully in the moment. You have to manifest the answer in your life—in your everyday relationships, in the marketplace, at work, as well as in the temple or meditation hall.
When we live our life fully, our life becomes what Zen Buddhists call “the supreme meal.”
We make this supreme meal by using the ingredients at hand to make the best meal possible, and then by offering it.
This book is about how to cook the supreme meal of your life.
This book is about how to step off the hundred-foot pole.
This book is about how to live fully in the marketplace.
And in every other sphere of your life.
Most people come to see me in my capacity as a Zen teacher because they feel that something is missing in their lives. You might even say that most people come to Zen because they are hungry in some way.
Maybe they are successful in business but feel that they have neglected the deeper, more “spiritual” aspects of life. These people come to Zen to find meaning. Other people have devoted so much time to their own spiritual search that they end up having neglected their livelihoods. These people come to Zen to “get their life together.”
Then there are people who want to practice Zen for health reasons. They find the posture and breathing that accompany Zen meditation especially helpful. The regular practice of Zen meditation, for example, lowers blood pressure and improves circulation. The lungs function better, so that you can breathe more deeply and powerfully.
Other people are drawn to Zen for “self-improvement.” They come to Zen because they want to accomplish more or become “better” people.
Finally, of course, there are people who practice Zen for spiritual reasons. These people want to experience satori or kensho. “Satori” literally means awakening, and “kensho” literally means seeing into our true nature. This seeing is done not with our eyes but with our whole body and mind.
All these reasons are valid. Zen can help you restore balance to your life. Zen can be beneficial for your health. Zen can help you sift through your own priorities, so you can get more done.
Zen can also improve your psychological health. The practice of Zen doesn’t eliminate conflict and strife, but it does help put our problems in perspective. Zen practice gives stability, so that when we get knocked over, when something unexpected sends us reeling, we bounce back and recover our balance faster.
The practice of Zen can help us in many other ways as well. It can give us an experience of inner peace; it can strengthen our concentration. It can help us learn how to let go of our preconceptions and biases. It can teach us ways to work more. These are all beneficial effects—but in a sense, they are still all “side effects.”
At its deepest, most basic level, Zen—or any spiritual path, for that matter—is much more than a list of what we can get from it. In fact, Zen is the realization of the oneness of life in all its aspects. It’s not just the pure or “spiritual” part of life: it’s the whole thing. It’s flowers, mountains, rivers, streams, and the inner city and homeless children on Forty-second Street. It’s the empty sky and the cloudy sky and the smoggy sky, too. It’s the pigeon flying in the empty sky, the pigeon shitting in the empty sky, and walking through the pigeon droppings on the sidewalk. It’s the rose growing in the garden, the cut rose shining in the vase in the living room, the garbage where we throw away the rose, and the compost where we throw away the garbage.
Zen is life—our life. It’s coming to the realization that all things are nothing but expressions of myself. And myself is nothing but the full expression of all things. It’s a life without limits.
There are many different metaphors for such a life. But the one that I have found the most useful, and the most meaningful, comes from the kitchen. Zen masters call a life that is lived fully and completely, with nothing held back, “the supreme meal.” And a person who lives such a life—a person who knows how to plan, cook, appreciate, serve, and offer the supreme meal of life, is called a Zen cook.
The position of the cook is one of the highest and most important in the Zen monastery. During the thirteenth century, Dogen, the founder of the largest Zen Buddhist school in Japan, wrote a famous manual called “Instructions to the Cook.” In this book, he recounted how he had taken the perilous sea voyage to China to find a true master. When he finally reached his destination, having survived typhoons and pirates, he was forced to wait aboard his ship while the Chinese officials examined his papers.
One day, an elderly Chinese monk came to the ship. He was the tenzo, or head cook, of his monastery, he told Dogen, and because the next day was a holiday, the first day of spring, he wanted to offer the monks something special. He had walked twelve miles to see if he could buy some of the renowned shiitake mushrooms Dogen had brought from Japan to add to the noodle soup he was planning to serve the next morning.
Dogen was very impressed with this monk, and he asked him to stay for dinner and spend the night. But the monk insisted he had to return to the monastery immediately.
"But surely,” said Dogen, “there are other monks who could prepare the meal in your absence.”
"I have been put in charge of this work,” replied the monk. “How can I leave it to others?”
“But why does a venerable elder such as yourself waste time doing the hard work of a head cook?” Dogen persisted. “Why don’t you spend your time practicing meditation or studying the words of the masters?”
The Zen cook burst out laughing, as if Dogen had said something very funny. “My dear foreign friend,” he said, “it’s clear you do not yet understand what Zen practice is all about. When you get the chance, please come and visit me at my monastery so we can discuss these matters more fully.”
And with that, he gathered up his mushrooms and began the long journey back to his monastery.
Dogen did eventually visit and study with the Zen cook in his monastery, as well as with many other masters. When he finally returned to Japan, Dogen became a celebrated Zen master. But he never forgot the lessons he learned from the Zen cook in China. It was the Zen cook’s duty, Dogen wrote, to make the best and most sumptuous meal possible out of whatever ingredients were available—even if he had only rice and water. The Zen cook used what he had rather than complaining or making excuses about what he didn’t have.
On one level, Dogen’s “Instructions to the Cook” is about the proper way to prepare and serve meals for the monks. But on another level it is about the supreme meal—our own life—which is both the greatest gift we can receive and the greatest offering we can make.
I practiced Zen and studied Dogen’s instructions for many years to learn how to become a Zen cook who can prepare this supreme meal. I got up early, around five-thirty every morning, and sat in zazen, or Zen meditation, for many hours. With my teacher I studied koans—paradoxical Zen sayings such as “What is the sound of one hand clapping.” Eventually I received transmission to teach in the Zen school Dogen had founded.
The principles I learned from my study of Zen—the principles of the Zen cook—can be used by anyone as a guide to living a full life, in the marketplace, in the home, and in the community.
A master chef spends many years serving an apprenticeship, preparing and serving thousands of meals. Some chefs keep their recipes and methods secret. But other chefs are willing to distill their years of experience—including failures, mistakes, and successes—into recipes that everyone can use to cook their own meals. In this book I have distilled my years of experience as a Zen cook and included in it my principles and recipes for the supreme meal of life.
Zen is based on the teachings of the Buddha. The Buddha was not God, or another name for God, or even a god. The Buddha was a human being who had an experience of awakening through his own effort. The Buddha’s awakening or enlightenment came about through the practice of meditation.
What did the Buddha discover? There are many different answers to this question. But the Zen tradition I studied says simply that when the Buddha attained realization, he opened his eyes to see the morning star shining in the sky and exclaimed, “How wonderful, how wonderful! Everything is enlightened. All beings and all things are enlightened just as they are.”
So the first principle of the Zen cook is that we already have everything we need. If we look closely at our lives, we will find that we have all the ingredients we need to prepare the supreme meal. At every moment, we simply take the ingredients at hand and make the best meal we can. It doesn’t matter how much or how little we have. The Zen cook just looks at what is available and starts with that.
The supreme meal of my life has taken many surprising forms. I have been an aeronautical engineer and a Zen student and teacher. I have also been an entrepreneur who founded a successful bakery and a social activist who founded the Greyston Family Inn, providing permanent housing and training in self-sufficiency for homeless families. I’m also involved in starting an AIDS hospice and an interfaith center.
Of course, the supreme meal is very different for each of us. But according to the principles of the Zen cook, it always consists of five main “courses” or aspects of life. The first course involves spirituality; the second course is composed of study and learning; the third course deals with livelihood; the fourth course is made out of social action or change, and the last course consists of relationship and community.
All these courses are an essential part of the supreme meal. Just as we all need certain kinds of food to make a complete meal that will sustain and nourish us, we need all five of these courses to live a full life.
It’s not enough to simply include all these courses in our meal. We have to prepare the five courses at the right time and in the right order.
The first course, spirituality, helps us to realize the oneness of life and provides a still point at the center of all our activities. This course consists of certain spiritual practices. This practice could be prayer or listening to music or dance or taking walks or spending time alone—anything that helps us realize or reminds us of the oneness of life—of what Buddha meant when he said, “How wonderful, how wonderful.”
The second course is study or learning. Study provides sharpness and intelligence. People usually study before they begin something, but I like my study of things, be they livelihood, social action, or spirituality, to be simultaneous with my practice of livelihood, social action, or spirituality. In this way, study is never merely abstract.
Once we have established the clarity that comes from stillness and study, we can begin to see how to prepare the third course, which is livelihood. This is the course that sustains us in the physical world. It is the course of work and business—the meat and potatoes. Taking care of ourselves and making a living in the world are necessary and important for all of us, no matter how “spiritual” we may think we are.
The course of social action grows naturally out of the courses of spirituality and livelihood. Once we begin to take care of our own basic needs, we become more aware of the needs of the people around us. Recognizing the oneness of life, we naturally reach out to other people because we realize that we are not separate from them.
The last course is the course of relationship and community. This is the course that brings all the seemingly separate parts of our life together into a harmonious whole. It’s the course that turns all the other courses—spirituality, livelihood, social action, and study—into a joyous feast.



=========


Jundo Cohen:


CNN has a beautiful article on Bernie Glassman ...
============
An American Zen Master has died: An oral history of Roshi Bernie Glassman
By Daniel Burke, CNN Religion Editor
Glassman, who died November 4 at age 79, was a Brooklyn-born Jew, a recognized Zen master, a Buddhist trailblazer, a restless mensch and a serial plunger.
Glassman plunged into aeronautical engineering, into Zen, into leading a Buddhist community, into running a bakery, into growing that bakery into a constellation of social services, into holding spiritual retreats among the homeless and at Holocaust-haunted concentration camps, into writing a book of koans with a Hollywood star, into mourning when his second wife died and into learning to walk and talk again two years ago after a stroke.
The plunges, as Glassman called them, served a spiritual purpose: to uproot preconditioned ideas, bear witness to what's going on and serve those most in need. At a time when many American Buddhists preferred self-development to social engagement, Glassman dismissed "mannequin meditation" and carried his Zen practice from clean-aired monasteries to chaotic city streets, where he led weeklong retreats on sidewalks and in crowded parks.
"Bernie was very clear that meditation was not a refuge from life," said Roshi Eve Myonen Marko, Glassman's third wife. "For him, meditation was total engagement."

...

Full article: https://us.cnn.com/2018/11/30/us/bernie-glassman-american-zen-master/index.html?fbclid=IwAR2uEqWng2B7Nii15blfEaSd_sOycrwDqs6x8CdIzynuPd4mapX5h_sncz4


Also see: 

Way of Bodhi
Wishing Prayer for the Attainment of the Ultimate Mahamudra
Madhyamaka, Cittamātra, and the true intent of Maitreya and Asaṅga self.Buddhism


Bodhidharma was the first Ch'an/Zen patriarch to ever step foot in China. He had given a wonderful discourse on anatta.

English translation above, original Chinese text below


https://terebess.hu/zen/bodhidharma-eng.html#app

 On No-Mind
In one fascicle
By Bodhidharma
(T85n2831 translated by Urs App, in The Eastern Buddhist, Vol. 28, No. 1 (Spring 1995), pp. 82-107)
1
The ultimate principle is without words; one needs to borrow words to make this principle apparent. The great Dao is without equivalent; [yet] to touch the uncultivated it reveals shapes. Let us now for expedience sake posit two persons holding a discussion on the subject of no-mind.
2
The student asks the Reverend, "[Do you] have a mind or not?"
"[I] have no mind."
3
"Since you say that you have no mind: who then has the ability to see, hear, feel, and know? Who knows that there is no mind?"
"Just no-mind is seeing, hearing, feeling, and knowing. And it is no-mind that has the ability to be aware of the absence of mind."
4
"If one accepts that there is no mind, it must follow that there is no seeing, hearing, feeling, and knowing. Say: how can there be any seeing, hearing, feeling, and knowing [without mind]?"
"Though I have no mind, I can ver well [1269b] see and hear and feel and know."
5
"Just the fact that you see, hear, feel, and know proves that you have mind! How can you deny this?"
"This very seeing, hearing, feeling, and knowing is no-mind! Where could there be another no-mind apart from seeing, hearing, feeling, and knowing? Now I am afraid that you do not understand; so let me explain this to you step by step in order to let you realize the truth. Take seeing: [I] see throughout the day - but since it is seeing without seeing, it is without mind. Or take hearing: [I] hear all day long - but as it is hearing without hearing, it is without mind. Or feeling: [I] feel all day long - but as it is feeling without feeling, it is without mind. Or knowing: [I] know all day long - but as it is knowing without knowing, it too is without mind. Engaged in actions day in and day out, [I] do without doing - which is nothing other than no-mind. Therefore it is said: Seeing, hearing, feeling, and knowing are all no-mind."
6
"But how could one [even] gain the ability to know that it is no-mind [that sees, hears, feels, and knows]?"
"Just try to find out in every detail: What appearance does mind have? And if it can be apprehended: is [what is apprehended] mind or not? Is [mind] inside or outside, or somewhere in between? As long as one looks for mind in these three locations, one's search will end in failure. Indeed, searching it anywhere will end in failure. That's exactly why it is known as no-mind."
7
"Reverend, since you have said that all is no-mind, neither evil nor meritorious deeds ought to exist. So why are people transmigrating in the six spheres of existence, ceaselessly embroiled in life-and-death?"
"In their confusion, people for no reason conceive an [an entity called] 'mind' within no-mind. Deludedly clinging to [mind's] existence, they perform action upon action, which in turn makes them transmigrate in the six realms and live-and-die without respite. It is as if someone would in the dark mistake a contraption for a ghost or [a rope] for a snake and be gripped by terror. That's just what people's deluded clinging [to a mind] is like. In the midst of no-mind they deludedly cling to a 'mind' and perform action upon action - yet this results in nothing but transmigration through the six realms. If such people come across a great teacher who instructs them in seated meditation, they will awaken to no-mind, and all karmic hindrances will be thoroughly wiped out and [the chain of] life-and-death cut through. Just as all darkness disappears with a single ray of sunlight that penetrates it, awakening to no-mind wipes out all evil karma."
8
"I am dull, and my mind is still not quite made up. But observing the one who is everywhere making use of the six sense organs, responding to questions, speaking, and performing all kinds of action - and [the existence of] delusion and wisdom, or life-and-death and nirvana, [I wonder if all of this] really is nothing but no-mind?"
"Indeed it is! Just because people deludedly cling to having mind, they have all their illusions and life-and-death as well as supreme wisdom (bodhi) and total release (nirvana). If they awaken to no-mind, then there are neither illusions nor life-and-death and nirvana. Thus the Tathagata said to those who [think that they] have mind that there is life-and-death. Bodhi is so named as a counterpiece to illusion, and nirvana as a counterpiece to [1269c] life-and-death; all of these [concepts are but contermeasures. If no-mind obtains, both illusion and bodhi are nowhere to be found; and the same is true for life-and-death and nirvana."
9
"[You state that] bodhi and nirvana are nowhere to be found - but one can say that all the buddhas of the past have attained bodhi, can one not?"
"Only in terms of the phraseology of conventional truth, but not from the point of view of genuine truth. Hence the Vimalakirti sutra's statement: 'Bodhi can neither be attained by a body nor by a mind.' Again, the Diamond sutra says: 'There is not the slightest object to be attained; the buddhas and the Tathagata simply attained through the unattainable.' Which goes to show that with mind everything arises, while with no-mind there is nothing at all."
10
"You have already said, Reverend, that everything everywhere is no-mind; so trees and rocks are also no-mind. But [no-mind] is not the same as trees and rocks, is it?"
"Our mindless mind is not identical with trees or rocks. Why? It may be compare to a celestial drum which, though just lying there without mind, by itself emits various wondrous teachings, thus guiding the people. Again, it is like the wish-fulfilling gem that, though also without mind, is by nature able to produce a variety of different apparitions. Our no-mind is just like that: though without mind, it is very well able to thoroughly perceive the true form of everything. Equipped with true wisdom (prajna), its threefold body enjoys utter freedom, and its activity is without constraint. Therefore the Ratnakuta sutra says: 'Without any mental intention, it is manifestly active' How would thus [no-mind] be identical to trees and rocks? Indeed, no-mind is nothing other than true mind. And true mind is nothing other than no-mind."
11
"At present, I am involved in [dualistic] mind; so how should I practice?"
"Just be totally aware in all affairs! No-mind is nothing other than practice; there is no other practice. Thus you'll realize that no-mind is everything, and that extinction (nirvana) is nothing other than no-mind."
12
At this, the disciple all at once greatly awakened and realized for the first time that there is no thing apart from mind, and no mind apart from things. All of his actions became utterly free. Having broken through the net of all doubt, he was freed of all obstruction.
13
As he rose and bowed with folded hands, he engraved no-mind in producing the following verse:
Mind is marvelously tranquil;
It has no color or form.
Looking at it, one does not see it;
Listening to it, it has no sound.
Seeming obscure, it is not so;
Appearing bright, it is not bright.
Try to discard it, and it does not vanish;
Attempt to grasp it, and it does not arise.
At large, it covers the entire universe;
Yet in the minute it does not obstruct a hair.
Embroiled in passions, it is not soiled;
In the serenity of nirvana it is not pure.
As suchness it is by nature without discrimination;
Yet able to distinguish between sentient and not sentient.
When it gathers in, nothing is left out;
When dispersing, it is common to all people.
[1270c] Wondrous beyond the grasp of knowledge;
Genuine awakening that cuts off the path of practice.
Though extinguished, one does not witness its demise;
Though present, its becoming is unseen.
The great Dao is tranquil and marked by no form,
Its myriad appearances silent and marked by no name.
Hence its activities are totally free -
All of this is the essence of no-mind.
14
The Reverend then told him: "Among all forms of wisdom, I regard the wisdom of no-mind as the highest. Thus the Vimalakirti sutra says: "Neither having a conscious mind nor mental impressions and processes, he sees through the ignorant and submits those of different creed." Again, the Sutra of the Great Dharma Drum states, "If you know that there is no mind that can be attained, no objects whatsoever are grasped; neither are sincs and meritorious activities, nor life-and-death and nirvana. Indeed, nothing at all can be grasped - not-grasping included!"
15
Then [the disciple again] produces a verse:
In the past, when I was deluded, I held that there is a mind;
But now that I am awakened, there's no mind, that's all!
Though there is no mind, it perceives and is active;
Its perception and activity ever calm, it is pure suchness.
16
And he added:
No mind, no perception, and no activity at all -
No perception, no activity: that's wuwei.
This is the genuine Dharma-realm of the Tathagata,
Different from that of bodhisattvas and pratyeka buddhas.
17
What is called no-mind is nothing other than a mind free from deluded thought.
18
[The questioner] continued asking: "What is 'taishang,' the supreme?
"Tai signifies 'great,' and shang 'lofty.' It is called 'supreme' because it is the highest wondrous principle. Tai also signifies the primordial stage. Though there are longlived ones of Yankang in the heavens of the three realms, their luck runs out, which is why they end up again transmigrating in the six spheres of existence. That 'ultimate' (tai) is not yet sufficient. And the bodhisattvas of the ten stages, though having escaped life-and-death, have not yet plumbed the depths of this wondrous principle. Their ultimate is also not yet [the one I am talking about]. Cultivation of mind in the ten stages gets rid of being in order to enter nonbeing; this is again not yet the ultimate since it does not get rid of both being and nonbeing and sticks to a middle path. But even if one has thoroughly discarded that middle path and the three locations [of inside, outside, and in between], and any place is that of wondrous awakening - and even if a bodhisattva gets rid of these three locations - one remains unable to free oneself of the wondrous. This again is not yet the ultimate.
Now if one discards the wondrous, then even the very essence of the Buddha Way has no place to abide; since no though is left, no discriminative thinking takes place. Both the deluded mind and wisdom have forever expired, and perceptions and reflections are at an end - calm and without ado. This is called tai; it means the ultimate of the principle. And shang means 'without peer.' Hence it is called taishang, the ultimate. This is simply another designation for Buddha, the Tathagata."
[End of] Treatise on No-Mind in one fascicle.


菩提达摩大师无心论

夫至理无言,要假言而显理。大道无相,为接粗而见形。今且假立二人,共谈无心之论矣。

弟子问和尚曰:有心无心?

答曰:无心。

问曰:既云无心,谁能见闻觉知,谁知无心?

答曰:还是无心既见闻觉知,还是无心能知无心。

问曰:既若无心,即合无有见闻觉知,云何得有见闻觉知?

答曰:我虽无心,能见能闻能觉能知。

问曰:既能见闻觉知,即是有心,那得称无?

答曰:只是见闻觉知,即是无心。何处更离见闻觉知别有无心。我今恐汝不解,一一为汝解说。令汝得悟真理,假如见终日见由为无见,见亦无心;闻终日闻由为无闻,闻亦无心;觉终日觉由为无觉,觉亦无心;知终日知由为无知,知亦无心;终日造作,作亦无作,作亦无心。故云见闻觉知总是无心。

问曰:若为能得知是无心?

答曰:汝但仔细推求看,心作何相貌?其心复可得,是心不是心。为复在内、为复在外、为复在中间?如是三处推求,觅心了不可得,乃至于一切处求觅亦不可得。当知即是无心。

问曰:和尚既云,一切处总是无心,即合无有罪福,何故众生轮回六趣生死不断?

答曰:众生迷妄,于无心中而妄生心,造种种业,妄执为有,足可致使轮回六趣,生死不断。譬有人,于暗中见杌为鬼,见绳为蛇,便生恐怖。众生妄执,亦复如是。于无心中,妄执有心,造种种业,而实无不轮回六趣。如是众生,若遇大善知识,教令坐禅,觉悟无心,一切业障,尽皆销灭,生死即断。譬如暗中,日光一照,而暗皆尽。若悟无心,一切罪灭亦复如是。

问曰:弟子愚昧,心犹未了,审一切处,六根所用者应?

答曰:语种种施为烦恼菩提,生死涅槃,定无心否?

答曰:定是无心,只为众生妄执有心,即有一切烦恼生死、菩提涅槃。若觉无心,即无一切烦恼生死涅槃。是故,如来为有心者说有生死,菩提对烦恼得名,涅槃者对生死得名,此皆对治之法。若无心可得,即烦恼菩提亦不可得,乃至生死涅槃亦不可得。

问曰:菩提涅槃既不可得,过去诸佛皆得菩提,此谓可乎?

答曰:但以世谛文字之言得,于真谛实无可得。故《维摩经》云:菩提者,不可以身得,不可以心得。又《金刚经》云:无有少法可得。诸佛如来,但以不可得而得。当知有心即一切有,无心一切无。

问曰:和尚既云,于一切处尽皆无心,木石亦无心,岂不同于木石乎?

答曰:而我无心,心不同木石。何以故?譬如天鼓,虽复无心,自然出种种妙法教化众生。又如如意珠,虽复无心,自然能作种种变现。而我无心,亦复如是。虽复无心,善能觉了诸法实相,具真般若,三身自在,应用无妨。故《宝积经》云:以无心意而现行,岂同木石乎?夫无心者,即真心也;真心者,即无心也。

问曰:今于心中,作若为修行?

答曰:但于一切事上觉了,无心即是修行,更不别有修行。故知无心即一切,寂灭即无心也。

弟子于是忽然大悟,始知心外无物,物外无心,举止动用,皆得自在,断诸疑网,更无挂碍。即起作礼,而铭无心,乃为颂曰:

心神向寂,无色无形。睹之不见,听之无声。似暗非暗,如明不明。舍之不灭,取之无生。大即廓周法界,小即毛竭不停。烦恼混之不浊,涅槃澄之不清。真如本无分别,能辩有情无情。收之一切不立,散之普遍含灵。妙神非知所测,正觅绝于修行。灭则不见其坏,生则不见其成。大道寂号无相,万像窈号无名。如斯运用自在,总是无心之精。

和尚又告曰:般若中,以无心般若而为最上,故《维摩经》云:以无心意无受行,而悉拙伏外道。又《法鼓经》:若知无心可得,法即不可得,罪福亦不可得,生死涅槃亦不可得,乃至一切尽不可得,不可得亦不可得。’”

乃为颂曰:昔日迷时为有心,尔时悟罢了无心。虽复无心能照用,照用常寂即如如。

重曰:无心无照亦无用,无照无用即无为。此是如来真法界,不同菩萨为辟支。言无心者,即无妄相心也。

又问:何名为太上?

答曰:太者大也,上者高也。穷高之妙理,故云太上也。又太者,通泰位也。三界之天虽有延康之寿,福尽是故终轮回六趣,未足为太。十住菩萨虽出离生死,而妙理未极,亦未为太。十住修心,妄有入无,又无其无有双遣,不忘中道,亦未为太。又忘中道,三处都尽,位皆妙觉。菩萨虽遣三处,不能无其所妙,亦未为太。又忘其妙,则佛道至极,则无所存。无存思则无思虑,兼妄心智永息,觉照俱尽,寂然无为,此名为太也。太是理极之义,上是无等色,故云太上,即之佛如来之别名也。

《菩提达摩大师无心论》卷终


無心論一卷
Wúxīn lùn
No. 2831 http://www.125a.net/book/T85/T85n2831/T85n2831_001.xhtml
釋菩提達摩製
夫至理無言。要假言而顯理。大道無相為接麁而見形。今且假立二人共談無心之論矣 弟子問和尚曰。有心無心 答曰。無心 問曰。既云無心。誰能見聞覺知。誰知無心 答曰。還是無心既見聞覺知。還是無心能知無心 問曰。既若無心。即合無有見聞覺知。云何得有見聞覺知 答曰。我雖無心能見能聞能覺能知 問曰。既能見聞覺知。即是有心。那得稱無 答曰。只是見聞覺知。即是無心。何處更離見聞覺知別有無心。我今恐汝不解。一一為汝解說。令汝得悟真理。假如見終日見由為無見。見亦無心。聞終日聞由為無聞。聞亦無心。覺終日覺由為無覺。覺亦無心。知終日知由為無知。知亦無心終日造作。作亦無作。作亦無心。故云見聞覺知總是無心 問曰。若為能得知是無心 答曰。汝但子細推求看。心作何相貌。其心復可得。是心不是心。為復在內為復在外為復在中間。如是三處推求覓心了不可得。乃至於一切處求覓亦不可得。當知即是無心 問曰。和尚既云一切處總是無心。即合無有罪福。何故眾生輪迴六聚生死不斷。
答曰。眾生迷妄。於無心中而妄生心。造種種業。妄執為有。足可致使輪迴六趣生死不斷。譬有人於暗中見杌為鬼見繩為蛇便生恐怖。眾生妄執亦復如是。於無心中妄執有心造種種業。而實無不輪迴六趣。如是眾生若遇大善知識教令坐禪覺悟無心。一切業障盡皆銷滅生死即斷。譬如暗中日光一照而暗皆盡。若悟無心。一切罪滅亦復如是 問曰。弟子愚昧心猶未了審。一切處六根所用者應 答曰。語種種施為煩惱菩提生死涅槃定無心否 答曰。定是無心。只為眾生妄執有心即有一切煩惱生死菩提涅槃。若覺無心即無一切煩惱生死涅槃。是故如來為有心者說有生死。菩提對煩惱得名。涅槃者對生死得名。此皆對治之法。若無心可得。即煩惱菩提亦不可得。乃至生死涅槃亦不可得 問曰。菩提涅槃既不可得。過去諸佛皆得菩提。此謂可乎 答曰。但以世諦文字之言得。於真諦實無可得。故維摩經云。菩提者不可以身得不可以心得。又金剛經云。無有少法可得。諸佛如來但以不可得而得。當知有心即一切有無心一切無 問曰。和尚既云於一切處盡皆無心。木石亦無心。豈不同於木石乎 答曰。而我無心心不同木石。何以故。譬如天鼓。雖復無心自然出種種妙法教化眾生。又如如意珠。雖復無心自然能作種種變現。而我無心亦復如是。雖復無心善能覺了諸法實相具真般若三身自在應用無妨。故寶積經云。以無心意而現行。豈同木石乎。夫無心者即真心也。真心者即無心也 問曰。今於心中作若為修行 答曰。但於一切事上覺了。無心即是修行。更不別有修行。故知無心即一切。寂滅即無心也 弟子於是忽然大悟。始知心外無物物外無心。舉止動用皆得自在。斷諸疑網更無罣礙。即起作禮。而銘無心乃為頌曰。
 心神向寂  無色無形  覩之不見
  聽之無聲  似暗非暗  如明不明
  捨之不滅  取之無生
 大即廓周法界  小即毛竭不停
  煩惱混之不濁  涅槃澄之不清
  真如本無分別  能辯有情無情
  收之一切不立  散之普遍含靈
  妙神非知所測 正覓絕於修行
  滅則不見其懷  生則不見其成
  大道寂號無相  萬像窈號無名
  如斯運用自在  總是無心之精
和尚又告曰。諸般若中以無心般若而為最上故維摩經云。以無心意無受行。而悉摧伏外道。又法鼓經。若知無心可得。法即不可得。罪福亦不可得。生死涅槃亦不可得。乃至一切盡不可得。不可得亦不可得。乃為頌曰。
 昔日迷時為有心  爾時悟罷了無心
  雖復無心能照用  照用常寂即如如
重曰。
 無心無照亦無用  無照無用即無為
  此是如來真法界  不同菩薩為辟支
言無心者即無妄相心也。
又問。何名為太上 答曰。太者大也。上者高也。窮高之妙理故云太上也。又太者通泰之位也。三界之天雖有延康之壽福盡。是故終輪迴六趣。未足為太。十住菩薩雖出離生死。而妙理未極。亦未為太。十住修心妄有入無。又無其無有雙遣不妄中道。亦未為太。又忘中道三處都盡。位皆妙覺。菩薩雖遣三處。不能無其所妙。亦未為太。又忘其妙則佛道至極。則無所存。無存思則無思慮。兼妄心智永息。覺照俱盡。寂然無為。此名為太也。太是理極之義。上是無等色。故云太上。即之佛如來之別名也。
無心論一卷


https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=29819

Krodha (Kyle Dixon) wrote:


http://melong.com/merging-true-self-dying/

The Melong resurrected this talk given by Elio in 2011, revised now in 2018 and republished.

A nice article in itself, but why Elio insists on the tirthika overtones, such as needlessly including “true self” in the title of this article which otherwise does not mention anything of that sort, is something I don’t get. Seems to be a continual theme in his contributions, which are otherwise quite nice.

This article was originally published 2 years prior to Elio’s Marvelous Primordial State which featured the controversial addition of a Ramana Maharshi quote as the epigraph. Elio later stated that this was perhaps a mistake, or at the very least something he should have reconsidered.

Why do I care? Because with Rinpoche passing, individuals like Elio are going to end up being spokespeople for Norbu Rinpoche’s organization and legacy.

ChNN was always very careful with his translation choices and what he decided to publish in written form. There was a clear and thorough attention to detail on his part.

Despite arguments that could be made in relation to the principle of bdag nyid chen po, the implementation of “true self” in such a cavalier manner — in the title of an article where it isn’t even necessary no less — is a bit reckless in my opinion.

While I should take Elio’s advice from this article, that ”...most of the time the opinions we hold on to with great attachment are useless.” I’m still marginally concerned and am airing my grievances.
 
 
 
Lopon Malcolm replied:
 
 
A couple of observations:

The term "true self" is nowhere used in any Indian or Tibetan Buddhist text, not even in gzhan stong texts.

Even in the Uttaratantra, where we find the Tibetan term, dam pa'i bdag in the discussion of ātmapāramitā, the Sanskrit text simply gives the term as ātma. The "dam pa" was added by Ngog Lotsawa to distinguish this "self," free from the proliferation of the self [i.e. existence] imputed by the hindus and nonself [i.e. nonexistence] imputed by śrāvakas, as a quality of the dharmakāya, — in other words, it is another way of saying the dharmakāya is free from extremes. This usage in the Uttaratantra comes from contrasting the impurity, nonidentity, suffering, and impermanence of compounded phenomena, with the purity, identity, bliss, and permanence of dharmakāya. But if someone should think this contextual usage of "self" with respect to dharmakāya means dharmakāya is an existent self, they have not understood anything of Mahāyāna at all, let alone Dzogchen, or even Buddhadharma for that matter.

With respect to the term bdag nyid chen po, it is a somewhat rare Dzogchen technical term, also found in the Guhyagarbha literature. Even so, its usage is very restricted. In his commentary on the Kun byed rgyal po, Khenpo Zhenphen Ozer glosses it as rang byung ye shes.
 
 
 

Kevin: What about "merging with" for attaining enlightenment?

Kevin... 
 
 
Malcolm: There is nothing with which to merge.

According to the teachings of Man ngag sde (but not sems sde or klong sde), at the time of death, the elements dissolve: earth into water, water into fire, fire into air, air into space, space into consciousness, consciousness into luminosity, and finally, luminosity dissolves into pristine consciousness. This happens to all beings at the time of death. The question is: will one recognize the sounds, lights and rays of one's own pristine consciousness in the bardo of dharmatā or not? If one does, liberation. If one does not, well, at worst one will be required to take rebirth in a nirmanakāya buddhafield, or at the very worst, one will be reborn a human being with a definite chance to meet and practice Dzogchen again.
Greg Goode:

Steve,  Madhyamika interprets the "thingness" gestalt as a type conception, a way of reacting or conceptualizing words or concepts or sensations, as if there were existence involved.  Maybe some words seem to invite this kind of reifying conceptualization more than others - we usually feel that more physical-sounding, more concrete words entail a more independent kind of existence.  But Madhyamika would refute this kind of existence across the board.

Does "dependent arising" require there is (A) something dependent that arises, and (B) something that A is dependent on?   Even though Madhyamika itself refutes this?

Not according to Madhyamika itself.  When A is said to be dependent, the meaning is that is is not INdependent.  It is not self-sufficient, it has no essence or true nature.

What does "dependent" mean?  Dependence is usually broken down into three types.  Phenomenon A relies on pieces and parts, on conditions, and on conceptual designation.

But none of these things (pieces + parts, conditions, conceptual designation) is an inherent, self-standing thing.  Each of these things itself dependent.

This kind of dependency is not linear, tracing back to an original first cause or universal stopping point.  It's more like a web of dependencies.  It's not arborial, it's rhizomatic.


----

Years ago:


Greg Goode Different types of dependency: several people have given examples, and here's another one.

A table..

1. A table depends on legs, a top, screws and braces (parts)
2. A table depends on being constructed, and trees, and sun and air, and builders (causes and conditions).
3. A table depends on being conceptualized and designated as a table.

This is the subtle one. Let's say you see a leg and a top. Do you see a backrest? No, so you won't call this a chair. The designation goes like this - you see some forms, and make them out as legs and a top. You give those forms the name, label, designation of "table."

This is subtle because the table is not exactly equal to the parts. The table cannot equal the parts, because then, if the parts change, the parts would be different, and so, following the equation, the table would have to change. Another reason the equality cannot hold is that there are many parts and only one table. The table cannot equal the *collection* of parts, because if the parts change, or if a leg gets broken off, or swapped out, then the collection changes. So the table would have to be a different table.

But we really don't want to say that the table would be different just because the parts are different. We want to somehow say that the table can remain relatively stable as the same table, even if the parts change, or get painted, etc.

And at the same time, we cannot find a truly existent, unchanging table behind or within the parts. If we did find such a truly existent table, then we wouldn't need to designate the parts as a table. But we do. It makes no sense that the table would really be a table if no one had ever in history designated anything as a table.

So we allow ourselves to end up saying, in a loose, conventional way, that the table depends on the parts, but is not the parts. It's a table in name only. this kind of naming is the designation-aspect of the dependency.

And this loose, conventional approach to tables and selves and life and all things is the experience of emptiness. It's a free, flexible, sweetly joyful, open-hearted way of life....
·  https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-ash4/c25.0.81.81/s64x64/252231_1002029915278_1941483569_s.jpg
John Tan And also functionality. A Chariot continues to function even with some of its parts missing. Dependencies based on parts, causes and conditions, relations, functions and imputations.