Jun Ruolan's Contemplative Practice (Vipaśyanā-caryā) Approach and Experience Regarding the Five Aggregates (Pañca-skandha)

A fly lands on the leg; one feels itchiness and annoyance. In fact, the leg is the aggregate of form (rūpa), a false combination of the four great elements; the itchiness is the aggregate of feeling (vedanā), and all feeling is suffering, with neither coming nor going; taking signs and making inferences is the aggregate of perception (saṃjñā)—the fly is also an illusion, the itchiness is merely a sensation, also an illusion, and assigning names and signs to the fly and the sensation, adding meaning to them, is the aggregate of perception. The decision to drive it away, the process of the mind consciousness running, that temporal process of sensation is the aggregate of formations (saṃskāra); the aggregate of formations arises conditioned on consciousness, also coming in accord with conditions and ceasing in accord with conditions. That which discerns all of this is the aggregate of consciousness (vijñāna): consciousness arises from the seeds of the tathāgatagarbha, also coming in accord with conditions and ceasing in accord with conditions.

The five aggregates arise from the coming together of causes and conditions, changing and impermanent; being inconstant in change is emptiness (śūnyatā). Grasping brings suffering, and even the feeling of suffering is an illusion. All of this, being inconstant and without any master, is the nature of no-self.

Then look again: the fly crawls on the leg, the itchiness is still there, but the inner sense of aversion has vanished; with a casual, gentle wave of the hand, the fly flies away. The event has just happened, yet it seems as if nothing happened at all. The five aggregates are utterly unobtainable; there is no self, no place where a self is. I observe the fly crawling on the leg—emptiness facing emptiness—where could anything be obtained? At this moment the mind is not contrived, a stretch of quietness.

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

Assessment: The line of thinking for contemplative practice (vipaśyanā-caryā) is clear. When actually engaging in contemplative practice, on the one hand one must be endowed with 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, from that point to the whole, that the five aggregates in their entirety 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 Sutra on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness and observe things as they truly are: whatever there is, contemplate that; whatever you become aware of, contemplate that—no need to imagine or project. How does the Sutra on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness 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 with the brain. 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/valid direct cognition.

In modern Buddhist practice, almost all group Dharma propagators teach mind-consciousness contemplative practice, mind-consciousness experience, mind-consciousness feeling, mind-consciousness realization, and mind-consciousness analysis, never touching upon the cultivation of the manas. As a result, what is obtained is not genuine experience and contemplative practice, not objective contemplative practice, but analysis, understanding, and imagination added by subjective consciousness, with a great deal of illusory content. Practitioners simply cannot distinguish whether this is true contemplative practice, true investigation, true cultivation; they only feel that this kind of thinking is relatively easy, does not take too much effort, and easily produces results. That is why false realization of the fruits is so widespread. In truth, how could cultivation ever be so simple and easy? How could there be so many worldlings (pṛthagjana) with ordinary faculties who transform into sages?