Nonorigination and Nirvana

[deci belle]

The following passages are totally derived from William Grosnick’s paper, Nonorigination  and  Nirvana  in  the  Early  Tathagatagarbha  Literature. The point of presenting this here is to introduce the practical buddhist origin of the terms I use extensively throughout my threads’ topical thrust, being the nature of true reality and subtle spiritual adaption of enlightening potential to conditions. I had not laid eyes on these ancient texts nor William Grosnick’s article before now. I googled the word “nonorigination” and found this in a couple sources. https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/jiabs/article/view/8547/2454

excerpts from his text…

This  interpretation  of  nirvana  in terms of nonorigination  is  of  considerable  importance in understanding  the  early tathagatagarbha  teaching,  for  it  clarifies  certain  notions frequently  associated  with  the  tathagatagarbha  like  the  "natural  purity  of  mind”  (cittaprakrtivisuddhi)—notions   which  have been  hotly debated [by those who had not or have not seen their nature]  ever  since the [teaching] doctrine's  inception.  It  may  also  tell   us  something   about  the   conceptual   issues  which   divided   the  schools  of  early  Buddhism  and  so  hold  clues  for  understanding  the  origin  of  Mahayana (mind only) Buddhism.

One  of the  most  interesting  notions  found  in the early  tathagatagarbha  literature  is  the  idea  that  nirvana  should   be  understood  as  nonorigination (anutpada).  This  idea  is explicitly  formulated  in  two  texts,  the Ratnagotravibhaga,  the  only  sastra  extant  in  Sanskrit  which  is completely  devoted  to  the  tathdgatagarbha  and  Buddha-nature  teachings,  and  the  Jnanalokalankarasutra,  the  sutra  upon  which  the  Ratnagotravibhaga  bases  its  exposition  of  nonorigination.

In  the  Anunativapurnatvanirdesa, the  title of which  means  the  “sutra which  expounds  neither  increase  nor  decrease," the  Buddha  responds  to the  questions  of  whether  there  is any  increase or  decrease  in  the  number  of  beings  transmigrating  through  the  triple  world  first  by  rejecting  the  questions  as  ill-conceived,  and  then  by  explicitly  attacking  both  the  idea  that  nirvana  represents  a kind  of severance, destruction, or  non-being  (the  view  of  "decrease"), and  the  idea  that  it represents  a  reality  over  and  above the phenomenal  life that arises suddenly without cause  (the view of  “increase”).

 

The  text  goes on  to  say that  these  two  erroneous  views of  nirvana  would  not  arise  if beings understood  the one dharmadhdtu (reality, being that which comprises Suchness or taoist Complete Reality).

 

The  view of  nirvana  brought  forward  in the early  tathdgatagarbha texts as an alternative to the idea of extinction  was the rather  remarkable  notion  of  nonorigination.  The  authors  of  the  Ratnagotravibhaga  and Jnanalokalankarasutra  (and  perhaps  the  other  tathagatagarbha  sutras),  seemed  to believe  that  true  attainment  is to be found  not  in  the  extinguishing  of  ignorance  and  passion,  but  in  their nonorigination.

Quote

"… true attainment is to be found not in the extinguishing of ignorance and passion, but in their nonorigination."

This   rather   ingenious   notion   is  clearly  brought   forward   in  the  Jnanalokalankarasutra  where  it  is said  that:  

Quote

“Where  there  is neither  origination  nor  extinction,  mind,  intellect, and  consciousness do not  take place. When  mind,  intellect,  and  consciousness do not take place, there is no false discrimination  by  which  incorrect  thought  would  arise. One  who  arouses  correct   thought   never   originates   ignorance.   Nonorigination  means the  non-arising  of  the  twelve parts  of  existence.”

The  idea  seems to  be that  correct  practice consists  of  not  generating  those  mental  activities  by which  illusory realities  are  conceived.  Correct  thought  seems  to  be  thought  which  does  not  originate  those  notions  of  "me" and  "mine" that  in  turn  give  rise to desire,  craving,  hatred,  and  the other  passions that  plague human  existence. Correct thought  is the nonorigination  of any  false and  foolish  conceptions of reality  (prapanca).  And the  Jnanalokalankarasutra  clearly associates this nonorigination with  nirvana, the liberation  from  samsara:  

Quote

“One  who  has been  able  to  reach  the truth  does not  give rise  to  vain  imaginings  {prapanca).  One  who  does  not  give  rise  to  vain  imaginings does not  act  in accordance  with  falsely  posited  realities.  One  who  neither  imagines  nor  acts  in  such  ways does  not  dwell  in  samsara.”

 

As I have repeated continuously in my articles on this forum (in terms of before and after), reality and powerful enlightening activity do not depend on sudden enlightenment because enlightenment and delusion are not different. It is simply a matter of seeing reality as is independent of the perspective of self-reifying thought, "the notions of “me” and “mine” that plague human existence."

 

 

ed note: typo, 1st sentence; add "not" in 2nd paragraph; add "…reality, being that which comprises…" in 5th paragraph; typos dispersed throughout the italicized text as pasted from the original article.

Edited February 18, 2021 by deci belle

[VeganAwake]

You would probably enjoy Robert Wolfe's Ajata Project ❤

[deci belle]

Hi mr Awake❤︎

It would be most advantageous for yourself and the other readers if you would take the trouble to say WHY you probably enjoy something you have referred to as it relates to the thrust of this topic.

Would you please tell us about how the Ajata Project relates to this topic and how you relate to this topic as well?

I would probably enjoy that.

 

 

ed note: add bulk of reply to mr Awake

Edited February 17, 2021 by deci belle

[zeroISinfinity]

Liberation from samsara well we just started to create it once again. ?

[Breakingthewall]

23 hours ago, deci belle said:

reality and powerful enlightening activity do not depend on sudden enlightenment because enlightenment and delusion are not different

What do you mean? sudden enlightenment and illusion seems really different. Two points of view that couldn't be more different

[zeroISinfinity]

Jed is right. 

Your Infinite sneakery. 

To get lost in samsara you have to deny you are God. 

Now invert it all back ta-da. Don't get it, you never will. 

[zeroISinfinity]

Samsara= victim, limited, one amongst many, person /mask, face in world...small pretender. 

Everything derived from it. 

Nirvana=One and Source. 

Edited February 17, 2021 by zeroISinfinity

[deci belle]

Hi Breakingthewall— yes, the sudden and delusion do seem really different~ hahahaaaa!

First, I will address the obvious point you raise (thank you for posting!)

If one posits the Absolute (before the dichotomy of the primal organization) as different than everyday ordinary existence (being delusion), I would tend to agree with you. On the other hand, if one clings to the experience of Absolute nature as a thing, and then proceeds to reject delusional existence as something else (different), one has turned both the Absolute and delusion into things— which is itself delusion. And that won't do!

The point I make is that reality (Suchness, being neither ordinary nor holy), is not dependent on the experience of sudden enlightenment. It not only is reality without distinctions (absolute/delusional), it is already thus, before the first thought, without needing to experience the Absolute (by virtue of sudden illumination). It's your own mind right now. If you see reality, it's your mind. If you see delusion, that's your mind too— if that's what you are doing with it.

So, "reality and powerful enlightening activity do not depend on sudden enlightenment because enlightenment and delusion are not different" means that seeing everyday ordinary situations without relying on self-reifying distinctions and awakening to your innate enlightening function is a matter of it being thus a priori without first needing to see your nature.

The point of this thread is the notion that nonorigination is not simply a reference to the realm beyond time. It is the unified operational ground of being, that is one's activity as the expression of enlightening being, selflessly so, adapting according to the time, from within the midst of, and by virtue of everyday ordinary situations. Potential is itself inherent in the karmically evolutionary process we refer to as "delusion."

Delusion is the created aspect of reality, just as enlightening potential is the uncreated aspect of reality. Therefore, enlightenment and delusion are not different. Those who see reality, see potential, whereas those who see delusion see things.

Seeing reality and adapting potential to karmic evolution is just a manner of speaking. For those who see reality, karma and potential are already causeless nondifferentiated unity without beginning. One sees delusion with the physical eyes, but one acts by sensing reality and adapting to its potential by having awakened to one's Dharma-eye.

I said enlightenment and delusion are the same. I didn't say sudden enlightenment and delusion are the same. I said that reality (Suchness) and powerful enlightening activity do not depend on sudden enlightenment (the experience of seeing your nature in terms of the Absolute).

 

 

ed note: add last sentence to penultimate paragraph; add first sentence to last paragraph

Edited February 17, 2021 by deci belle

[Breakingthewall]

31 minutes ago, deci belle said:

If you see reality, it's your mind. If you see delusion, that's your mind too— if that's what you are doing with it.

On 16/2/2021 at 10:57 PM, deci belle said:

 

great to squeeze my brain again trying to understad your articles! I'm afraid that i didn't catch the most about the budism. True they are two different points of view of the same reality, seems a craziness because they seems two completely different realities but obviously, in a misterious way, are the same

 

35 minutes ago, deci belle said:

I said that reality (Suchness) and powerful enlightening activity do not depend on sudden enlightenment (the experience of seeing your nature in terms of the Absolute).

What do you mean with "powerful enlightenment activity"? 

[deci belle]

Breakingthewall wrote:

Quote

What do you mean with "powerful enlightenment activity"?

Enlightening activity is powerful in the sense that one does not rely on one's own power to "take over creation and steal its potential", to use the taoist description of buddhism's teaching of mutual response. Therefore such response is spiritual adaption in that one sees by nonpsychological awareness and responds to situational karmic energy by virtue of karma's inherent uncreated potential. Potential is itself the nature of (created) energy, and since it is possible for one to see its essence, one is able to partake of its potential. Taoism says that one "takes over creation" by seeing its essence, and "steals its potential" by virtue of its (potential's) power to spiritually transcend karma from within its midst (because it's neither different nor created).

What is "spiritually transcending karma from within its midst?" Enlightening activity is selfless action (because it is void of personality/ego consciousness). Seeing by virtue of nonspychological awareness is itself "enlightening activity", which is not the person (I swear, it's not that amazing), by which one's actions relative to non-differentiated perception of situational potential are free of karmic energy because one does not abide in karmic energy when seeing its essence. By seeing impersonally (nonpsychologically), one's selfless accord in reality is transcendent (in terms of delusion). Again, mind is one: seeing potential is seeing reality; seeing things is seeing delusion. It's all by mind alone.

This is the transmission of the "mind only" teaching perpetuated by those who first awaken to essence, then who subsequently see their nature and clarify its substance by advance practice in the aftermath of sudden realization, and finally learn to adapt "harmonize" enlightenment to conditions in the process of passing through endless karmic cycles. Taoism calls this "planting lotuses in fire, sublimating the self spiritually and physically in endless transformations entering the Tao in reality."

Certainly, one's takeover of creation is assuming partnership in creation, by virtue of its essence. This is specifically why and how one is not subject to Change's changes. How could that not be powerful? Another description of "stealing potential" is called freeing potential from the karmic matrix. This potential is what one absorbs for further refinement in the empty vessel, one's immaterial body of awareness which has no location.

Taoism didn't invent this— it's natural. Buddhism calls this "saving energy". The mystic school of Judaism calls this "gathering the sparks." This planet's ancient enlightening teachings all have different terms for the same operation outside of doctrine. You see, all authentic teaching is an open secret derived of inconceivabilities that are our inherent nature. Creation's nature is inconceivable. People are inconceivable beings. To be alive is an incomprehensible and fathomless opportunity. All prior illuminates have left this secret behind in order to keep the knowledge alive.

 

 

ed note: add "because it is void of personality/ego consciousness" in 2nd paragraph; split off/create the 3rd paragraph, remove word "and"; add "This is specifically why and how one is not subject to Change's changes."; typo last paragraph

Edited February 18, 2021 by deci belle

[deci belle]

The Sanskrit word "garbha" means seed, germ, womb, feminine essence, among other definitions in Sanskrit. "Tathagata" translates from the Sanskrit as "one who has thus gone" or "one who has thus come", as well as other similar and/or opposing aspects relative to the meaning Gautama Buddha used to refer to himself as inherently and thusly awake. Tathagatagarbha refers to one's nonoriginated essential and inherent buddha nature; one's potential seed or germ of buddhahood, as it were. This, itself, is the premise of Mahayana, or Mind Only teaching. Gautama Buddha didn't invent it. It is already thus. This is the open secret which all prior illuminates have been leaving behind since time immemorial and beyond, in order to keep the knowledge alive. All people have their task in discovering and actualizing the buddhadarmha.

Again quoting from William Grosnick's Nonorigination and Nirvana in the Early Tathagatagarbha Literature article…

"As noted earlier [in William Grosnick’s paper], the practice of not originating ignorance is not simply the means to liberation (as the cause), it is also liberation itself (as the result). By not originating false notions of reality, beings [automatically] actualize their innate purity [of mind] (cittaprakrtivisuddhi). All beings are said to possess the Buddha-nature because they possess the capacity to practice nonorigination—this is the Buddha-nature as cause. [Thus] when they practice [nonorigination], it becomes [the] result."

Quote

…since it is possible for one to see karma's essence, one is able to partake of its potential. This is practicing nonorigination. Taoism says that one "takes over creation" by seeing its essence, and "steals its potential" by virtue of potential's spiritual power to transcend karma from within its midst (because potential is neither different than karma nor created).

As I have said many times, action relative to delusion is karmically bound, so transcendence (nonoriginating the personality) is simply a matter of seeing reality as is without conjuring the psychological patterns habitually reifying the personality. How is that different than practicing nonorigination?

I hope there are students able and willing to study William Grosnick's paper and further research and study the early Tathagatagarbha literature in the Jnanalokalankarasutra and the Ratnagotravibhaga, which cut clearly through the thrust of my writing on the subject, in terms of describing enlightening activity by virtue of the essence of delusion.

For those wondering about the term "Nirvana", supposing it to mean the equivalent of the theoretical Christian "heavenly hereafter", that term was concluded early on in Mr. Grosnick's paper as a signifier (of buddhist provisional teaching) as it is posited in terms relative to extinction. But in terms of the Mind Only schools of Mahayana, Chan and Zen buddhism, as well as Quanzhen (Complete Reality) taoism, since there is nothing to "get rid of", nirvana signifies nonorigination. Because reality is itself unborn, or nonoriginated, nirvana comes to constitute the living state of perfection operating transcendently within the midst, and by virtue of, all delusional realms no different than enlightenment.

Since reality is the same as nonorigination and the nature of creation (delusion) is the essence of reality (unborn), the means to transcend delusion is by virtue of seeing its essence before the first thought. And rightly so, because before the first thought is already nonoriginated.

It is so wonderful to learn that the earliest proponents of authentic teaching expressing reality (in Indian buddhism) including Gautama Buddha himself, who also attacked (depending on his audience) dualistic notions purporting origination (dependent or otherwise) and its counterpart, extinction, also elucidated the same description of transcendent (skillful) means by enlightening activity as do I by virtue of my own experience over the last thirty-five years. Not that I need the validation, because I had and have had no doubt regarding the inherent natural expression of enlightening being as Suchness, a singularly boundless, nonoriginated island, itself actualized by virtue of the eternal realm of delusion as one's selfsame planetary sea of jewels.

 

 

ed note: add 1st paragraph; forgot to type "quote mark" at end of 2nd paragraph; add quote box and content; add last sentence in 4th; add 5th through 8th paragraphs

 

 

Edited February 18, 2021 by deci belle

[Breakingthewall]

On 18/2/2021 at 0:22 AM, deci belle said:

This is the transmission of the "mind only" teaching perpetuated by those who first awaken to essence, then who subsequently see their nature and clarify its substance by advance practice in the aftermath of sudden realization, and finally learn to adapt "harmonize" enlightenment to conditions in the process of passing through endless karmic cycles. Taoism calls this "planting lotuses in fire, sublimating the self spiritually and physically in endless transformations entering the Tao in reality."

This planting lotuses in the fire raises a question for me. someone has a sudden enlightenment and becomes aware of their true nature. understand that it is a dream, somehow unreal, or not really real, emanating from the absolute. After this, through practice, what do I imagine it will be to adapt your mind to the fullest possible understanding of this new perspective, and to minimize your ego as much as possible ... do you get off the karmic wheel of endless births? It seems like a kind of test or work to get something, to get off this wheel. Who goes out? if all are unreal illusions dreamed of by the same absolute. some illusions come out, and others don't? How important is it, what is achieved? you and I are the same, you come off the wheel, I'm still in it ... therefore, you are still in . Well, if i understood correctly the meaning of this process of the lotus on fire

Edited February 18, 2021 by Breakingthewall

[lmfao]

@zeroISinfinity who tf is Jed 

[deci belle]

Yes, Breakingthewall, "planting lotuses in fire" is symbolic of adapting potential to conditions. That's all it is.

If you saw your "true" nature (in terms of the absolute), where is it now? Who saw it? If it was you who saw your nature, then you are mistaken about the event. "You" have never existed, and neither has any buddha ever existed when seeing the Absolute. You did mention stark fear being encountered in this event of "seeing your nature." Fear is ego, plain and simple. YOU DID NOT SEE YOUR NATURE if you experienced fear. It won't hurt to get off that wheel asap. Just do it. Don't be the slightest bit concerned about seeing your nature.

Seeing your nature dispels all doubt about reality, and you have plenty of doubts it seems. Just remove this "seeing your nature" from the equation and you'll be fine for the time being, I assure you. Whatever it was wasn't that powerful anyway.❤︎ There are much more important issues to attend to, Breakingthewall!!

Quote

[One] understand(s) that it is a dream, somehow unreal, or not really real, emanating from the absolute.

The Absolute does not "emanate" anything. It is itself the nature of your own mind, without beginning. It literally has never begun. It has never moved. If it did, it would be created. It is nonorigination itself.  This is who you are; Unborn. Since it is so, and since it is your nature, you can actualize it at will by not thinking good or bad. Your own mind is none other than such as it is. Unborn, nonoriginated, awake. Right now!

Quote

After this, through practice, what do I imagine it will be to adapt your mind to the fullest possible understanding of this new perspective, and to minimize your ego as much as possible…

I see you are following the stages I presented as before and after (gradual and sudden)~ good! There is no new perspective either before or after the sudden. Authentic practice is NOT giving rise to thoughts by compulsive activity relative to the psychological patterns of the personality before the PRIOR gradual stage. Sudden realization of your nature IS THE RESULT of a long period of prior gradual enlightening activity. You would have been already practicing nonorigination BEFORE you experienced the sudden. So this "new" perspective is never going to happen either before or after sudden realization. One awakens to the potential of one's mind long before one sees the Absolute. Minimizing ego is just in practicing the nonorigination of its psychotic patterns of habitual mental activity. "Minimizing" ego is not giving rise to its habitual pattern-awareness. Not giving rise to ego-consciousness is already nonorigination on the spot. The sudden does not change anything, and neither does authentic practice of nonorigination in the midst of delusion. The buddha said that absolutely nothing is gained by complete perfect (sudden) enlightenment. If you did gain something, it wasn't enlightenment, because enlightenment is already nonoriginated. 

Quote

... do you get off the karmic wheel of endless births?

"Getting off this wheel" cannot be done by the person, since the person is itself the wheel it imagines of itself as karmic bondage— that's way real, even when it's delusion. That is the working definition of self-reifying. Just don't do things. The wheel exists relative to the person alone. The wheel is your own doing.

Nonorigination, if you have been paying attention to this entire thread's contents, is simply NOT originating the wheel you have been dragging around all this time. That's all it is. So put that wheel down along with that sudden enlightenment thing!

The whole premise of nonorigination is that your changeless nature is already thus. You may have had a glimpse of the absolute, but I seriously doubt the experience had any real power. At any rate, it doesn't even matter because such is already your nature. You should have learned that much just by seeing your nature on the spot. What does matter is that when one ceases using mind habitually by NOT perpetuating the illusory personality in everyday ordinary situations, the result is simply the selfless observation of reality as is, in the midst of delusion. It's nothing beyond natural and ordinary.

Quote

Selfless observation of reality as is, in the midst of delusion, is nothing beyond natural and ordinary.

It's just NOT your view of reality. Your view of reality is already deluded. Delusion is reality relative to your mind. Forget your mind and just see what is without self-reifying psychosis. That's all nonorigination is about, in terms of practice. What has changed between delusional psychosis and awakening to nonpsychological awareness? The scene is the same but there is no personality habitually imposing itself on situational evolution. The key word here is habitually. That's all it is.

Great comments, by the way, Breakingthewal! Your questions and comments help those who are themselves going through the spiritually developmental experiences you yourself know first-hand❤︎!!

 

 

ed note: add "That's all it is." to 1st line; add to 1st and 2nd paragraphs; swap paragraphs 1~3 to last three paragraphs.

 

Edited February 19, 2021 by deci belle

[deci belle]

William Grosnick continues:

"The natural purity of mind can be thought of simply as the awareness of one who does not originate thoughts of "me" and "mine" and other illusory realities. Nothing special is being said about any kind of mystical penetration into an absolute or universal mental nature. The natural luminosity of mind is only the natural purity of one who does not generate foolish thoughts. It is completely unthinkable, unrealizable, and indescribable, and thus fully compatible with the prajnaparamita teaching of emptiness."

 

The natural purity of mind is what is referenced when I say "it's your own mind right now." "Your own mind right now" is just this mind of nonorigination. Bankei used the term "Unborn" when saying that "All things resolve upon awakening to the Unborn."

Not giving rise to personality-based affliction is the nonorigination of suffering. Not giving rise to pattern-awareness is itself enlightening activity.

 

 

ed note: keep having to fix the italicized long Sanskrit word spelling after pasting

 

 

Edited February 19, 2021 by deci belle

[Breakingthewall]

10 hours ago, deci belle said:

Sudden realization of your nature IS THE RESULT of a long period of prior gradual enlightening activity. You would have been already practicing nonorigination BEFORE you experienced the sudden. So this "new" perspective is never going to happen either before or after sudden realization

Well,with the exception of if you've used psychedelics. There is the option of performing an ego deconstruction activity but only up to a certain point, and at that point use 5 meo dmt and completely remove your ego in an artificial way. Here fear can occur since the ego in the moments in which it panics of its annihilation. when he's not there, he obviously feels nothing. by doing this one realizes the enormity of the task to arrive at the same result in an "analog" way

 

10 hours ago, deci belle said:

Getting off this wheel" cannot be done by the person, since the person is itself the wheel it imagines of itself as karmic bondage— that's way real, even when it's delusion. That is the working definition of self-reifying.

Absolutely . it is movement that generates karmic energy and strengthens illusion. the ego, made up of future and past, becomes strong in movement, even (or especially) the mental one. although some movement without ego must be possible. If I'm not mistaken you are a climber, a strongly egoic activity. Doing it leaving the ego aside must be an art. I have stopped activities of that type because they were fuel for my ego. Well, almost all kind of activities, even write here, are egotic since I'm egotic.

 

6 hours ago, deci belle said:

The natural luminosity of mind is only the natural purity of one who does not generate foolish thoughts.

Maybe thought and fool is a redundancy

[deci belle]

haha!! I read somewhere that thought is itself indicative of mental illness…

I've only been climbing since 1972. I'm a total granite above tree-line snob, that's for sure. Throw in a little (or a lot) of ice and I get to wear some trés posh Italian shoes~ avec 32mm razor-sharp teeth strapped onto my soles, and swinging 50cm razor-sharp ice-tools in my hands-- heehee!! ooh-ooh, my dominatrix is showing!!

In my experience, and by countless others' as well, the actual climbing is the proof of one's assessment going into the adventure. Alex Honold's recently filmed and televised free-solo ascent of the Salathé, a 3,500' line on El Capitan in Yosemite Valley is proof of an obviously successful assessment of his own audacity, perseverance, aptitude and vision.

For me, the adventure is a ticket to nowhere for the hell of it. There are more people climbing plastic holds under a roof than real rock and/or ice in the clouds, the sun, or often enough, under the stars. In the 80s, a pusillanimous derivative of gravity-dependent endeavors called "sport-climbing" arrived from Europe where anchors for clipping carabiners are drilled with a industrial battery-powered drill motor en-rappel (from the top-down) enabling egoic individuals to chase their purely technical ambitions void of any real consequence, i.e.: no danger, no risk, no adventure, no unknown element. That's a sport? I looks just like climbing though… I guess it is, in some sense. All my guide-partners latched onto it (as new clients beckoned), but I was never seduced by that, nor by international travel for the purpose of alpinism. I can die easy enough within 160kM of my home.

For me, gazing on a 3,000 meter north face (in southern California!!) and feeling its (relative to human scale) ageless geological dynamic, I just want to be part of it… and in assimilating into a wonder such as that, one submits to the wonder and wanderlust, and one simply submits to the line. It is a creative act, in a sense.

Eventually one either proves the line or doesn't. I've done plenty of both. One's self becomes the dynamic proof of one's inner vision in terms of before and after. I guess that deliberately submitting to adventure is essentially egoic. In terms of technological barriers that people have been developing for at least 2 million years to buffer the species from the ravages of biological, geological and meteorological elements in the planetary environment, submitting to the adventure in terms of climbing, per se, hasn't long been an option now entertained by as few as 2% of any given population at any given time in the history of the human species. The inception of alpinism as a "sport" can be traced (in European culture) to the "leisure" class (think "mad-dogs and Englishmen") as products of their industrial-age opulence whereby the textile and steel barons began hiring local shepherd guides in the community of Chamonix-Mont-Blanc in the Haute-Savoie region of France, thus creating a new industry, a new "sport" and a new field of technological research in terms of science at altitude. Nevertheless, I've seen photographs and read about an ordinary (non-climber) black-African who climbed Mount Kilimanjaro solo (back when there were still formidable year-round ice-formations on the mountain) with little more that an ordinary table-knife. For some, climbing is in their bones.

Quote

Well,with the exception of if you've used psychedelics. There is the option of performing an ego deconstruction activity but only up to a certain point, and at that point use 5 meo dmt and completely remove your ego in an artificial way. Here fear can occur since the ego in the moments in which it panics of its annihilation. when he's not there, he obviously feels nothing. by doing this one realizes the enormity of the task to arrive at the same result in an "analog" way

It is Mind alone. Doing it yourself only goes so far, with or without drugs. Carlos Casteñeda is a famous drug employer in that sense, under the tutelage of the seer don Juan Matus. In seeing your nature by any means, it is not up to oneself to induce the experience. If you actually feel that you experienced enlightenment, it must have been something else, because the psychological apparatus has never been up to par with the real.

If it wasn't the person experiencing itself as unborn nonoriginated aware potential, then you've arrived, but the rule is— if you know but you cannot act on that knowledge, it is the same as ignorance of reality. There are plenty of that kind floating around, clinging to the experience of the Absolute.

Your absolute nature is you, but you aren't it. Having experienced it myself, I know nonoriginated selfless awareness isn't the person— neither in terms of the absolute nor in terms ofsubtle spiritual adaption to conditions. There never has been such a one in reality. Why? Because creation is illusion. A buddha cannot reach you in the absolute. There is no thing. That's your nature.

I never had doubts about the real, in terms of seeing potential as well as the experience of the Absolute, but it took me five years to let it go and get on with assimilating potential with situational evolution, without doubting consequential ramifications relative to the self (ego). I found great help in arriving at that space by the writing of the 11th century Chan illuminate Hongzi Zhengjue, who instructed people to trust their luck, accept their (enlightening) function with open hands and to share themselves with the world. A recently published volume of his writing is called Cultivating the Empty Field, translated by Taigen Daniel Leighton. North Point Press ISBN 0-86547-475-3

The other book that helped me get beyond my post-sudden enlightenment funk twenty five years ago is The Unborn, by the 16th century Japanese Zen illuminate Bankei Yotaku, translated by Norman Waddell. North Point Press ISBN 0-86547-153-3

Earlier, I mentioned that I'd been dealing with the ins and outs of enlightening activity for thirty-five years. The discrepancy is that seeing essence being enlightening practice in which freeing potential from the karmic matrix is a seamless practicality of gradual practice, there is before and after. In terms of gradual practice, seeing essence isn't sudden enlightenment. One somehow awakens to essence by dealing with situational potential instead of dealing with things relative to the person. Seeing essence is seeing that things aren't things— enlightening activity is seeing creation as potential, and dealing with potential obviates self-reification and self-aggrandizement on the spot, simply because seeing isn't the person. So that bit of gradual practice amassing the fuel of enlightenment was a ten year long period. I did a lot of reading too, by the way… by which time I had long since stopped using hallucinogenic psychotropic synthetic and naturally derived compounds, mushrooms and cacti.

The rule is to "work with what is the same." Work with essence and amassing potential by virtue of the immaterial body of awareness which has no location fuels the enlightening process resulting in a trip to the absolute. The trigger setting off your trip is circumstantial by any account. So it doesn't matter if you use drugs or not because unless you have also amassed the spiritual potential to fuel your trip to the inconceivable, you ain't going nowhere in terms of reality, absolute or otherwise. Work with essence and you end up with essence. Work with (created) energy and you end up up with energy— being the perpetuation of endless rounds of birth and death. And that won't do!!

I so appreciate your posts, Breakingthewall!

 

 

 

[Breakingthewall]

3 hours ago, deci belle said:

 

when i saw honnold's video the first thing i thought is: enlightened. here I leave a video of a part of the climb

of course the beauty, the truth of nature is wonderful, and climbing (even miserable, egoic, fast food, tinder climbing, sport climbing) is communion with nature.

3 hours ago, deci belle said:

Carlos Casteñeda is a famous drug employer in that sense

Regarding what you say about drugs, I would say that what happens to many: outdated information. there are drugs, and there is the 5 meo dmt. it's unfair for the very few who have been able to completely dissolve their ego through faith, discipline, courage, and lots of intelligence. but this substance does. It is true that you must be prepared, but nothing to do with what a true meditator would need to get rid of his ego. The 5 meo, combined with serious work of meditation, self-observation, deconstruction, and not small courage, will take you to the point where there is no one there, there is nothing and from that nothing in no time ,reality, or better, the creation, will manifest as what it is: illusion dreamed by you, immutable dreamer, alone, the one who has always been, with no other attributes but to be. But it isn't so easy, at least for me, i need to did once a week more or less during 6 months, and the rest of the week meditating many hours per day ,and I'm only having glimpses. i don't know how it's for others but for me it's almost so scary than the honnolds video. I recommend you to do.

3 hours ago, deci belle said:

If it wasn't the person experiencing itself as unborn nonoriginated aware potential, then you've arrived, but the rule is— if you know but you cannot act on that knowledge, it is the same as ignorance of reality. There are plenty of that kind floating around, clinging to the experience of the Absolute.

Well, maybe not the same, but sure it's truth there. What do you mean with act on that knowledge? i can say that once the truth is glimpsed, nothing less than the truth is enough. Even before, without knowing it, there was a longing, everything led to this from the beginning. I dont know what the next step is (yes, there are no steps, just being, but you have to walk), I guess I polish my mind to be able to break the wall on a daily basis without the need for chemical bombs. it's completely possible

[deci belle]

Oh dear, well, I've done El Cap twice. Honnold's route was a variation of the route I was on in the mid 80s. His variation splits off from the classic route that was put up by Chuck Pratt, Royal Robbins, and Tom Frost in 1961, somewhere above the 11th pitch and left of the "Heart" (the prominent 1,000 foot recess between the West Buttress route and the Nose).

As I recall, the variation goes left of the normal route. Much further below~ almost 4 rope-lengths from the bottom of the 35 pitch climb, is a spot that gave Alex the most trouble. Roper's guidebook states that the face-climbing on that section is only 5.9 in difficulty. Meyers' topographic guide indicates the section is rated at 5.10. The fact is, the face-climbing is on insanely slick and relatively steep granite polished to a sheen by wind and water over the course of millennia. Ask me why I know. It is crazy slippery. One just doesn't know if the feet are going to stick or not. The actual climbing is basically kind of easy (5.10 smearing), but the rock surface is absolutely slick. A free-solo on the scale of the Salathé Wall cannot tolerate a single throw-away move, much less a whole section of steep, continuous climbing on such unforgiving unstable footing, so the kind of uncertainty Alex was working on eliminating on that section is mind-boggling. He HAD to be sure. I believe Alex spent the most time during the whole project working out the factor of unknowability that section of rock represented.

As for the video, I assure you, as one who has accrued 2.8 seconds of air-time on a 100 foot free-fall on overhanging ice, I don't need to watch climbing videos of anybody! It's just that I've invested possibly more than one life-time in climbing (I should be dead a few times over already). I've seen precisely two climbing movies in my entire life; one, in 1982, being the original black and white El Capitan, filmed in 1968 by Glen Denny and finally resurrected and edited by his film teacher, Fred Padilla. It won the Banff Film Festival in 1978. I watched the other one at night outside down in the center of the southern Californian mountain town of Idyllwild in the 70s. It was a short film depicting a climber soloing an aid pitch and starring a tiny frog he put in his pocket at the start of the ascent, which he then let loose at the top of the climb. It may be titled "Aid Climber", for all I know. Both films were absolutely authentic, factual representations of the climbing experience, as is the documentary of Alex's climb shot by Jimmy Chin.

As you can imagine, big wall flameouts, long falls on overhanging ice, dubious epic alpine adventures, having partners and strangers alike die on the vertical… would naturally amount to unrepeatable and utterly intense concoctions able to match any mere chemically induced state of psychological deconstruction…Just hanging out on a wall was a continuous experience of opening and closing bardos for me. I forget about that sometimes, as well as the fact that I am still in the wild and crazy midst of an incredibly charmed life.

At any rate, enlightenment is inconceivably beyond mere experience of the Absolute— which, as you know, does not confer buddhahood. The sudden is the entry-level experience of enlightening being. Most people (not you) assume that the sudden is all there is to spiritual evolution— what a huge misconception!!  The fact is, there is no path until one gets to the end of the road, then learns to end fascinations (including that of the sudden in its aftermath) and step over the whole of creation without misgivings or doubts. Only then does the dusty path open up for one to follow in the gradual footsteps of all prior illuminates.

Taoism says that the first trip is short, in that the sudden is experienced in terms of the absolute, in an instant, because the nature of the absolute is already selfless nonorigination before the first thought. It says the second trip is long, in that integration of one's experience of buddha-potential is endless, because creation is endless in terms of its incrementality, and wholly consistent with enlightenment in terms of its causeless essence.

Gradual and sudden are one continuum without beginning or end. In the aftermath of the sudden, one must take up advanced practice based on prior practice. If one has taken chemical shortcuts to circumvent the natural process of self-refinement, one may very well have done oneself a disservice. Having said that, the traditions of authentic teaching have long employed drugs for accelerating the deconstruction process. But the drug-use was controlled by an experienced teacher— not the student.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter because there are no shortcuts. Our karmic footprint is assured; all is accounted for without possibility of deviance. That's not destiny in terms of the person, that's reality in terms of potential.

Quote

What do you mean with act on that knowledge? I can say that once the truth is glimpsed, nothing less than the truth is enough. Even before, without knowing it, there was a longing, everything led to this from the beginning. I dont know what the next step is (yes, there are no steps, just being, but you have to walk), I guess I polish my mind to be able to break the wall on a daily basis without the need for chemical bombs. it's completely possible.

This is an absolutely beautiful line, Breakingthewall~ "Even before, without knowing it, there was a longing, everything led to this from the beginning." That is a really incredible statement. A thousand "heavy hearts" couldn't do that justice!

As for the truth being glimpsed (in terms of the absolute, I'm assuming). If that's what you meant by the truth… the "truth" being our selfless nature in terms of the absolute— if that's what you mean, that is called "traces of enlightenment." We need to get you off that drug!

In order to progress and further refine oneself in the aftermath of the sudden, all traces of enlightenment must be eliminated and forgotten. It's true. This is precisely what took five years for me to accomplish in the aftermath of my experience of the absolute. You simply must work through it in order to accept your enlightening function and fulfill its dharma in the world.

What I said was "If you know but cannot act on that knowledge…" Seeing your nature is just seeing your nature, and only that— it doesn't mean anything. Otherwise, seeing potential in terms of situational karmic evolution in the midst of delusional realms is the same mind as the absolute, which is the same mind using habit energy to reify the personality perpetuating karmic bondage. Activate that mind without dwelling on its contents, is all one can do.

As for acting on that knowledge~ THAT'S ALL I HAVE BEEN WRITING ABOUT SINCE 2008. hahahahhaaa!!

The knowledge of no knowledge seen in terms of the sudden cannot be reconstituted for daily consumption; it's already your own mind. As for "polishing your mind" there is no such mind to polish. When I say that delusion is no different than your own mind, that is to say that the nature of delusion is the nature of Mind. That can be understood in terms of the relative aspect of Mind as well as in terms of the absolute aspect of Mind. Either way, the truth applies equally in terms of reality.

Shen-hsiu wrote on the wall:

Quote

The body is the tree of enlightenment, the mind is like a clear mirror stand. Polish it diligently time and again, not letting it gather dust.

The 5th Chan master said, "Your verse indicates that you have not yet seen your fundamental nature. You have only arrived outside the gate…"

Hui-neng had someone write the following verse on the wall because, being illiterate, he could not write it himself:

Quote

Enlightenment originally has no tree, and a clear mirror is not a stand. Originally there is no thing— what dust can be attracted?

The Chan master saw the verse, and fearing for the safety of Hui-neng, erased the writing from the wall with his shoe, saying, "This is still not yet perception of essence." Later, the master met Hui-neng secretly. Hui-neng said, "The grain has been ready for a long time, but it still wants sifting." Hui-neng met with the master in the middle of the night. When the master said "You should activate the mind without dwelling on anything," Hui-neng spontaneously realized that all things are not apart from inherent nature.

In the case of Hui-neng, he realized original nature himself after already understanding reality. In my case, I saw original nature after having already activated the inherent function of subtle spiritual adaption in the midst of delusional everyday ordinary situations. Even so, it is still necessary to eliminate all traces of enlightenment in the aftermath of selfless experience expressing transcendent absolute nonorigination.

If you have seen your nature, do not tarry in eliminating all traces of enlightenment. Until this is accomplished, the "truth" of selfless realization will be a barrier to functional accord in reality.

 

 

ed note: fix 1st paragraph; italicize "bardos" in 4th; add "As for the video…" and the bulk of the 3rd paragraph; add last 12 paragraphs; re-write 15th paragraph (above Shen-hsiu's quote)

Edited February 20, 2021 by deci belle

[deci belle]

Breakingthewall wrote: 

Quote

What do you mean with act on that knowledge? I can say that once the truth is glimpsed, nothing less than the truth is enough.

This is the obstruction to acting freely from within potential: Delusion is the truth, as is, since its inherent essence is enlightenment. There isn't a single thing that isn't already "the truth." Let the absolute go (it's not going to go anywhere).

Seeing reality is seeing enlightening potential from within situational evolution. There is no reality without delusion and no delusion without reality. It's not a matter of some absolute aspect being the truth, it's a matter of it (delusion) being exactly what it is. Whatever it is, is just that. That's the reality one adapts to.  When you aren't able adapt to just that without referencing your personally abstracted sense of the absolute nature of enlightened mind, even though you know the truth, you aren't able to act on the knowledge of the "truth", which is the essence of reality. Why? Because referencing one's recollection of the absolute is still referencing through the self that recollects. That is habit-awareness regardless of whether the experience is delusional or absolute. Referencing the psychological self is unconsciously separating the self from reality (which is undifferentiated selfless unified nonoriginated awareness).

What isn't already just this unattributable nonoriginated unity? Self-referencing consciousness automatically differentiating itself, arbitrarily creates delusional attributes where there are none. Nonorigination is not coming up with notions of arbitrary differentiation, in terms of relative or even absolute "truth."

It is necessary to deal with delusion on its terms without dredging up references to your understanding of "the truth." Trust that reality has always been the nature of all things without having to refer back to your experience of the Absolute. Clinging to one's experience of the Absolute is just as delusional as clinging to one's experience of everyday ordinary sense-impacts (relative to the personality). Both extremes of Absolute and Delusion are just that: extremes. This is the meaning of the "middle way" in that one transcends both extremes of delusion and absolute before the first thought.

"Before the first thought" being nonorigination on the spot, transcends both absolute and creation without having set them up as such. "Before the first thought" is itself activating the mind without dwelling on anything because there is already no thing.

The "middle way" is not a relativistic compromising approach to delusional attributes, it is already neither ordinary nor holy. That is, it is neither delusion nor absolute in that one sees external reality as no different than itself (or even oneself) as is, without referencing ego's personal perspective relative to itself or other (deemed not-itself). The personal perspective is "after the first thought." If you know selfless nonoriginated awareness, what is stopping you from seeing reality as is by virtue of this nonoriginated  "truth" in the midst of delusion? After all, it's already your own mind right now.

Seeing delusional attributes as delusional in the midst of situational evolution and adapting to just that is enlightening accord in reality. This is called the Supreme Vehicle of buddhas and tathagatas. Buddhas and tathagatas are those who dwell in nonorigination and deal with reality as is because reality is nonoriginated. If you use Mind to create illusion by referencing the functional apparatus of the personal psychology at every turn, where is nonoriginated aware potential?

I don't want to coddle anyone, but I don't want to be harsh either ❤︎

 

 

ed note: add "in terms of relative or even absolute "truth." at end of 4th paragraph

Edited February 20, 2021 by deci belle