Jun Ruolan's Contemplative Approach and Experience of the Five Aggregates

A fly landed on my leg, and I felt itchiness and annoyance. In fact, the leg is the aggregate of form, a false combination of the four great elements; the itchiness is the aggregate of feeling—all feeling is suffering, with neither coming nor going; taking on marks and reasoning is the aggregate of perception—the fly is also an illusion, and the itchiness is merely a sensation, also an illusion; assigning names and labels to the fly and the sensation, and adding meanings to them, is the aggregate of perception. The decision to drive it away, the process of the mind consciousness operating, and that temporal process of sensation constitute the aggregate of volitional formations; the aggregate of volitional formations arises conditioned on consciousness, and it also comes according to conditions and ceases according to conditions. That which discerns all of this is the aggregate of consciousness: consciousness arises from the seeds of the tathāgatagarbha, and it likewise comes according to conditions and ceases according to conditions.

The five aggregates arise from the combination of causes and conditions, changing and impermanent; what changes and is not constant is emptiness (śūnyatā). When there is attachment, there is suffering, and even the feeling of suffering is an illusion. All of this being impermanent and without any master is the nature of no-self.

Then I watched the fly crawl on my leg again: the itchiness on the leg was still there, but the inner feeling of aversion had vanished; with a casual, gentle wave of the hand, the fly flew away. The event had just happened, yet it seemed as if nothing had happened at all. The five aggregates are utterly unobtainable; there is no self, and no place where a self resides. When I contemplate the fly crawling on my leg, it is emptiness facing emptiness—where could anything be obtained? At this moment the mind is not deliberate, just a piece of quietude.

This is the disciple's line of thinking, intended to clarify the theory through a concrete example, so it is very shallow. Once the theory is clearly understood, the disciple will engage in deep contemplation bit by bit, without being greedy for more. As Master said, when facing phenomena, let the mind consciousness intervene as little as possible and contemplate directly. Grasp the core and continue to advance diligently.

Assessment: The line of thinking in this contemplative practice (vipaśyanā-caryā) is clear. When actually engaging in contemplative practice, on the one hand one must possess meditative concentration (samādhi), and on the other hand one's energy must be focused on a single point; only by breaking through one point can one realize, using that point to open up the whole, that the entire five aggregates are without self. If you want the most genuine contemplative practice and the most genuine experience, then when practicing contemplation you should, as much as possible, follow the methods taught in the Four Foundations of Mindfulness Sūtra and contemplate things as they truly are: whatever there is, contemplate that; whatever you are aware of, contemplate that—no need to imagine or mentally substitute. How does the Four Foundations of Mindfulness Sūtra teach contemplative practice? It is the direct experience and observation of the various phenomena without engaging the mind consciousness—based on facts, without filling in the gaps with imagination. Everyone should savor well this kind of contemplative state. If you cannot achieve this, then you must deeply cultivate meditative concentration; if your power of concentration is insufficient, everything will fall into analysis, there will be little direct intuition, and very little direct perception.

In modern Buddhist practice, almost all the Dharma propagators of every group teach consciousness-based contemplative practice, consciousness-based experience, consciousness-based feeling, consciousness-based realization, and consciousness-based analysis, never touching upon the cultivation of the manas at all. As a result, what is obtained is not genuine experience and contemplative practice, not objective contemplative practice, but analysis, understanding, and imagination overlaid with subjective consciousness, containing a great deal of illusory elements. Followers simply cannot distinguish whether this is genuine contemplative practice, genuine investigation, or genuine cultivation; they only feel that this kind of thinking is relatively easy, does not require too much effort, and easily produces results. This is why false attainment of fruition is so widespread. In truth, how could cultivation be so simple and easy? How could so many people of ordinary being's faculties be transformed into sages?