A discussion with a friend in TheTaoBums, who himself has pretty deep insights.

Hi,

Sorry for the slow reply... Didn't really have much time last week - long shifts on duty in operations on an island and lack access to internet apart from my phone. (well I am still only using my phone now but have more time to reply). I'm back from the operation late saturday and just fired 115 rounds last night in a machine gun live firing exercise (from one hill to another hill with night vision, kinda fun). Not that I like military life in general tho - we are just told to "suck up" the two years of national service in Singapore. (It does suck to have your freedom taken away and have to stay in camp every weekday)

There are different understandings about unborn... Related to different realisations.

At the I AM (realization of luminosity but inherent and dualistic) and substantial nondual (nondual but inherent) level, unborn is understood in terms of an unchanging, inherent, birthless and deathless awareness. At this point, we discover ourselves as an all-pervading presence not bounded by the birth and death of this body-mind. As an analogy, you used to think you are one of the wave arising and subsiding in the ocean, but now you realize you are the whole ocean. Or you used to think you are the drop of water, until that drop of water sinks into the ocean and you can no longer find a separate identity or drop of water apart from the entire ocean. Or the outbreathe merges with the air in the environment, the air in the vase becomes inseparable from the air of the whole world when the vase breaks. These analogies should give you a sense of the 'all-pervadingness' of Pure Presence, and how 'deathlessness' is experienced when the sense of 'individuality' is overcome in the discovery of one's true identity as this all-pervading Presence. At this level of insight, the transience (the birth and death of waves on the ocean) in contrast is understood to be illusory, unlike the real, absolute unchanging awareness (the deathless oceanic Presence)... it should be understood that the lack of individual identity in the all-pervading Presence is not to be understood as the no-self of Anatta which will be explained further on.

Even though it might be understood that the unchanging awareness is inseperable from illusory, transient experiences (nonduality of subject and object). This is understanding unborn from an inherent (albeit nondual) perspective. This is also the understanding of advaita vedanta (though a common understanding among some zennists, shentongpas, etc). This is understanding things from the substantialist non-dual point of view.

Second is unborn from the perspective of anatta... Due to the insight of anatta it is seen that there is no inherent self anywhere, no subject, no substantiality to any phenomena including a superawareness of sorts... Seeing is the seen, scenery sees! Awareness is realized to simply be a label collating the various transient experiences in the same way that the word weather is a label collating the various diverse, dynamic and ungraspable manifestations like clouds, rain, lightning, wind, etc. Similarly awareness is not an unchanging essence located anywhere but is simply the self-luminous transient manifestations.

So how is this anatta linked to unborn if there is no unchanging awareness? It is the absence of a self at the center that links and persists throughout experience - walking from point A to point Z, there is no sense that there is a self unchanged throughout point A to point Z - instead, experiences are experienced as disjoint, unsupported, self-releasing and spontaneous. In other words, point A is point A complete in itself, same goes to point B, C, to Z.

Do take note that experience is effortlessly and implicitly non-dual, just a refinement of 'view' after this new found experience and realization. That is, from this implicitly and effortlessly non-dual experience and without having the need to reify and rely on a 'source', how is 'unborn' understood?

If we keep on penetrating this, it will come a time that 'boom' we suddenly realized that why is there a need to do so? Why is the relying of the Source so persistent? It is because we have relied on a wrong view despite the right experience.

Once the willingness to let go of the 'wrong dualistic and inherent view' arose, it suddenly it became clear that all along I am still unknowingly relying on 'wrong view'. For example, seeing the same 'mind' being transformed into the transience manifestation.

In actuality there is in seeing just the seen, no seer, in hearing just sounds, no hearer. How is this deathless if there is just manifestation? Just as Zen Master Dogen puts it: firewood does not turn into ashes, firewood abides in the phenomenal expression of firewood while ash abides in the phenomenal expression of ash, while at the same time ash contains firewood, firewood contains ash (all is the manifestation of the interdependent universe as if the entire universe is coming together to give rise to this experience and thus all is contained in one single expression).

The similar principle applies not just to firewood and ash but to everything else: for example you do not say summer turns into autumn and autumn turns into winter - summer is summer, autumn is autumn, distinct and complete in itself yet each instance of existence time contains the past, present and future in it. So the same applies to birth and death - birth does not turn into death as birth is the phenomenal expression of birth and death is the phenomenal expression of death - they are interdependent yet disjoint, unsupported, complete. Accordingly, birth is no-birth and death is no-death... Since each moment is not really a starting point or ending point for a entity - without the illusion and reference of a self-entity - every moment is simply a complete manifestation of itself. And every manifestation does not leave traces: they are disjoint, unsupported and self-releases upon inception. This wasn't dogen's exact words but I think the gist is there, you should read dogen's genjokoan which I posted in my blog.

Lastly is understanding the unborn dharma from the perspective of shunyata. This perspective should complement with the perspective of anatta for true deep experiential insight (without realization of anatta, there will still be clinging to a base, ground, somewhere).

I should say the realization of the unborn dharma (from shunyata) arose the day after you sent me this PM - the details of which can be found in the last ten to twenty pages of my ebook - new materials just added on sunday, in a new chapter called "shunyata". The realization arose spontaneously while simultaneously reading and contemplating an article from a highly experienced mahamudra practitioner/blogger, Chodpa, owner of the blog luminous emptiness.

The realization of unborn from the perspective of emptiness is the realization that everything experienced - thoughts and sensate perceptions are utterly unlocatable, ungraspable, empty. In investigation where did thought arise from, where is thought currently located, and where will thought go to, it is discovered that thoughts are indeed like a magician's trick! No source can be located, no destination can be found, and the thought is located nowhere at all - it is unfindable, ungraspable... Yet "it" magically and vividly appears! Out of nowhere, in nowhere, to nowhere, dependently originated and empty... A magical apparition appears, vividly luminously yet empty. When this is seen, there is an amazement, wonder, and great bliss arising out of direct cognition of the magic of empty luminosity. So how is this linked to unborn? It is realized that everything is literally an appearance, a display, a function, and this display is nowhere inherent or located anywhere - so like a dream, like a tv show, characters of the show may vividly appear to suffer birth and death and yet we know it is simply a show - it's undeniably there (vividly appearing) yet it's not really there. It has no actual birth, death, place of origin, place of abidance, place of destination, ground, core, substance.

However in the insight of emptiness, this is different from substantial nonduality as there is no referencing of the manifestations and appearances as being part of an unchanging awareness. Awareness is the unborn display - not the display is appearing in/as an unborn, unchanging Awareness. This is the difference between unborn understood from a nondual and noninherent view, and unborn understood from a nondual but inherent view. Even though it is realised all is mind/experience, there is no substance to mind/experience. It is not the same as the subsuming of all experiences to a "one mind" like substantial nondualism. There is also no cosmic mind (this is actually a nonbuddhist view) but individual, unique and nondual mindstreams.

Lastly if you are interested in dzogchen (oh and just wondering, are you more into mahamudra or dzogchen?) you might want to chat with loppon namdrol in dharmawheel (vajrahridaya informed me that namdrol has recently started posting in that forum, previously namdrol posted mostly in esangha before it was taken down), namdrol is very knowledgeable, has deep wisdom and is an experienced dzogchen practitioner under chogyal namkhai norbu rinpoche. He is a loppon which means he has like a phd in buddhism, and if memory serves he was asked by a lama to teach dzogchen though he rejected it.

Finally just a note, whenever there is any mentions of permanence, it is not a permanent metaphysical essence of awareness or substance... But emptiness (the absence of inherent existence) is the permanent nature of everything.

Also, as Loppon Namdrol pointed out, Mahaparinirvana sutra and other teachings on Tathagatagarbha on permanence, self etc shld be understood in terms of Emptiness and No-self - it is simply the subversion of Hindu concepts of atman and brahman into emptiness and noself - the true essence is lack of essence. And as Lankavatara sutra points out, the teachings of true self by Buddha is not the same as non-Buddhist teachings of an all-pervasive creator and Self but is simply a skillful means to lead those who fear emptiness to the profound prajna wisdom. It (true self, tathagatagarbha, etc) is not meant to be taken literally as pointing to an inherently existing metaphysical essence. It is a teaching device.
Emptiness... emptiness....

In normal, everyday life, when someone uses the word “emptiness”, it usually has a negative connotion.

Like a 'lack of something'... like as if life is lacking something (e.g. "life feels so empty nowadays"). If anything, things lack ‘inherent, unchanging, independent existence’… yet they are wondrously, intensely vividly luminous and apparent!

Unfortunately, the teaching of 'emptiness', along with other teachings of Buddha (including the most common misperception of Buddha's teaching as 'Life is Suffering' which is certainly NOT what he said!*) gives the misconception of Buddhism as having a life-denying, pessimistic view of the world.

But this is NOT the Buddhist understanding of Emptiness!

Form is emptiness, emptiness IS form!

Emptiness IS Fullness!

I can assure you when you realize emptiness, you will marvel, be amazed, at the whole universe as a magical apparition... it's like Whoa, the universe is magic, luminous and empty, clearly manifest yet no-thing 'there'! No place of origin, place of abidance, and destination - to thoughts, to sensate experiences... just a clear display of luminous apparitions. Shunyata is a wonder.

This is a wonderful truth... This is nothing dreadful... and is nothing short of Great Bliss.

The luminous and empty universe is spontaneously perfected, lacking nothing, amazing!


*The Buddha taught that suffering is a part and parcel of life, or to put it more simply, 'there is suffering in life', and that there is a way to end suffering. He did NOT say "Life is Suffering" or "Life can only be suffering" even though sadly, this is what many teachers are promoting - their own distortion of Buddha's original words. For more info see this well-written article: Life Isn't Just Suffering by Thanissaro Bhikkhu



(update) p.s. found something from a great article,

http://www.ktgrinpoche.org/KTGR%20Buddhadharm%20Flashing%20Lances.pdf

"When you put the two truths together in this
way, you get Milarepa’s two lines:

E ma, the phenomena of the three realms
of samsara,
While not existing, they appear –
how incredibly amazing!


The three realms of samsara are dreamlike
– while not existing they appear, while appearing
they are empty of inherent nature, and so they
are miraculous."
A poster I've been communicating from RuthlessTruth woke up and shared his account with me.

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


I have experienced the intensity of luminosity. I like the word luminosity for it. It's like the pristineness, the silent, still, and radiant aliveness of the universe, the !-ness of reality. It almost shimmers with the awesomeness of aliveness. I can sense where this differs from the undivided unity of Being experience which is still a thought-form. It still holds onto a concept of a higher power, or a God. And as the world begins to synchronize with my intentions and purposes, I attribute this to the higher power, and communicate with it. But this is different. It's like the unity of Being as a thought form brought into the foreground as pure sensation. There's a recognition that "this is what I am," as I walk around the house and see the couch, the faucet, the kitchen counter. There's a feeling of total oneness. Not so much "there is this One and I am experiencing it, I understand it." There's an unmistakable recognition that I am the Universe, and I'm not experiencing myself from any particular vantage point. I just Am the whole thing, and anything I look at, there I am. I am the metal. I am the cold. I am the blueness. I am the night and day. There doesn't seem to be an inquiry appropriate to deepening the luminosity. It's just a noticing and cultivating that noticing.

I've been all the way through to the end of this journey a couple times. It lasted almost a month once when I was off working at a retreat center. I think I started malfunctioning in certain obvious ways that I ignored about a week into it. I had seen and was experiencing the truth, but I hadn't picked up on enough of the implications and found an integrity to it yet. I was just celebrating the absence of time, meaning, etc. I watched X-files, got drunk, and ate bacon every night. Very strange way for an "enlightened" person to act. So yeah, the vision of truth was there, but I was out of harmony with it. Then I crashed really hard and had to pick a bunch of pieces up. Then another one lasted only a few hours but was so fucking intense and thorough. I knew what Nisargadatta and Ramana were saying. I WAS Nisargadatta and Ramana. And I crashed again, and had a new set of stuff to clean up. And then I joined Ruthless Truth and they pushed me over into a new sort of experience, which also came with a crash, but my time here really came to fruition when Ciaran told me to focus on What K (name omitted) actually is. The "unique and intimate stunning reality of who you are (as a real fiction)." Then all that stuff I was cleaning up from before started cleaning up much faster. I came to appreciate my existence as K (name omitted). I saw how utterly complex I am, within the context of this utter simplicity of only now-ness. And then this insight a couple weeks ago spread to other people as well. I have a better sense for the importance of identity and how it's essentially the best way the universe has come up with so far (on this planet) to recognize itself, and FUCK that's amazing. So a lot of my resistance to "unconsciousness" fell away. I just see it as part of the unfolding of consciousness. My resistance to rigidity and ignorance in others had diminished significantly and so my own peace with the universe increased.

Anyway, that's a lot of story telling. What's up with that luminosity? I appreciate you guiding me in the right direction. I can feel that this is the correct way to be going as there's a deeper sense of peace and less fabrication happening. I keep "disappearing" throughout the day. I cease to exist within the universe. This is pleasant. It's not that I'm uninvolved in the drama. It's that I'm not even here to experience it. And the body, which looks so impersonal, just goes about its day doing shit, even feeling insecure for hours at a time, and in reflection, it doesnt' seem like I was there for any of it, experiencing or collecting these experiences in some central place called "me."

Judith Blackstone, 'The Empathic Ground':
"Although nondual realization is considered, in Asian spiritual traditions to be an advanced level of spiritual attainment, I have found that for many people it is easily accessible. It is important to understand that nondual realization is a process. Complete nondual realization is said to be extremely rare, if it is possible at all. But an initial realization requires between one and three years of consistent practice intention."

I saw this quote in your forum thread Any living enlightened Master? I wonder why you quoted it, it doesn’t seem relevant. Nevertheless with the recent insight into anatta, I am sure you no more concur with Judith Blackstone that “Complete nondual realization is said to be extremely rare, if it is possible at all.” In fact not only is complete non-dual possible, it is simply the beginning. In the realm of no-mind, all experiences are implicitly non-dual and effortless. This should not be a mystery to you by now.

The purpose of bringing up Judith Blackstone quote is not to boast about one’s achievement but to convey an additional point in practice. That is in addition to experience and realization, you have to embrace the ‘right view’. I have mentioned to you in the article Realization and Experience and Non-Dual Experience from Different Perspectives, I will re-iterate it here:

To mature this realization, even direct experience of the absence of an agent will prove insufficient; there must also be a total new paradigm shift in terms of view; we must free ourselves from being bonded to the idea, the need, the urge and the tendency of analyzing, seeing and understanding our moment to moment of experiential reality from a source, an essence, a center, a location, an agent or a controller and rest entirely on anatta and Dependent Origination.

Therefore despite the clear realization and right experience, seamlessness and effortlessness of non-dual experience will not be smooth without ‘right view’. The reason though obvious is often overlooked; if deep at the back of a practitioner’s mind he still hold the dualistic and inherent view, how is it possible to have seamless and effortless experience of in seeing, just scenery; in hearing, just sound? How unreserved, open and seamless can a practitioner be in transcending the self altogether into the transience? Hence equip oneself with a view that can integrate with the realization and experience, it will help practitioners progress more smoothly. Understanding the impact of view in practice is what I find lacking in many of your posts. You may want to look into it.

With regards to the attachment of view, it does not apply to practitioners that have gone pass certain phases of insights. Practitioners after certain phases of insights are constantly abolishing ground and are clear that whatever pith instructions and views are merely provisional. There are masters that caution practitioners and there are students that parrot their masters’ advises, so do not follow blindly. In fact if understood correctly every deepening of view is a giving up. In the case of anatta, it is the total elimination of Self.
"Bhikkkhus, as purified and bright as this view is, if you covet, cherish, treasure and take pride in it, do you understand this Dhamma as comparable to a raft, taught for the purpose of giving up [i.e. crossing over] and not for the purpose of grasping?" "No, venerable sir." "Bhikkhus, as purified and bright as this view is, if you do not covet, cherish, treasure and take pride in it, would you then know this Dhamma as comparable to a raft, taught for the purpose of giving up [i.e. crossing over] and not for the purpose of grasping?" "Yes, venerable sir."
source: http://www.leighb.com/mn38.htm

Coming back to your practice, there are 3 experiences that you should be familiar:

1. Frequent occurrences of mini absorption states in sensory experiences of the 6 entries and exits.

2. Getting grounded in the ‘here and now’.

3. Occasional brief moment of experiencing oneself being transcended into ceaseless activity (This is the beginning of maha interconnectedness aka 一合相 according to your dharma grand master).

I would like to hear from you the followings:

1. How is 1,2 and 3 related?

2. What in your own opinion is your next natural progression?
In your Taiwanese teacher's reply, he pointed out to you about seeing the equality of all dharma and all appearances. Is this your next natural progression? If in a flash moment you are able to intuit what your Taiwanese teacher is pointing at, then all gaps are filled and transmission beyond verbal inadequacies is attained; otherwise there is no rush for experience and realization. The mind has not given up enough to rid itself of artificialities to intuit what that is plainly simple, gapless and direct.

Whatever arises dependently originates.
Life is so, Death is so.
This is so, That is so.
Here is so, Now is so.
Therefore no life, no death, no this, no that, no here, no now.
No Self to create the hierarchy to complicate matters.
Marvelously simple, primordially pure.
Diverse yet equal!

3. Is grounding in the ‘here and now’ something to seek after? Relate this to Ted’s article and the article on Stainless. You have written a post about relinquishing attachment to the 'here and now'. The improvement is indicative of the increase in understanding and expression of no-self.

4. How and why does the experience of 一合相 (the experience of interconnectedness) arise and why only occasionally unlike your non-dual experience?

5. How is your Taiwanese teacher’s reply related to Ted’s article?


Lastly, I want to comment on the following 3 points found in Ted's article "A" is "not-A", "not A" is "A". They are related to the questions above and is a little beyond you at this point in time. Take your time to refine your understanding and experience in army. I will update it along the way.

1. The myriad things advance and confirm the self
2. Kaiin Zammai (Ocean-reflection Samadhi) 海印三昧
3. Do not anticipate, Do not oppose

1. The myriad things advance and confirm the self
Zazen is “mustering the whole body-mind (the whole of existence-time, inclusive of “A” and “not-A”) to look at forms and listen to sounds,” which is described by Dogen as “direct experience.” This “direct experience” is not only hearing, seeing, etc.; it is the arising of an ‘I’.” As in Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, “The myriad things advance and confirm the self.

The whole article would be beautiful without the above texts quoted in bold. This emphasis is no difference from the need to find ground in the ‘here and now’. There is another article posted by you in the blog Genjo Koan: Actualizing the Fundamental Point that in my opinion provides a more accurate translation:
To carry yourself forward and experience myriad things is delusion. That myriad things come forth and experience themselves is awakening.
….
….
To study the buddha way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be actualized by myriad things. When actualized by myriad things, your body and mind as well as the bodies and minds of others drop away. No trace of realization remains, and this no-trace continues endlessly.

If “the myriad things advance and confirm the self”, then practitioners will be leaving trace. This also reminds me of my conversation with Gozen (a Soto Zen teacher) in dharmaoverground:
24. RE: The mind and the watcher
Apr 7 2009, 5:46 PM EDT | Post edited: Apr 7 2009, 5:57 PM EDT
"I AM: Paradoxically, one feels at the same time that one is both essentially untouched by all phenomena and yet intimately at one with them. As the Upanishad says "Thou are That."

1.a. Body and Mind as Constructs: Another way to look at this is to observe that all compound things -- including one's own body and mind -- are **objects to awareness.** That is to say, from the "fundamental" point of view of primordial awareness, or True Self, even body and mind are **not self.**"

Ha Gozen, I re-read the post and saw **not self**, I supposed u r referring to anatta then I have to disagree...:-). However I agree with what that u said from the Vedanta (True Self) standpoint. But going into it can make it appears unnecessary complex.

As a summary, I see anatta as understanding the **transience** as Awareness by realizing that there is no observer apart from the observed. Effectively it is referring to the experience of in seeing, only scenery, no seer. In hearing, only sound, no hearer. The experience is quite similar to “Thou are That” except that there is no sinking back to a Source as it is deemed unnecessary. Full comfort is found in resting completely as the transience without even the slightest need to refer back to a source. For the source has always been the manifestation due to its emptiness nature.

All along there is no dust alighting on the Mirror; the dust has always been the Mirror. We fail to recognize the dust as the Mirror when we are attached to a particular speck of dust and call it the ”Mirror”; When a particular speck of dust becomes special, then all other pristine happening that are self-mirroring suddenly appears dusty.

Anything further, we will have to take it private again. :-)
source : Emptiness as Viewless View and Embracing the Transience

Therefore to see that all dusts are primordially pure from before beginning is the whole purpose of maturing the insight of anatta. The following text succinctly expresses this insight:
...According to Dogen, this “oceanic-body” does not contain the myriad forms, nor is it made up of myriad forms – it is the myriad forms themselves. The same instruction is provided at the beginning of Shobogenzo, Gabyo (pictured rice-cakes) where, he asserts that, “as all Buddhas are enlightenment” (sho, or honsho), so too, “all dharmas are enlightenment” which he says does not mean they are simply “one” nature or mind.

Anything falling short of this realization cannot be said to be Buddhist's enlightenment and it is also what your Taiwanese teacher Chen wanted you to be clear when he spoke of the "equality of dharma" as having an initial glimpse of anatta will not result in practitioners seeing that phenomena are themselves primordially pure.

2. Kaiin Zammai (Ocean-reflection Samadhi) 海印三昧

The Libya war, Japan earthquakes, tsunami and nuclear crisis have caused much turbulence to the world and its economy. The past few weeks have been a difficult period to cope (in business). It is a very tough period for those businessmen having businesses that are closely linked to Libya and Japan and I can understand the fear, anger and frustrations in them. I have friends that are badly affected but amid this difficult time, let us also not forget that thousands of lives have been lost and tens of thousands more are still suffering now…

I sincerely hope that all beings in this crisis be free from danger, mental and physical suffering .....
_/\_


The term ‘Ocean-Seal Samadhi (海印三昧)’ seems to originate from Flower Adornment Sutra. I am not familiar with flower Adornment Sutra and therefore know very little about 海印三昧. When Amitayus48 first posted an article about 海印三昧 by 宣化老和尚 in your forum, I did an internet search on 海印三昧 (in Chinese characters) and what I gathered were the explanations (in Chinese) by many masters from non-dual substantialists perspective. It was quite a disappointment.

That which rekindled my interest in Ocean-Seal Samadhi is the following description:
The Buddha said, "It is just the dharmas that combine to form this body. When it arises, it is simply the dharmas arising; when it ceases, it is simply the dharmas ceasing. When these dharmas arise, [the bodhisattva] does not state, 'I arise'; when these dharmas cease, he does not state, 'I cease'." "In prior thought moments and subsequent thought moments, the moments do not relate to each other; in prior dharmas and subsequent dharmas, the dharmas do not oppose each other. This is called the the ocean seal Samadhi.

I wonder where Dogen got this wonderfully expressed quote but I am unable to locate it in Flower Adornment Sutra (Update by Soh: The entire passage here is from the Recorded Sayings of Mazu. The first quotation represents Mazu’s (slightly abbreviated) quote of the Vimalakirti Sutra, in which Vimalakirti is instructing Mañjusri on how a sick bodhisattva should regard his body. The second quotation is Mazu’s comment, in which he goes on to say that the samadhi collects all the dharmas as the ocean collects the water of all the rivers.
The awkward translation “thought moment” tries to preserve something of the ambiguity of the term nen, used in reference both to moments of time and individual mental events. The term will reappear below in both senses. - https://global.sotozen-net.or.jp/pdf/dharma-eye/de14/de14_10.htm)
. The quote appears to be a piece-together from two different sutras -- Vimalakirti Sutra and (Zen Grand Master) Hui Neng Sutra. If that is the case, Ted is right in saying that Dogen has indeed creatively shed new light into the profound meaning of 海印三昧.

In my opinion the quote is not about an expression of a perfectly transparent and clear state of mind where object and subject collapsed into an undifferentiated oneness reflecting myraid forms. This would just simply be a non-dual state; rather it is a perfection in insight of seeing what that is truly happening in this instantaneous moment of suchness. The myriad forms are presenting themselves in plain simplicity and the myriad forms have always been what we called ‘mind’. The texture, the fabric, the shape, the vivid colors, the myriad appearances in primordial purity has always been 'mind' itself! Yet do not mistake that 'mind' is the one substance that made up the myriad forms for this is a distorted inherent view. It is simply a label denoting this instantaneous moment of vivid arising that entails the total exertion of the universe. This 'total exertion' is not by way of 'effort' and no amount of 'effort' will lead to 'total exertion'; this 'total exertion' is by way of realizing the 2 fold empty nature of whatever arises.

Therefore To study the mind is to study the myriad forms. To study the myriad forms is to study the dependently originated appearance at this instantaneous moment. To study this instantaneous moment is to understand the full exertion of the 'interconnected universe' and this full exertion is expressed without reservation as this vivid moment of arising sound...this breath...this passing thought...this obviously clear scenery...

and

Instantly Gone!

3. Do not anticipate, Do not oppose

The previous section is essentially realizing that the "Ocean" is something extra, in actuality it does not exist. However the arising insight of "no agent" does not naturally lead to the realization that:

“A preceding thought-moment and a succeeding thought-moment do not anticipate each other; a preceding dharma and a succeeding dharma do not oppose each other."

You have written a post relating to this matter where you spoke of the difference between the first and second stanza. I think it is more relevant than seeing it as the total exertion in an instantaneous moment as presented by Ted. This arising moment of myriad appearance is the full embodiment of past, present and future 'total exertion', hence "existence-time" is an invaluable insight but relates more to the experience of maha.

For the purpose of your practice, before going deeply into 'total exertion', it is advisable to first directly experience the 'releasing from the chain (of birth and death)' by realizing that thought moment "do not anticipate each other and dharma do not oppose each other". In my opinion, without this de-linking the chain of thought-moment and seeing that manifestation is continuously springing up non-dually, non-locally and unsupported, the 'Samadhi' of the Ocean-Seal will not be adequately understood.

Also in between ”seeing the Ocean as extra” to directly experiencing the “total exertion in the ceaselessness of this ongoing activity”, a process of maturing the insight of anatta is necessary. By maturing I am referring to the ending of any reification of mind-objects be it "Self/self", "here/now", "mind", "body", "weather"... -- there is no "Self/self", only changing aggregates; no "body", only changing sensations; no “here and now” besides changing phenomena; no "weather" besides changing clouds, rain and sun shines. If this insight can be thoroughly extended to whatever arises then the interconnectedness and total exertion of this moment will become clear and obvious. So much so that when eating an apple, the universe tastes it! -- the full exertion of the apple, the hand, the taste, the throat, the stomach, the everything of everything is completely transcended into this simple action of suchness where nothing is excluded. Here again, do take note that this "total exertion" is not the result of being fully concentrated; it is the natural outcome when practitioners have adequately embraced the 'view' of 2 fold emptiness.

In summary I think this is an excellent article written from deep experiential insight. However the article seems to emphasize more “A” than “not A”. Although there is the mentioning of the “casting off”, it is quickly overshadowed by the emphasis of “total exertion”, the grounding in the “here and now” and the affirming of the ‘Self’ in the arising and ceasing.

“Here” and “Now” are simply impressions formed by the senses. Fundamentally there is nothing truly ”here”, nothing truly “now” and nothing truly “self”. Though the universe (with all causes and conditions) is fully exerting to make this moment possible, it is nothing real. In my opinion the recent post written by Pegembara in your forum provides a good balance to Ted’s insight of “total exertion”.

Just my 2 cents. :)
My Taiwanese teacher's reply to my two Chinese articles which I wrote (the first article details the I AM realization, the second article details the initial insight into Anatta):

根器不错,可是呢!一切法由心所生,即无一切心,哪有一切法可悟,所以悟无所悟,才是真正的真如本性。

若还有法可表相,还有法可得,皆不能见真性。

因为诸法寂灭,本来无我,即见无我,何来有法,既然无一法,何来可悟。所以悟无可悟,本来具足,这样才是真正的见真如。一切相,一切法皆是平等,平等。因为自性空性,要诸相归性, 懂得见一切法,见一切相,归于自己的自性,见无所见,诸法平等,诸相平等,行者无心,这样就成功了。

他还在法上,寻找更高的境界,真正最高的境界,是诸相平等,诸法平等,所以要诸相归性,诸法寂灭,所以见无所见,悟无所悟,才能入诸法平等现象。


(Translation from Chinese)

Root faculty is not bad, but! All dharmas arise due to mind, if there is no mind, then how can there be a dharma to be realized, therefore realize there is nothing to be realized, this is then truly the original nature of true thusness.

If there are still dharmas to represent appearances, if there are still dharmas that can be attained, one will not be able to see the True Thusness.

Because all dharmas are quiescent cessation (Nirvana), always already without self, and since one realizes No-Self, how can there be dharmas, and since there are no dharmas whatsoever, how can there be realization, therefore realize that there is nothing that can be realized, originally it is complete. This, then, is truly seeing true thusness. All appearances, all dharmas are equal, equal. As self-nature is empty by nature, we must revert all appearances to nature, know how to see all dharmas, all appearances, as belonging to one's self-nature, see that there is nothing to see, all dharmas are equal, all appearances are equal, the practitioner has no mind. If one practices this way, one succeeds.

He (referring to me) is still searching for a higher state in dharmas, the true highest state is the equality of all appearances, the equality of all dharmas, therefore we must return appearance to nature, all dharmas are of quiescent cessation (Nirvana), therefore see that there is nothing seen, realize that there is nothing realized, only then one can enter into the phenomenon of the equality of all dharmas.
This is a good post on the insight of Anatta and Dependent Origination, and represents Dogen's thought well.

From: http://zenforuminternational.org//viewtopic.php?f=17&t=5490&p=73011#p73011

Also see Thusness's comments on this article: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/03/realization-experience-and-right-view_13.html


by Ted Biringer on Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:03 am
"A" is "not-A", "not A" is "A"

In the Avatamsaka Sutra, the Buddha, speaking from within the enlightened state, elucidates the nature of reality in an elaborately metaphorical expression that envisions the totality of existence as an “ocean” in which all the myriad dharmas are viewed as “reflections.” In his, Kaiin Zammai (Ocean-reflection Samadhi), Dogen assimilates the traditional account and, drawing on some unsuspected implications of the doctrine, manages to push the whole vision to a new, more dynamic level.

In the sutra, the Buddha describes his “body” as consisting of the “arising” and “vanishing” of myriad dharmas. He also asserts that he does not “speak of this body,” which is the arising and vanishing of myriad dharmas, as “the arising and vanishing of an ‘I’.” Here, Dogen quotes the Buddha as going on to explain that:

“A preceding thought-moment and a succeeding thought-moment do not anticipate each other; a preceding dharma and a succeeding dharma do not oppose each other. This is known as the ocean-reflection samadhi”
Shobogenzo, Kaiin-zammai, Hee-Jin Kim, Flowers of Emptiness, p.166


For one thing, Dogen’s viewpoint differs significantly from the standard Huayen model in his emphasis on the unity of existence and time (uji; existence-time). This is seen in the present case by Dogen’s attention to the fact that preceding and succeeding “moments,” and “dharmas,” do not anticipate each other – thus the nondual nature of moments (time) and dharmas (existent forms) are underscored.

Dogen explains that although Buddhas and ancestors actualize various kinds of enlightenment (e.g. original, acquired, initial, etc.), there is more to Buddhas and ancestors than that. The “body” that the Buddha spoke of as consisting of the “integrated form” of myriad dharmas should not be hastily regarded as a “single unified form” (of undifferentiated oneness). According to Dogen, this “oceanic-body” does not contain the myriad forms, nor is it made up of myriad forms – it is the myriad forms themselves. The same instruction is provided at the beginning of Shobogenzo, Gabyo (pictured rice-cakes) where, he asserts that, “as all Buddhas are enlightenment” (sho, or honsho), so too, “all dharmas are enlightenment” which he says does not mean they are simply “one” nature or mind. On that line from Gabyo, Hee-Jin Kim comments:

All Buddhas and all things cannot be reduced to a static entity or principle symbolized as one mind, one nature, or the like. This guards against views that devaluate the unique, irreplaceable individuality of a single dharma.
Hee-Jin Kim, Flowers of Emptiness, p.257


In Kaiin Zammai, the “arising” of dharmas, says Dogen, is the actualization of a specific moment of time. “Existence,” being coessential and coextensive with “experience,” the “arising of dharmas” is synonymous with our experience here and now. The arising of myriad dharmas is itself authentic practice-enlightenment.For Dogen, “zazen” is the archetypal symbol of this “practice-enlightenment.”

Zazen is “mustering the whole body-mind (the whole of existence-time, inclusive of “A” and “not-A”) to look at forms and listen to sounds,” which is described by Dogen as “direct experience.” This “direct experience” is not only hearing, seeing, etc.; it is the arising of an ‘I’.” As in Shobogenzo, Genjokoan, “The myriad things advance and confirm the self.”

Thus, the “arising of dharmas” (the myriad particular things of experience) is itself “the one” totality of existence-time which is itself the whole, real, ever advancing body-mind of Buddha at each (and every) particular moment of existence-time. In other words, the totality of “myriad” dharmas right now are - as they are - the “one” body-mind of Buddha right now. This “body-mind” is immediately “cast off” and the new totality of myriad dharmas is fully exerted as the one body-mind of Buddha, which is immediately cast off as the “body-mind of Buddha” ceaselessly advances into novelty – This! Now this! Now this! Now this!

The “body-mind” of the Buddha (or Universe) that is manifested or actualized with each now total exertion “contains” or is “inclusive of” all previous total exertions (body-minds of Buddha) which, being “real dharmas” occupy dharma-positions (specific coordinates of space-and-time; uji, existence time), and therefore are “one of the myriad dharmas” that constitute the body-mind of Buddha here and now (i.e. their particular instance of existence forms part of the “fabric” of this particular instance of existence). Also, the “body-mind” of the Buddha here and now “contains” or is “inclusive of” all future total exertions (body-minds of Buddha) which, being “real potentials” are, and must be “real dharmas,” hence, actually present here and now. Thus, Dogen’s teaching, “Nothing in the whole universe has ever been concealed.”

One thing this means is that the body-mind of Buddha is directly perceptible here and now. The Buddha (thus our “self”) is nothing more, or less, than each and every particular thing and event of our experience here and now. As the masters say, “Truly seeing a mote of dust is truly seeing the whole universe.” In Dogen’s terms, “When one side (a dust mote) is illumined, the other side (the totality of space and time) is dark” (“dark” as in “shadowed,” or “eclipsed” – thus “dark” denotes presence not absence).

This (and every) instant of existence-time (dharma-position) is the “self” or the “I” which can be, and is, confirmed in (and as) “zazen” (authentic practice-enlightenment). Thus Dogen says: [Note: Nearman translates “dharmas” as “elements”]

‘Arising’ invariably refers to the arrival of a specific moment, for time is what arises. Just what is this ‘arising’? It must surely be arising in and of itself. This arising is already a moment in time. Never did He say that it fails to expose what Skin and Flesh, Bones and Marrow really are. Because this is the arising of ‘being composed of ’, it is this body of His that arises, it is an ‘I’ that arises, and it is ‘merely being various elements’ that arises. It is not only hearing sounds and seeing forms and colors; it is also the arising of an ‘I’. It is this arising of an ‘I’ that one does not speak about. ‘Not speaking about something’ does not mean ‘not expressing something’, for being able to express something is not the same as being able to put it in words. The time of arising is synonymous with the appearance of ‘these elements’; it does not refer to the twenty-four hours of a day. These elements are what the time of arising is, and they do not compete with each other within the three worlds of desire, form, and beyond form. As an Old Buddha once put it, “Suddenly, fire arises.” Through this expression, He was saying that there is no waiting about for this arising.
Shobogenzo, Kaiin Zammai, Hubert Nearman


After commenting on this, Dogen cites a Zen koan and asserts that “we need to discern the real meaning” of the “ceaselessness of this process,” underscoring that “the myriad dharmas” is “the one” body-mind (Buddha, true self) – as it is - and “the one” body mind is “the myriad dharmas.” Then he reminds us that nonduality indicates “unity” not “identification” by describing this (inclusiveness of “A” and “not-A”) as the “lifeblood” of Buddhas and ancestors, pointing out that, “the ‘you’ is the who that arises and vanishes.”

Another Old Buddha once said, “What is this ceaseless time of arising and vanishing?” Thus, in that this arising and vanishing is our experience of the arising of an ‘I’ and our experience of the vanishing of an ‘I’, the process is unceasing. In entrusting the Matter to Him, we need to discern the real meaning of His stating the ceaselessness of this process. We continually chop up this unceasing time of arising and vanishing, which is the very lifeblood of an Ancestor of the Buddha. In the unceasing time of arising and vanishing, who is it that arises and vanishes? As to the ‘who’ that arises and vanishes, it is the ‘who’ that is on the verge of being able to realize enlightenment within this body. That is, it is the ‘who’ that manifests this body, the ‘who’ for whom the Dharma is expressed, the very ‘who’ in the past who was unable to grasp what Mind is. It is “You have gotten what my Marrow is,” and it is “You have gotten what my Bones are,” because the ‘you’ is the who that arises and vanishes.
Shobogenzo, Kaiin Zammai, Hubert Nearman


After exploring and illuminating the significance of the implications of this, Dogen concludes Kaiin Zammai, by citing and commenting on a Zen koan that directly relates to our discussion on the unity of “A” and “not-A” in the infinite and eternal nature of “existence-time.” Here is the koan as translated by Hubert Nearman:

Sozan Honjaku was once asked by a monk, “I have heard that it says in the Scriptures that the great ocean does not give lodging to corpses. Just what kind of an ocean is this?”

The Master responded, “One that contains all that exists.”

The monk then asked, “Then why doesn’t it give lodging to corpses?”

The Master replied, “What has ceased to breathe is not connected with It.”

The monk asked, “Given that it contains all that exists, why is something that has ceased to breathe not connected with it?”

The Master said, “The functioning of all that exists is something other than ceasing to breathe.”
Shobogenzo, Kaiin Zammai, Hubert Nearman


After pointing out that the “great ocean” in the koan is the same as in the Avatamsaka Sutra, Dogen defines “a corpse” as “dead ashes” and describes this as a being (dharma) whose “mind does not change no matter how many times it encounters springtime.” This is a remarkably creative expression; Dogen depicts “a corpse” as a dharma (thing, being, etc.) that seems to defy his own teachings on what “dharmas” are. First, according to Dogen, all dharmas arise and perish ceaselessly. Second, all authentic dharmas are said to be real insofar as they are experienced by sentient beings, and thus undergo ceaseless change. But here Dogen defines “a corpse” as a dharma that remains unchanged (no matter how many times it encounters springtime). Saying “a corpse” is unchanging, Dogen seems to contradict himself. However, this is actually a beautiful example of Dogen’s unconventional use of convention – out pops the rabbit:

What he called ‘a corpse’ is something that no one has ever experienced, and that is why they do not comprehend what it is.
Shobogenzo, Kaiin Zammai, Hubert Nearman


We know that for Dogen, existence is experience and experience is existence (i.e. to exist is to be experienced, to be experienced is to exist). Thus, all real (existent) dharmas are “experienced dharmas.” Thus, saying “a corpse” is something that “no one has ever experienced,” in light of this teaching is the same as saying that “a corpse” is something (a dharma) that “has never existed.” With this in mind, the rest of Kaiin Zammai is fairly straightforward.

The Master’s saying, “One that contains all that exists,” expresses what the Ocean is. The point he is making is not that there is some single thing that contains all that exists, but rather that It is all contained things. And he is not saying that the Great Ocean is what contains all existing things, but rather that what is expressing ‘all contained things’ is simply the Great Ocean. Though we do not know what It is, It is everything that exists for the moment. Even coming face-to-face with a Buddha or an Ancestor is a mistaken perception of ‘everything that exists for the moment’. At the moment of ‘being contained’, although it may involve a mountain, it is not just our ‘standing atop a soaring mountain peak’, and although it may involve water, it is not just our ‘plunging down to the floor of the Ocean’s abyss’. Our acts of acceptance will be like this, as will our acts of letting go. What we call the Ocean of our Buddha Nature and what we call the Ocean of Vairochana are simply synonymous with ‘all that exists’.

Even though the surface of the Ocean may not be visible to us, we never doubt its existence in our daily conduct of ‘swimming about’. For example, the monk Tafuku—one of Joshu’s Dharma heirs—once described a grove of bamboo as, “One or two canes are crooked, and three or four canes are aslant.” Although his daily monastic conduct led him to see all that exists as a bunch of errors, why did he not say, “A thousand crooked canes! Nay, ten thousand crooked canes!” Why did he not say, “A thousand groves! Nay, ten thousand groves!” Do not lose sight of the underlying principle that is present like this in a grove of bamboo. Sozan’s expression, “One that contains all that exists,” is synonymous with ‘all that exists’.

Although the monk’s question, “Why is something that has ceased to breathe not connected with it?” might be viewed, albeit mistakenly, as arising from doubt, it could have been just what his mind was concerned with. When Master Rinzai said about Fuke, his elder brother in the Sangha, “I have long had my doubts about that fellow,” he was simply recognizing who ‘the person’ was about whom he had long held doubts. In what exists, why is something that has ceased to breathe not connected with It and how can It not give lodging to corpses? Herein, why something that has ceased to breathe is not connected with It is that It already contains all that exists. Keep in mind that ‘containing’ does not mean ‘keeping’ and that ‘containing’ is synonymous with ‘not giving lodging to’. Even if all that exists were a corpse, it might well be that not giving lodging to it would forthwith span ten thousand years, and it might well be that ‘not belonging to It’ is this old monk Dogen playing one stone in a game of Go.

What Sozan said is, “The functioning of all that exists is something other than ceasing to breathe.” In other words, whether all that exists ceases to breathe or does not stop breathing, a corpse would still be unconnected with It. Even though a corpse is a corpse, if it had behavior that was in harmony with all that exists, it would contain all—it would be containment. The journey before us and the journey behind us, which is part and parcel of all that exists, each have their own functions, and ceasing to breathe is not one of them. In other words, it is like the blind leading the blind. The fundamental principle of the blind leading the blind includes ‘one blind person leading one blind person’ and ‘a mass of blind people leading a mass of blind people’. When a mass of blind people are leading a mass of blind people, all contained things contain all contained things. Further, no matter how many Great Ways there are, They are beyond ‘all that exists’, for we have still not fully manifested our meditative practice, which is the meditative state that bears the seal of the Ocean.
Shobogenzo, Kaiin Zammai, Hubert Nearman


While Dogen’s most articulate critiques are those refutations of the non-Buddhist Indian teaching of Senika, his disparagement of all dualism permeate his works. All so-called antitheses only become “antitheses” when we fail to abide by the Buddhist principles of nonduality which asserts that mind and matter, Buddhas and ordinary beings, delusion and enlightenment, practice and realization, self and other, etc. are united, not identical, they are not two, not one.

When we conceptually posit a gap between existence and experience, we divide existence from time. Authentic Zen practice requires us to perceive existence (sees what we are seeing), thus to perceive existence-time. Dogen frequently reminds us that we only experience (perceive) real dharmas and at specific places (of existence) and definite moments (of time). As “time” is inherent to all experiences, “place” (or space) is inherent to all existences. This principle corresponds to Dogen’s refrain about the unity of true form and true nature, activity and expression, appearance and essence, emptiness and form. For Dogen, every particular expression of Buddha nature is a manifestation of existence-and-experience, thus of existence-and-time. More specifically every dharma (thing, being, instance, etc.) is a particular manifestation of the whole of existence-time (uji), not existence “plus” time, but a singular unit of existence-time.

Dogen, like all Mahayanists, firmly denied the existence of an eternal, unchanging self. But Dogen also pointed out that the matter did not end there:

What is constantly saintly is impermanent and what is constantly ordinary is impermanent. The view that those who are just ordinary people and not saintly ones, and thus must lack Buddha Nature, is a foolish opinion held by some folks who are small-minded; such a view constitutes a narrow perspective which their intellect has conjectured. For the small-minded, ‘Buddha’ is a body and ‘Nature’ is its functioning, which is the very reason why the Sixth Ancestor said, “What is impermanent is, of course, Buddha Nature.”

What seems constant has simply not yet undergone change. ‘Not yet undergone change’ means that, even though we may shift our perspective to our subjective self or shift it to the objective, outer world, in both cases there are no signs of change to be found. In that sense, it is constant. As a consequence, grasses and trees, as well as thickets and forests, are impermanent and, accordingly, they are Buddha Nature. It is the same with the human body and mind, both of which are impermanent and, accordingly, they are Buddha Nature. The mountains and rivers in the various lands are impermanent, so, accordingly, they are Buddha Nature. Supreme, fully perfected enlightenment is Buddha Nature, and hence it is impermanent. The Buddha’s great entry into nirvana was impermanent, and hence it is Buddha Nature.
Shobogenzo, Bussho, Hubert Nearman


Hee-Jin Kim in his Flowers of Emptiness, elucidates this line thus:

That is, permanence means the steadfast quality of the Buddha-nature which exerts itself totally and drops itself off completely in each and every situation. In this respect, the impermanent is permanent, the permanent is impermanent.
Hee-Jin Kim, Flowers of Emptiness, p.91


“A” and “not-A” are the nondual actualization that is the (one) universe ceaselessly exerting its totality (as the myriad dharmas), casting it off, exerting, casting off, in and as each and every particular thing time and event in and as the totality of existence-time. “A” is “not-A”, “not-A” is “A.”

Peace,
Ted
Ted Biringer - Zen student and practitioner
Author of The Flatbed Sutra of Louie Wing


http://dogenandtheshobogenzo.blogspot.com/
Hi AEN,

Just read your post this morning and an innocent joy arose spontaneously. Indeed, after bringing non-dual to the foreground, the next step is to let go of this subtle grasping of presence and penetrate deeply into the two fold Emptiness.

In many of your recent posts after the sudden realization of anatta from contemplating on Bahiya Sutta, you are still very much focused on the vivid non-dual presence. Now the everything feels ‘Me’ sort of sensation becomes a daily matter and the bliss of losing oneself completely into scenery, sound, taste is wonderful. This is different from everything collapsing into a “Single Oneness” sort of experience but a disperse out into the multiplicity of whatever arises. Everything feels closer than ‘me’ due to gaplessness. This is a natural but as you mentioned in your post,
...somehow, even though luminosity is no longer seen as a Self or observer, there is still a sense of solidity that luminosity/presence is constantly Here and Now. The tendency to sink back into substantialist non-dualism is still strong...

Indeed and very well said. ‘Now-ness, Here-ness’ are no different from ‘Self-ness’, let go of all these. There are several discussions in your forum recently that are related to the pointing out of the difference between the bliss that comes from non-dual Luminous Presence and 'self-liberating' aspect that comes from the insight of two fold Emptiness. You can re-read them, it may help. Also, it is time for you to put aside the Presence, this taste is already implicitly present, rather focus on having direct experiential insight of the following:

1. Unsupported

This experience is radically different from One Mind that is non-dual. It is not about stillness transparency and vividness of presence but a deep sense of freedom that comes from directly experiencing manifestation as being disjoint, spontaneous, free, unbounded and unsupported. Re-read the first stanza of anatta – an excerpt
1. The lack of doer-ship that links and co-ordinates experiences.
Without the 'I' that links, phenomena (thoughts, sound, feelings and so on and so forth) appear bubble-like, floating and manifesting freely, spontaneously and boundlessly. With the absence of the doer-ship also comes a deep sense of freedom and transparency. Ironical as it may sound but it's true experientially. We will not have the right understanding when we hold too tightly 'inherent' view. It is amazing how 'inherent' view prevents us from seeing freedom as no-doership, interdependence and interconnectedness, luminosity and non-dual presence.

2. Unfindability, Corelessness, Essencelessness and Ungraspability

Further penetrate into these unsupported freely manifesting phenomena and look into the core of whatever arises, not only there is nothing behind as a background, there is no inner core that can be found, nothing ‘inherently there’. If we truly see this unfindability, corelessness, essencelesnesss and ungraspability empty nature of the moment to moment of experience, something ‘magical’ will happen. Observe how the karmic tendency to ‘hold’ releases itself when the empty nature of ‘whatever arises’ comes into view.

3. Embrace the view of Dependent Origination

Do not get bounded by the ‘who-where-when’ construct and embrace the view of dependent origination fully; always only 缘起当生, 缘尽当了 (AEN's translation: arises upon the arising of conditions, ends upon the cessation of conditions). Practice diligently until there is the experience of unsupported continuous opening without inner core but do not rush into any experience. :-)

Happy Journey!