Here's a video that Thusness and I found very interesting. I
think what is said in this video lines up well with the Buddhist
teaching of Emptiness. Thusness have suggested I post it in our
blog, http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com,
which I did.
URL:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb1u9zOPwiQ&feature=related
It also reminds me of an article written by Longchen:
The non-solidity of existence
This article describes a spiritual insight. It may be quite
hard to understand.
The things that we experience are registered by all the sense
organs. The eye sight registers vision, the ears register sound,
the body registers sensations. These perception, sensations and
experiences are not happening in some places. They are the
experience of the arising of certain conditions. There is no
solidity and physicality in the actual experience.
What we experienced is not universal and common to all.
Here's an example to illustrate that: We know that as human beings,
we see in term of colours. Some animals are however colour-blind,
thus they see differently from us. But none of us, is really seeing
the truth nature directly. The senses of different species of
sentient beings experience things differently. So who is seeing the
real image of an object? None.
Likewise, the various planes of existence are due to
different conditions arising. In certain types of meditation, one
is said to be able to access these planes of existence. This is
because they are not specific locations. They are mental states and
are thus non-localised. In these meditations, our consciousness
changes and 'aligned' more with these other states or planes of
existence.
All the planes of existence are simultaneously manifesting,
but because our senses are human-based conditioned arisings, we
only see the human world and other beings that shared 'similar'
resonating arising conditions. But nevertheless, the other planes
of existences are not elsewhere in some other places.
What we think of as places are really just consciousness and
there is no solidity whatsoever. Even our touch sense is just that.
The touch sense gives an impression of feeling something that is
physical and three-dimensional. But there is really no solid
self-existing object there. Instead, it is simply the sensation
that gives the impression of physical solidity and
form.
OK, that all I can think of and write about this topic. I
will revise and improve this article where the need
arises.
For your necessary ponderance. Thank you for
reading.
These articles are parts of a series of
spiritual realisation articles .
It also reminds me of something Thusness talked about in the
Transcript of
the Lankavatara Sutra sharing by Thusness in January 2007 (note
that this isn't meant to be a commentary of the sutra but simply a
personal sharing of his experience with it):
When we look at Buddhism, Buddhism is very consistent. Why do
I say that Buddhism is very consistent? Not because I like
Buddhism. You see, a person saying that I have experienced
Presence, and I AM the Eternal Witness, I AM God, I AM all powerful
and I AM the First Cause, and yet, they see a dualistic world. This
is in total conflict; this has totally no logic at all. Because,
you see, in Buddhism when we talk about Non-Duality, we are saying
something like the Dependent Origination. Because of This, That Is.
This arises, That arises. This ceases, That ceases. We look at the
entire formation, there is no “Who?” Where is the “Who?” When we
ask “Where?”, there is no “Where?”. When we ask “When?”, there is
no “When?” It can be 10 million miles away. It can be in another
planet. The teaching is consistent. It does not require a “Who”, a
“Where”, a “When”. Condition arises, it is there. It is not stored
in any place, or anywhere. This is the teaching. The entire
teaching is consistent when it comes to the practise. They didn’t
say Concentration can lead to Insight. They tell you, Vipashyana
Meditation can lead to Insight of what Reality is all about. It
does not teach that there is a Self. The Buddha taught the three
dharma seals: there is No-Self. So the teaching is consistent in
terms of philosophy, in terms of meditation practice, and in terms
of the truths that is being preached.
And also in terms of spiritual powers. When I say something
like Clairvoyance... I can see, not bounded by distance. I can
hear, not bounded by distance. How come? Why? If we were to take
other religions, they can’t explain. But if you were to take
Buddhism, Buddha had never told you, has never taught, something of
an Ego, something of a Where, something of a When. It is not
bounded by Time and Space at all in the entire philosophy. Never
has he taught anything like that. And therefore, when we talk about
spiritual powers, it is consistent. It is knowing without the need
for a Space and Time, not bounded by Space and Time, because the
entire teaching is so. And what is being said about this? It is the
Nature. This is your nature. Reality is like that, it is so.
Therefore, when we understand the teachings, we understand that
yes, it is not right to be attached, therefore we cannot say we
want to seek spiritual powers, like Nub. But we have to understand,
this is our Nature, this is our Reality. Because the teaching has
never contradicted itself. If you want to know about your reality,
you have to practise. That is the teaching. And the practise has
always been telling you to observe these 3 universal
characteristics. So when we see the link between the practise, the
philosophy, even something spiritual and something that is not
scientific. This is important.
....in Buddhism they teach you
otherwise. They teach you not to see things in terms of “I”, not to
see things in terms of a “where” and a “when”. Let’s say something
very simple. When I say that things happen, it is not like those
people that subscribe to think that anything is just taking by
itself, it’s nature. Mainly what is important is conditions. You
must have the conditions, then things can surface. When the
conditions is there, they just surfaces, and manifest. If there is
cause in ten million miles away or ten million light years away, or
whatever it is, or in other realms, as long as there is conditions,
it WILL surface, it is not travelling {inaudible}. Can you
understand this part? Condition is there, they just manifest. This
is one thing.
The second thing, to break the view of an entity, when we say that,
where? Why must we keep of asking where? Why must we keep on asking
who? Where does the seed of propensity reside? It doesn’t reside
anywhere. Don’t ask where. It’s just the way it is. Because
whenever you ask where, who, and when, it is because you are very
accustomed to our way of inquiry. The way we enquire. It is an
inquiry system only. It is not reality. It is just the way you ask
things only. It is just the way we are molded, and therefore we ask
things this way. If we ask things this way, then the idea of God is
more {inaudible} You see, the idea of God is based on the first
cause, right? What is God? God is the first cause. But why must
there be a first cause? There is a first cause because there is a
limit to the way we think. It is due to the poverty of our own
thinking mechanism. The mind requires a base to start. So it is for
the thinking mind to understand. It is not reality. Only the mind
needs to understand this way. Reality doesn’t behave that way. Can
you see? So we are trying to fit reality into a model of concept.
Correct?