8th Translation of One Thought Traveller's articles :)


(2012-03-29 09:34:55)

At That Place of No-Form, It is Calm and Steady.


Question: What is the relation between True Mind and False Mind? What characteristics/nature does True Mind have, or what kind of functions does the True Mind have?


1. No matter True or False Mind, anyway all men only have one mind. Discriminating between true and false is a form of delusional thinking.


2. What is False Mind? Whatever thought movements, thinking this and that, is it; Where is True Mind? Whatever you are able to find are false mind, (you) do not see a trace of it.


3. Apart from false mind there is no independent true mind. False mind and true mind are spoken in dependence on each other, for the purpose of removing sentient beings’ doubts, the various Buddhas and Bodhisattvas established false names, established the True/Real to extinguish the False, teaching people about the tranquil liberation.


4. Mind does not reside at any spot of the body and mind, yet it also isn’t separate from any spot of it. Amidst the physical body, even a cell as tiny as a micro-dust, that also has awareness; in the false mind, even if a thought or feeling is shaped like tracelessness (formless?), the mind is still able to know.


5. Mind does not have any image, whatever that can be felt, whatever/whether the brilliance, movement, quiescence, large or small, all-pervasiveness etc, are not its image.


6. All dharmas are without image, mind is also likewise; all dharmas are dependently arisen, mind is not otherwise.


7. All seeing, hearing, perceiving and knowing, are the functions of True Mind; all thoughts and movements are the revelations of false mind.


8. Do not establish True Mind as the Master, True Mind is not True/Real; do not discard the false mind as slave, False Mind is the True Mind.


9. No matter what True Mind is, or what it is called or what is it like, it is not apart from the five aggregates; apart from the five aggregates there is nothing that could be called mind – regardless whether it is True Mind or False Mind.


10. Do not care about True Mind/False Mind, but go and realize that all dharmas are empty of self, all person/subject are empty of self, and at the no-self of all dharmas, (attain) Nirvana quiescence.


11.  Verify the three dharma seals, understand the marvelous mind of Buddha; at that place of no-form, it is calm and steady.



Today I wrote in Dharma Connection, "Citta (Mind) is not an entity but a process, and does not exist apart from the aggregates, nor does it exist apart from dependent origination (be it the afflicted twelve links of D.O. or the general D.O. that applies to both tainted and untainted experience). There is no citta apart from specific mental experience, and although mind is primordially pure this is only actualized by the insight of anatta since the sense of self would prevent the direct seeing of what mind actually is in its direct immediacy and purity."

Venerable Hui-Feng nicely explained the difference between the view of "atman" and "mindstream" (as taught by Buddha) in the Dharmawheel forum:

"In short:

"self" = "atman" / "pudgala" / "purisa" / etc.
--> permanent, blissful, autonomous entity, totally unaffected by any conditioned phenomena

"mind" = "citta" / "manas" / "vijnana" / etc.
--> stream of momentarily arising and ceasing states of consciousness, thus not an entity, each of which is conditioned by sense organ, sense object and preceding mental states

Neither are material.

That's a brief overview, lot's of things to nit pick at, but otherwise it'll require a 1000 page monograph to make everyone happy.

You'll need to study up on "dependent origination" (pratitya-samutpada) to get into any depth to answer your questions."


V. said, "I don't really resonate with True Mind and False Mind ... it is a little bit confusing when he is saying
"All seeing, hearing, perceiving and knowing, are the functions of True Mind; all thoughts and movements are the revelations of false mind."

If one studies the mind sees it is not like that... But this is my perception, i don't agree with diving the mind in "true" and "false"...."

I replied, "The point though, is that true mind and false mind are just convenient conventional designations, in the end "False Mind is the True Mind.", true mind is not real (it is empty of self or substance), and true mind is not other than dependently originated aggregates."

7th Translation of One Thought Traveller's articles :)



(2012-03-30 13:14:57)


The Noble Eightfold Path: Direct Path for Departing from Illusory Entanglements
(2012-03-30 13:14:57)

Question: The Taoists seems to emphasize on sitting meditation in order to cultivate the energy channels, forming the elixir, and in this way one progresses to higher levels. ** Guru also emphasizes very much that one must have enough energy before one could let the mind consciousness come out, and this is only the first step of cultivation. However the school of Zen emphasizes on directly pointing out Mind and becoming Buddha, does this leap over the process of energy channels, energy, forming the elixir? Or does this process naturally exists?


阎浮提众生,根性不同,修同一 名相法门,所修不同。为什么呢?因为对同一概念理解不同。例如,神识——有人是修神识的,那么,什么是神识?如何修?神识是一个独立的事物,还是并无真 体、仅是诸缘和合假影?神识能出能入、能来能去吗?在做有关神识的修行之前,若不先了解这些问题,那么修行将陷入不正确的作为。

1. The sentient beings of Jambudvipa (the southern continent in Indian cosmology – where we’re at) have varying root faculties. Although we may practice a single dharma door in name, what one cultivates are different. Why is this so? This is because what we understand with regards to a single concept are different. For example, mind-consciousness – some people are cultivating mind-consciousness, then, what is mind-consciousness? How do we cultivate it? Is mind-consciousness an independent thing, or is it without any real substance and purely an illusory appearance out of the coming together of various conditions? Can mind-consciousness go out and come in, can it come and go? Before cultivating anything with relation to the mind-consciousness, if we do not understand these issues, our cultivation will sink into incorrect action.

神识说白了就是意识——不管六 识七识八识,还是一二三四五识。因为我们的意识能变能现,神通无比,故称神,曰为神识。那么,如果神识就是意识,意识是修出来的吗?很显然,你修不修,它 就在那里。一切万法,不假修行,皆在彼处,法住法位。所谓修行,只是认出,认出诸法实相,解脱它对你的束缚,获取人生自由的。若你不能认识到这点,那么修 行反倒变成了缠缚。你修什么物,什么物就变成你的主,而你变成了它的奴隶;你修什么法,什么法是了你的主人,而你成了它的家奴。

The spirit-consciousness spoken plainly is the mind-consciousness – no matter whether it is the sixth consciousness, or seventh consciousness or the eighth consciousness, or the first, second, third, fourth and fifth consciousness. Because our mind-consciousness
can transform and manifest, its spiritual abilities are unparalleled, therefore it is called “spirit/god/divine”, therefore it is known as “spirit/god/divine consciousness”. Therefore, if this spirit-consciousness is mind-consciousness, is the mind-consciousness something that is the result of cultivation? Very evidently, regardless of whether you are cultivating or not cultivating, it is there. All ten thousand dharmas, without contrived practices, are at that place, the dharmas abide in their dharma position. Whenever you cultivate anything, that thing becomes your master, and you become its slave; no matter what dharma you cultivate, that dharma becomes your master, and you become its family bondservant.

所以,了解事物的实相,是真正 的修行。除此之外,皆是往头脑的深处去而不是往外来;如此,你又将卷入自己头脑创造的新故事了。在故事中千修万修,即使有所境界,也是虚假,不得解脱,最 终是枉费功夫;那样,如同猫在和自己造就的影子玩一样。神识不用你修,它本在那里。它不出不入,不来不去。看起来的出入来去,皆是幻影。那“出”去的肯定 是幻象,并且连那“出”也是假象。

Therefore, understanding the truth/reality of all things, is the true/correct practice. Anything else other than this is to walk into the deep reaches of the brain (i.e. entering into discursive thoughts) and not coming out of it; thereupon, you will again be drawn into the brain’s newly created stories.

意识如同镜子,镜像于镜子怎么 能出能入呢?镜子里有像,并不是有像“飞入”了镜子;镜子中无像,也并不是像又从镜子里“飞走”了。而镜子本身,也并无来去。因此,我们的神识没有个来 去。如果你认真深观的话,你会认识到,神识并没有独立的自体,诸缘和合才有神识。因为本没有独立的神识存在,所以谈论神识来去生灭等,皆成戏论了。

Mind-consciousness is just like a mirror, how can the reflection and the mirror be able to leave or enter? When the mirror has reflections, it is not that the reflection “flew into” the mirror; when the mirror does not have reflection, it is not the case that the reflection “flew out” from the mirror. As for the mirror itself, there is also no coming nor going. Therefore, our spirit/mind-consciousness does not have a coming or going. If you seriously contemplate, you will realize that spirit/mind-consciousness does not have any independent self-substance, there is spirit/mind-consciousness only when there is the coming together of conditions. Because there is originally no existence of an independent spirit/mind-consciousness, therefore discussing the coming and going, arising and cessation of spirit/mind-consciousness is simply mental proliferation.


When I “practice” spirit/mind-consciousness, firstly it is to recognise that spirit/mind-consciousness is dependently arisen and empty in nature, secondly it is to distinguish pure consciousness from defiled consciousness, and rest in the ever undefiled pure consciousness, upon rising up in the early morning from our sleep, during walking, standing, sitting and sleeping, within that non-defilement one merges with the brilliance and becomes one with the dust. This has nothing to do with body, energy, or dantien. At the place of the body, there is no body, in the midst of energy there is no energy, only true mind is the true dantien, I have deep affinity in this.


再说说身体。我以总相智,观身 体及世间万物,不见身体及万物,只见微尘;再观之,连微尘相也不见。我们的身体,以菩萨眼观之,是由无数无量微尘、极微尘,经由无数无量缘起、再缘起和合 而成。六地以上菩萨观之,只见微尘不见身体;再以甚深眼观之,微尘相也没有,唯有空相,唯识所显。

Let’s talk about the body. When I, with the wisdom that correctly understands the essence of the universe, contemplate/observe the body and the ten thousand things in the world, I do not conceive of a body or various ten thousand things, I only see micro-dust; upon further contemplation/observing, I also stop conceiving of the appearance of micro-dust. Our body when viewed with the eye of the Bodhisattva, is the result of countless and limitless dependent arising and formed in the aggregation of dependent origination through countless and limitless micro-dusts. The view of the Bodhisattva of the sixth bhumi and above, sees only micro-dusts but does not conceive of a body; and with further deep contemplation, there is not even the micro-dusts appearance, there is only empty-appearance, appearing due to consciousness only.


If we can understand all these, we shall know what exactly are those energy channels, energy, dantien etc. Speaking from truth’s perspective, the body is ungraspable/not-obtainable, let alone the other things that arise dependent on the body? If you think the body is really existent, and therefore practice based on that body (not that you aren’t taking care of it), then after a thousand births and ten thousand lifetimes, your ordinary mind will only be mutually entwined, unable to depart from birth and death.

于之解脱修行,身体不可执,意 识不可执。为什么呢?一、从实相法上讲,它们皆无常,它们皆无我。执著无常终将败坏之物,并在其之上要这要那,必将枉费功夫;如同在沙堡上雕龙雕马,并要 使它们常住一样。执无我之体而为实有,并就此谈这论那,必如玩笑;如同讲说石女子的儿子,高矮、胖瘦、大小一样。二、你若执著那些事物,决定不能完全解 脱。

As for liberation and practice, the body cannot be grasped, mind-consciousness cannot be grasped. Why is this? 1) From the perspective of the dharma of truth, they are all impermanent, they are all empty of self. Attaching to phenomena that are impermanent and eventually coming into decline, and desiring this and that over it, is surely a waste of time and energy; just like carving dragons and horses on sandcastles and wanting them to abide permanently. Attaching to what is without substance of self as really existing, and discussing this and that, is just like playing a joke; it is just like saying the son of a barren (stone) woman is tall or short, fat or thin, big or small. 2) If you attach to those events and phenomena, you will surely not be able to be completely liberated.


If you want to practice in that way, practising body, practising spirit, cultivating mind and
cultivating consciousness, that would be like the precious pearl being at the south, yet walking towards the north, in the end there will be no result. Therefore, go and realize the truth of all dharmas, that is the key point about practice.




Among all the practices and liberation, the teaching method of the Zen school is the quickest and cleanest, it is liked by many people with superior wisdom and sharp faculties. For liberating from birth and death, it is indeed a direct/straight path. The Zen school’s teaching method is often described as: “Directly pointing to Mind, realizing one’s nature and attaining Buddhahood.”

那么,禅德们所指向的人心是什么呢?所见到的性又是何物呢?以我此时见,大德们所指的人心是指“不动心”。不动心,又名“真心”、“直心”、“无心之心”、 “觉心”、“菩提心”、 “净识”、“净土”、“大圆镜智”等。为什么要认出它呢?认出它,足以出离百千万劫亿的生灭苦恼。如果有修行者能够认出它,这已经不容易了;若再能常安于它,将得到巨大的利益。但即使是这颗心,也不能执著它;执著它,仍然不能彻底出离生死。还必须进一步见性,见什么性呢?

In that case, what is the “Mind” that the virtuous people of Zen are talking about? What is the “nature” that they have realized? Based on what I know now, the Mind that great virtuous men were pointing to is “unmoving mind”. Unmoving mind, is also called “True Mind”, “Straight/Direct Mind”, “The Mind of No-Mind”, “Awareness Mind”, “Bodhi Mind”, “Pure Consciousness”, “Pure Land”, “The Great Perfect Mirror Wisdom” etc. Why should we recognise it? Recognizing it is enough to depart from the billions of kalpas of arising and ceasing suffering. If a practitioner is able to recognise it, this is already not easy; if one is further able to constantly abide in it, one will obtain enormous benefits. However even this mind should not be attached to, if we are attached to it, we will still be unable to thoroughly leave behind birth and death. One still needs to go a further step and realize one’s nature, what nature is to be realized?


Realize that all dharmas are without self-nature. If our Minds are being seen as objects similar to tables, stools, teacups etc, then it is a bodiless, gleaming and shining divine lamp. Even though recognising this divine lamp will result in enormous benefits, still it should not be attached to. This is because: 1) It is not the ultimate truth of all things, its appearance does not represent the truth of all phenomena, or in other words it is not the truth of all phenomena itself; 2) Attaching to it as having self-nature would certainly beckon upon
the judge of birth and death – the void of annihilation. Therefore, this mind cannot be attached to, if there are attachments there will be suffering. When all minds are not attached to, only then can one come out of birth and death.


When a practitioner recognises this gleaming and shining true mind, it is still actually not even attaining to the fourth bhumi of the Bodhisattva (stage). It is only at the third bhumi/ground – the ground of illuminating light. (translator’s note: this is just one of the many subjective interpretations of the bodhisattva bhumis, in general the first bhumi is already said to have realized twofold emptiness, and this author also posted a different and contradictory scheme elsewhere in which the first bhumi realizes firstfold emptiness and the sixth bhumi realizes secondfold emptiness) This is because you have not touched the no-self of person/subjective self. When one reaches the fourth bhumi/ground, when one then truly realizes the no-self of person/subject, only then will one be able to let go of this true-mind. If we use a four storey building as an analogy to the Buddhist system: if you recognise that all person/subject is empty of self, you have reached the first level of the Buddha-building, if you realize that all dharmas are empty of self, you have reached the second level of the Buddha-building; if you further realize that, although all dharmas are empty they are not nothing/void, although appearing they are without any reality (nature/substance) – you are not attached to presence and absence, being in accord with conditions without obstructions, living out that understanding, then you have arrived at the third level; when you pass through these three stages, then in the next stage, you can enter the hall of the patriarchs, enter into the room of the abbot, sit on the seat of the Tathagata (Buddha), and become the great abbot of the triple worlds, men and gods.


Seeing that all dharmas are without self-nature is to realize the nature (of all things). One who is able to realize the nature, is to see the Buddha. If we can act out (actualize/live out that understanding?) of the no self-nature of all dharmas (
not empty, not not-empty), that is to become a Buddha. Pointing directly to Mind, the great virtuous people are talking about presence; realizing the nature and becoming Buddha, the patriarchs are showing emptiness. Displaying emptiness and displaying presence, not skewing and not leaning, is the complete/perfect teaching of Buddha, the truth/reality is just so.




If all practitioners can correctly practice throughout the way – right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration, etc, entering directly into the room of the Tathagata (Buddha), there will surely be no doubts that one will become Buddha and attain liberation. Otherwise, if we do not (practice) “right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration” etc, one will be placed at (cling to?) the body, mind consciousness, or even energy channels, energy, dantien etc – various illusory tree branches and leaves. Then, when will there come a time for the liberation from birth and death?


If we practice the Buddha’s right view and teachings, rely on the Buddha’s noble eightfold path and act accordingly, practicing and liberation is a straight and direct path. If we do not do so, one will surely twine around (go around in bends, like a vine entwining a tree), and if one desires to leave the entanglements, vines and cages, it is not an easy thing. All those who truly wishes to be liberated, should listen to the teachings of the Buddha, make use of right view to smoke out the mind of ignorance, act according to what the Buddha said, depart from birth and death and the sea of suffering, transcending the triple worlds and six realms. That achievement can be seen/longed for, and at the end of the road is heaven, when realizing reality it is liberation.


Having been entwined for ten thousand years, liberation is in an instant, this is the true “dying while sitting or standing”. Those who can truly drop while sitting and standing, from then on there is no birth nor cessation, the lifespan is equal to the infinite-life Buddha (Amitabha), this is true without falsity. The practitioner goes to the no-self of all dharmas, quiescent Nirvana. Ceasing worldly views, all Buddhas together appear in front. (Namo Amitabha Buddha!)



I particularly liked part 3. Told Thusness about it two weeks ago. Thusness has often mentioned ever since 2004/2005 when I first knew him that, "realizing mind is not the same as seeing nature".



Well written.

There was once I wrote about
this before, any idea where was it?


(12:31 AM) Thusness: U must also remember that 见证真心,不明空性,只是明心,并未见性 (Realizing true mind, and not understanding its empty nature, this is only realizing mind, but not seeing nature)
(12:38 AM) Thusness: 明蕴即心,即是明心 (Understanding that the aggregates are Mind, that is to understand Mind)
(12:39 AM) Thusness: 蕴随缘现,即是见性 (The aggregates manifest according to conditions, this is to see its nature)


Should be 见蘊明心 (Seeing aggregates and realizing Mind)


Geoff (Dharmawheel's Jnana) said: "
Mind (sems) can be known. It's a mere clarity and awareness (gsal rig). And it can be known through direct perception as already mentioned here, and by 5heaps here.

The nature of the mind (sems nyid) can also be known. It is recognized as the inseparability of this cognitive clarity and emptiness."
One Thought Traveller also said,


"True Mind is not apart from conditions, departing from conditions no mind manifests. It is not created by causes and conditions, it is not alternate with conditions."

我们能够体验到的觉相——心 光,不离意识造作。若无清醒意识,即无此心此光。此心光觉相是一种净识,有善知识称它为真心,把它当作真我,作最终的归依。莫认此事。此光明心相亦是报化 佛,非法身佛。诸菩萨集居此地,求佛作祖者莫住此处。万法皆依缘起,有相无相皆无自性。本性无我,莫立我义。如此知见,方能究竟涅槃。若非如此,滞于幻化 之地。

"The Awareness-form that we are able to experience - the luminosity of mind, isn't separate from the activity of mind-consciousness. If there is no awake mental-consciousness, there will not be such mind or such brilliance. Such luminosity of mind and awareness-form is a form of pure consciousness, there are good spiritual advisors that treat it as True Mind and treat it as True Self, making it into an ultimate refuge. We should not be mistaken about this matter. This appearance of luminous mind is the Sambhogakaya Buddha, it is not the Dharmakaya Buddha. The Bodhisattva class abide in such ground, those who wish to become Buddhas and patriarches should not abide in such a place. All dharmas arise being supported by conditions, whether there is appearance or no appearance there is no self-nature. Our fundamental nature is empty of self, do not establish a view of self. With such a view, one will be able to attain ultimate Nirvana. Were it not so, one will remain stagnant in the ground of unreal illusions."


(Tu-shun (557-640), a specialist in the Hua-yen (Avatamsaka) Austra, became the first patriarch of the Hua-yen school of Chinese Buddhism. He is remembered as a monk with exceptional healing abilities who lived close to the peasants. Translation by Thomas Cleary)

Question: Things being thus, what about knowledge?

Answer: Knowledge accords with things, being in one and the same realm, made by conditions, tacitly conjoining, without rejecting anything, suddenly appearing, yet not without before and after. Therefore the sutra says, “The sphere of the universal eye, the pure body, I now will expound; let people listen carefully.” By way of explanation, the “universal eye” is the union of knowledge and reality, all at once revealing many things. This makes it clear that reality is known to the knowledge of the universal eye only and is not the sphere of any other knowledge. The “sphere” means things. This illustrates how the many things interpenetrate like the realm of Indra’s net of jewels – multiplied and remultiplied ad infinitum. The pure body illustrates how all things, as mentioned before, simultaneously enter each other. Ends and beginnings, being collectively formed by conditional origination, are impossible to trace to a basis – the seeing mind has nothing to rest on.

Now the celestial jewel net of Kanishka, or Indra, Emperor of Gods, is called the net of Indra. This imperial net is made all of jewels: because the jewels are clear, they reflect each other’s images, appearing in each other’s reflections upon reflections, ad infinitum, all appearing at once in one jewel, and in each one it is so – ultimately there is no going or coming. 

Now for the moment let us turn to the southwest direction and pick a jewel and check it. This jewel can show the reflections of all the jewels all at once – and just as this is so of this jewel, so it is of every other jewel: the reflection is multiplifed and remultiplifed over and over endlessly. These infinitely multiplying jewel reflections are all in one jewel and show clearly – the others do not hinder this. If you sit in one jewel, then you are sitting in all the jewels too. And the reverse applies to the totality if you follow the same reasoning. Since in one jewel you go into all the jewels without leaving this one jewel, so in all jewels you enter one jewel without leaving this one jewel.

Question: If you say that one enters all the jewels in one jewel without ever leaving this one jewel, how is it possible to enter all the jewels?

Answer: It is precisely by not leaving this one jewel that you can enter all the jewels. If you left this one jewel to enter all the jewels, you couldn’t enter all the jewels. Why? Because outside this jewel there are no separate jewels.

Question: If there are no jewels outside this one jewel, then this net is made of one jewel. How can you say then that it’s made of many jewels tied together?

Answer: It is precisely because there is only one jewel that many can be joined to form a net. Why? Because this one jewel alone forms the net – that is, if you take away this jewel there will be no net.

Question: If there is only one jewel, how can you speak of tying it into a net?

Answer: Tying many jewels to form a net is itself just one jewel. Why? “One” is the aspect of totality, containing the many in its formation. Since all would not exist if there were not one, this net is therefore made by one jewel. The all entering the one can be known by thinking about it in this way.

Question: Although the jewel in the southwest contains all the jewels in the ten directions completely, without remainder, there are jewels in every direction. How can you say then that the net is made of just one jewel?

Answer: All the jewels in the ten directions are in totality the one jewel of the southwest. Why? The jewel in the southwest is all the jewels of the ten directions. If you don’t believe that one jewel in the southwest is all the jewels in the ten directions, just put a dot on the jewel in the south-west. When one jewel is dotted, there are dots on all the jewels in all directions. Since there are dots on all the jewels in the ten directions, we know that all the jewels are one jewel. If anyone says that all the jewels in the ten directions are not one jewel in the southwest, could it be that one person simultaneously put dots on all the jewels in the ten directions? Even allowing the universal dotting of all the jewels in the ten directions, they are just one jewel. Since it is thus, using this one as beginning, the same is so when taking others first – multiplied over and over boundlessly, each dot is the same. It is obscure and hard to fathom: when one is complete, all is done. Such a subtle metaphor is applied to things to help us think about them, but things are not so; a simile is the same as not a simile – they resemble each other in a way, so we use it to speak of. What does this mean? These jewels only have their reflected images containing and entering each other – their substances are separate. Things are not like this, because their whole substance merges completely. The book on natural origination in the Hua-yen Sutrasays, “In order to benefit sentient beings and make them all understand, nonsimiles are used to illustrate real truth. Such a subtle teaching as this is hard to hear even in immeasurable eons; only those with perseverance and wisdom can hear of the matrix of the issue of thusness.” The sutra says, “Nonsimiles are used as similes. Those who practice should think of this in accord with the similes.”

Vairocana Buddha’s past practices
Made oceans of Buddha-fields all pure.
Immeasurable, innumerable, boundless,
He freely permeates all places.
The reality-body of the Buddha is inconceivable;
Formless, signless, without comparison,
It manifests material forms for the sake of beings.
In the ten directions they receive its teaching,
Nowhere not manifest.
In the atoms of all Buddha-fields
Vairocana manifests self-subsistent power,
Promising the thundering sound of the ocean of Buddhahood
To tame all the species of sentient beings.

Sixth translation. :)

(2012-03-27 09:46:55)

Original text:


(2012-03-27 09:46:55)

No Self: One of Reality’s Marvelous Truths


Question: What is “no self”? How do we accomplish “no self”?  Is being in harmony with the world a kind of state of “no self”? How about forgetting self? People often say that “a job of working hard, forgetting self”, the spirit of forgetting self, etc, are these a kind of expression of no self?

1.    No Self is a fact/truth, it does not require a “how” to accomplish it, it only requires you to discover it.

2.    No Self and forgetting self bears no relations, (No Self) bears no relation with being in harmony or in disharmony with the world. No Self is the truth of all things.

3.    All things do not have self-nature - it neither has self-substance nor a self-form, it is purely a false designation/name; however it also does not mean that nothing exists. That is the meaning of “no self”.

4.    As for the no-self of dharma, one could witness it through deeply contemplating things as they really are; and as for the no-self of person (subject), one could witness it through deep contemplation, and one could also verify it through practicing awareness/mindfulness.

5.    No-Self and the experience of No-Self is not the result of conjecture while sitting, nor is it the result of deeply thinking and engaging in logical reasoning, rather it is the result of observing/examining things as they really are.

6.    The no-self of all dharmas (things) is a rational fact. The no-self of all dharmas can be categorized as the no-self of person and the no-self of dharma.

7.    The myriads of things do not have self-nature (all dharmas are without self), it is one of the three dharma seals, and all buddhas of the three times (past, present and future) bear witness to it.

8.    Past, present, future, all bodhisattvas that contemplate/observes freedom, while deeply contemplating on the Prajnparamita, could witness it.

9.    “The five aggregates are empty”, “All dharmas are empty appearances”, etc, are other ways of expressing no-self. “Five aggregates are empty” does not mean emptying the five aggregates, “all dharmas are empty appearance” does not mean there isn’t any dharmas, rather it means the myriad dharmas are empty in nature, are empty in essence.

10.     All practitioners that proceeded to verify the Prajnaparamita Heart Sutra, by the verification of the Prajnparamita Heart Sutra they could thereby know the truth of “no-self”!

11.    The marvellous principle of no-self is one of the truths of all dharmas, it is extremely subtle, one should go and realize and actualize it!
Someone asked what Geoff might have meant with: "Or are “seer,” “sees,” and “seen,” just three conceptual labels applied to this experience in which the three parts are entirely interdependent?" - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2012/09/great-resource-of-buddhas-teachings.html

I said, based on the seen and the conventional designation of the seen, does seeing have that conventional designation, or a seer, as there is no seeing without the seen or a seer. They are three interdependently arisen conventional designations applied to this experience but without being actual and inherently existing realities or entities.

I was also reminded of what Thusness wrote.

The knowing is precisely the known and vice versa.
Only in ignorance does the knowing appear to co-locate with the known.
If both are realized as mere conventions that arise in dependence of the other,
Then the middle way that severs the extremes can be understood.