Also see:

The Tendency to Extrapolate a Universal Consciousness

No Universal Mind

No Universal Mind, Part 2

Wrote in Facebook:

Yes... as for collective consciousness, no Buddhist (including Tibetan Buddhism) teachings accept the notion of a collective consciousness. A cosmic, universal, collective, over-arching consciousness is a Hindu teaching, not a Buddhist one. In Buddhism, all notions of 'universals' are pure abstractions.

Loppon Namdrol/Malcolm: "Buddhism is all its forms is strictly nominalist, and rejects all universals (samanya-artha) as being unreal abstractions."

When we investigate "consciousness" in the same way as the "weather" analogy, we completely deconstruct any notion of a consciousness in and of itself - be it universal or individual (though conventionally we can accept that consciousness is always individual and unique), but most of all, an 'inherently existing' consciousness. We do not treat 'consciousness' as any sort of a thing in the same way we do not treat 'weather' as a 'thing' - when the word 'weather' comes to mind it is immediately understood to be an imputation for the wind blowing, sun shining, clouds flowing etc. Likewise the word "consciousness" is immediately penetrated (instead of reified into an entity) and directly apprehended in immediate, direct experience as the suchness of seeing/seen-consciousness, hearing/sound-consciousness, and so forth, all of which are directly, immediately and gaplessly apprehended in its total luminous clarity.

Or as Alex Weith says in his third step,

"This also means that the first step is to disembed from impermanent phenomena until the only thing that feels real is this all pervading uncreated all pervading awareness that feels like the source and substance of phenomena. Holding on to it after this realization can hower become a subtle form of grasping diguised as letting go.

The second step is therefore to realize that this brightness, awakeness or luminosity is there very nature of phenomena and then only does the duality between the True Self and the appearences arising and passing within the Self dissolve, revealing the suchness of what is.

The next step that I found very practical is to push the process of deconstruction a step further, realizing that all that is experienced is one of the six consciousness. In other words, there is neither a super Awareness beyond phenomena, not solid material objects, but only six streams of sensory experiences. The seen, the heard, the sensed, the tasted, the smelled and the cognized (including thoughts, emotions, and subtle thougths like absorbtion states, jhanas).

At this point it is not difficult to see how relevent the Bahiya Sutta can become."

The fact that all notions of universals are pure abstractions is not a notion, it is a truth that can be realized in direct experience. Universals cannot be found in direct experience, ever. It is related to the truth of anatta. Universals are either abstractions born out of delusions, or abstractions spoken merely for convenience/conventional parlance/communications.

How can you appreciate "sensate facts" or the particulars/specifics of "in the seen just the seen/in the heard just the heard" if you are obscured by abstractions (including the abstraction of a universal soul, etc)? Even if you have a PCE but back in the mind you hold the view of a universal soul, i.e. an abstraction, the PCE will come and go and one will continue to rest in the view and sense of Self.

Hence, one needs to investigate, challenge, realize and penetrate all of our false views - self/Self/objects/here/now etc. By the manifestation of prajna wisdom, the veil of ignorance is released.

Only then can there be any true "intelligence" to speak of


Both "self", "it" and so on are imputations. It is just like the imputation, "weather".


28/3/13 10:35:30 PM: Thusness: A table is just color, shapes, line, hardness, texture in touch, the sound when u hit it and being labelled
28/3/13 10:36:51 PM: Thusness: When deconstructed r just these
28/3/13 10:37:07 PM: Thusness: In direct experience

14/4/13 7:35:01 PM: Thusness: When u say "weather", does weather exist?
14/4/13 7:35:20 PM: AEN: No
14/4/13 7:35:42 PM: AEN: It's a convention imputed on a seamless activity
14/4/13 7:35:54 PM: AEN: Existence and non existence don't apply
14/4/13 7:36:02 PM: Thusness: What is the basis where this label rely on
14/4/13 7:36:16 PM: AEN: Rain clouds wind etc
14/4/13 7:36:25 PM: Thusness: Don't talk prasanga
14/4/13 7:36:36 PM: Thusness: Directly see
14/4/13 7:38:11 PM: Thusness: Rain too is a label
14/4/13 7:39:10 PM: Thusness: But in direct experience, there is no issue but when probed, u realized how one is confused abt the reification from language
14/4/13 7:39:52 PM: Thusness: And from there life/death/creation/cessation arise
14/4/13 7:40:06 PM: Thusness: And whole lots of attachment
14/4/13 7:40:25 PM: Thusness: But it does not mean there is no basis...get it?
14/4/13 7:40:45 PM: AEN: The basis is just the experience right
14/4/13 7:41:15 PM: Thusness: Yes which is plain and simple
14/4/13 7:41:50 PM: Thusness: When we say the weather is windy
14/4/13 7:42:04 PM: Thusness: Feel the wind, the blowing...
14/4/13 7:43:04 PM: Thusness: But when we look at language and mistaken verb for nouns there r big issues
14/4/13 7:43:22 PM: Thusness: So before we talk abt this and that
14/4/13 7:43:40 PM: Thusness: Understand what consciousness is and awareness is
14/4/13 7:43:45 PM: Thusness: Get it?
14/4/13 7:44:40 PM: Thusness: When we say weather, feel the sunshine, the wind, the rain
14/4/13 7:44:58 PM: Thusness: U do not search for weather
14/4/13 7:45:04 PM: Thusness: Get it?
14/4/13 7:45:57 PM: Thusness: Similarly, when we say awareness, look into scenery, sound, tactile sensations, scents and thoughts


U must understand that pure vivid luminous experiences of transient manifestion r very important for both non-dual and anatta. It is key in fact. The unsupported, disjoint springing out non dually is a test on ur degree of "no self". Without the support of the second stanza, there is no true realization of anatta.

When we say "no agent", what does that mean?

It implies a practitioner has penetrate reification of whatever arises and everything is in fact presenting itself in gapless and plain simplicity. If u realized that there is "no agent" that awareness/super awareness is simply a label much like the word "weather" to denote the changing aggregates, then this insight must be also applied to "body", "mind", "weather".... How is it possible to say one has realized anatta in realizing that there is no-self yet see "weather" as having inherent existence?

Because there r certain clear experience relating to the initial arising insight of anatta, I have expressed it out in writing. If you r attached to the "words" and not see the essence, then u have missed the point.

Therefore maturing implies the clarity of insight to see "anatta" in whatever arises.

So first integrate stanza 1 and 2 and apply this insight of "anatta" to whatever arises. It is then the condition for stable maha experience of suchness.
Labels: | edit post
2 Responses
  1. Anurag Jain Says:

    "Universals as being unreal abstractions" seems to me to be a very big abstraction. Please do not answer to me in the abstract :-)

  2. Soh Says:

    By realizing "universal as being unreal abstraction", that is, penetrating the view of a solid/inherently existing universal substance/awareness/etc, one is at the same time realizing the true face of awareness to be the very specific, manifest, non-abstract manifest experience (in seeing always only the seen, no seer, in hearing always only sound, no hearer, all self-luminous), total exertion in all activities,