Hello! Welcome to the Awakening to Reality blog.

For all new to Awakening to Reality blog, I highly recommend reading the 'Must Read' articles on the right panel, such as 

• "Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment" (Available in multiple languages: AR, DA, DE, EN, ES, FR, HI, ID, IT, JA, KO, NE, PL, PT-BR, PT-PT, RU, TA, TH, VI, ZH) - Exploring a series of experiential awakenings and insights into the nature of pristine consciousness.
• "On Anatta (No-Self), Emptiness, Maha and Ordinariness, and Spontaneous Perfection" (Available in multiple languages: AR, DA, DE, EN, ES, FR, HI, ID, IT, JA, KO, NE, PL, PT-BR, PT-PT, RU, TA, TH, VI, ZH) - Delving into the subject in more detail.

If you are interested in realizing and actualizing these insights, do read the following (free) e-books:

1) The Awakening to Reality Practice Guide by Nafis Rahman:

• Download Guide (Version 1.1)
• Update: AudioBook now available on SoundCloud
• Feedback: "The shortened AtR guide is very good. It should lead one to anatta (the experiential realization of no-self) if they really go and read. Concise and direct." - Yin Ling
• Download Links: Word version or Mirror link
• PDF version or Mirror link
• EPUB Version or Mirror link

2) The Awakening to Reality Guide - Web Abridged Version by Pablo Pintabona and Nafis Rahman:

• Access the Abridged Version

Special thanks to these individuals for their efforts in making these compilations. I trust they will greatly benefit spiritual aspirants.

3) The Awakening to Reality Guide - Original Version compiled by Soh:

• Awakening to Reality: A Guide to the Nature of Mind - PDF or Awakening to Reality: A Guide to the Nature of Mind (Long Version) Mirror Link
• This is the original 1300+ pages document upon which the practice guide and abridged guide is based.

I often say, self enquiry is not a mantra. It's not something you just repeat mentally "who am i.. who am i..." it's not that sort of practice. It is an investigation, an exploration, an inquiry into the true nature of identity and the true nature of consciousness.

The inquiry/koan "Before Birth, who am I?" has a dual purpose: the elimination of all conceptual identification (ego) and to discover one's underlying radiant Consciousness, or Pure Presence/Beingness.

During my journey of self-enquiry, which spanned over two years (2008-Feb 2010), involving meditative contemplations such as “before birth, who am I?” During the process, this line of questioning, we eliminate all the candidates for my self -- I am not my hands, my legs, my name, my thoughts. They come and go and are observed, they are not me. So what am I? As John Tan said before, “you cannot know the “Ultimate Source” without the process of elimination”. What does it eliminate? The conceptual identification of self with various mentally constructed and perceived objects. This is why "before birth" is asked, as it directs the mind to this elimination. And what does that elimination reveal? Who am I, what is this radiant Being that stands alone revealed after that process of elimination?

Ramana Maharshi said:

"1. Who am I ?

The gross body which is composed of the seven humours (dhatus), I am not; the five cognitive sense organs, viz. the senses of hearing, touch, sight, taste, and smell, which apprehend their respective objects, viz. sound, touch, colour, taste, and odour, I am not; the five cognitive sense- organs, viz. the organs of speech, locomotion, grasping, excretion, and procreation, which have as their respective functions speaking, moving, grasping, excreting, and enjoying, I am not; the five vital airs, prana, etc., which perform respectively the five functions of in-breathing, etc., I am not; even the mind which thinks, I am not; the nescience too, which is endowed only with the residual impressions of objects, and in which there are no objects and no functioning’s, I am not.

2. If I am none of these, then who am I?

After negating all of the above-mentioned as ‘not this’, ‘not this’, that Awareness which alone remains - that I am.

3. What is the nature of Awareness?

The nature of Awareness is existence-consciousness-bliss"

- continue reading at https://app.box.com/s/v8r7i8ng17cxr1aoiz9ca1jychct6v84

This line of questioning (before birth, who am I?) led me to a moment in silent meditation where everything subsided, leaving only a doubtless unshakeable certainty of pure existence and presence.

So eliminating concepts until none is left with some prompting like self enquiry or zen koan will allow one to reach a complete state of stillness (stillness of the conceptual mind) and authenticate presence/clarity/radiance directly. 

While this method effectively dissolves conceptual attachments and reveals the radiant core of Consciousness, it fails to address the view of inherency and the dualities of subject and object or the deeper insight of both self and phenomena as merely nominal and overcome views that reifies the four extremes. Sometimes we call it "inherentness" in short, and inherentness means concepts being reified and mistaken as real. But that requires deeper insights and realisations and is crucial for releasing the deeper afflictive and knowledge obscurations. Merely the pausing of conceptual thinking or even revealing one's Radiance is insufficient to realise its nature. 

At this point, after radiance is realized, as John Tan points out, "before we can hop into the next path and focus on radiance and natural state, without recognizing implication of conventional and seeing through them, there will be ongoing cognitive as well as emotional obscurations. How deep and far can you go? Much less talking about natural state when one can't even distinguish what is conventional and what is ultimate."

As John Tan said before,

“When we authenticate radiance clarity directly, we have a first hand experiential taste of what is called the "ultimate free from all conceptual elaborations" but mind is not "free from conceptual elaborations".”

I also wrote some time back:

"Seeing selfness or cognizance as a subject and phenomena as objects is the fundamental elaboration that prevents the taste of appearances as radiance clarity.. then even after anatta, there are still the subtle cognitive obscurations that reified phenomena, arising and ceasing, substantial cause and effect, inherent production and so on.

So elaboration is not just coarse thinking like labelling but to me is like a veil of reification projecting and distorting radiant appearances and its nature.

Another way to put it is that the fundamental conceptual elaboration that obscures reality/suchness is to reify self and phenomena in terms of the extremes of existence and non existence through not apprehending the nature of mind/appearance.

...

If you mean just authenticate radiance clarity like I AM, then it’s just nonconceptual taste and realisation of presence.

That moment is nondual and nonconceptual and unfabricated but it doesnt mean the view of inherency is seen through. Since fundamental ignorance is untouched the radiance will continue to be distorted into a subject and object."

"The process of eradicating avidyā (ignorance) is conceived… not as a mere stopping of thought, but as the active realization of the opposite of what ignorance misconceives. Avidyā is not a mere absence of knowledge, but a specific misconception, and it must be removed by realization of its opposite. In this vein, Tsongkhapa says that one cannot get rid of the misconception of 'inherent existence' merely by stopping conceptuality any more than one can get rid of the idea that there is a demon in a darkened cave merely by trying not to think about it. Just as one must hold a lamp and see that there is no demon there, so the illumination of wisdom is needed to clear away the darkness of ignorance." - Napper, Elizabeth, 2003, p. 103"

It is important however to note that Gelug and non Gelug authors may have different definitions of conceptualities, as John Tan pointed out years ago: “Not exactly, both have some very profound points.  Mipham "conceptualities" is not only referring to symbolic layering but also self-view which is more crucial.  Mipham made it very clear and said the gelug mistake "conceptualities" as just symbolic and mental overlay, which is not what he is referring then he laid down 3 types of conceptualities.  Same for dharmakirti also...there is the gross definition and the more refine definitions.”

However, for the purpose of beginners trying to realize the I AM, just going through and focusing on self-enquiry and the process of elimination mentioned earlier is sufficient to result in Self Realisation. 

You should read this article https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/12/the-direct-path-to-your-real-self.html as this author was able to bring several to the realization of I AM, and explains well the process of self enquiry and the process of elimination.

Someone told me about mind not being an appearance.

I replied:

it is in this sense that mind is not an appearance: John Tan wrote before, “That light is just alaya, not the nature of mind (imo). There is no form whatsoever that can be grasped. Signlessness therefore appearances are possible.”

it does not mean that there is an objective appearance apart from mind

there is no mind apart from appearance and no appearance apart from mind

Likewise, Krodha also said in 2014, "'Self luminous' and 'self knowing' are concepts which are used to convey the absence of a subjective reference point which is mediating the manifestation of appearance. Instead of a subjective cognition or knower which is 'illuminating' objective appearances, it is realized that the sheer exertion of our cognition has always and only been the sheer exertion of appearance itself. Or rather that cognition and appearance are not valid as anything in themselves. Since both are merely fabricated qualities neither can be validated or found when sought. This is not a union of subject and object, but is the recognition that the subject and object never arose in the first place [advaya]. ", "The cognition is empty. That is what it means to recognize the nature of mind [sems nyid]. The clarity [cognition] of mind is recognized to be empty, which is sometimes parsed as the inseparability of clarity and emptiness, or nondual clarity and emptiness." - Kyle..."

---

there is also no mind apart from appearance

"
The cognizer perceives the cognizable;
Without the cognizable there is no cognition;
Therefore why do you not admit
That neither object nor subject exists [at all]?

The mind is but a mere name;
Apart from it's name it exists as nothing;
So view consciousness as a mere name;
Name too has no intrinsic nature.

Either within or likewise without,
Or somewhere in between the two,
The conquerors have never found the mind;
So the mind has the nature of an illusion.

The distinctions of colors and shapes,
Or that of object and subject,
Of male, female and the neuter -
The mind has no such fixed forms.

In brief the Buddhas have never seen
Nor will they ever see [such a mind];
So how can they see it as intrinsic nature
That which is devoid of intrinsic nature?

"Entity" is a conceptualization;
Absence of conceptualization is emptiness;
Where conceptualization occurs,
How can there be emptiness?

The mind in terms of perceived and perceiver,
This the Tathagatas have never seen;
Where there is the perceived and perceiver,
There is no enlightenment.

Devoid of characteristics and origination,
Devoid of substantiative reality and transcending speech,
Space, awakening mind and enlightenment
Possess the characteristics of non-duality.

- Nagarjuna"

---

07
No Mind, No Appearances and No Apparent Objects

Soh: https://www.reddit.com/r/Dzogchen/comments/qo5hyj/the_refutation_of_maintaining_that_appearance_is/


[8:17 am, 07/11/2021] John Tan: Apparent objects are not mind, appearances are mind.
[8:26 am, 07/11/2021] John Tan: And then from that,
further exhaust mind, appearances, apparent objects.
No mind, no appearances and no apparent objects

Soh: no appearances as in not no appearances but presence is empty right


John Tan:
No appearances just mean the conceptual notions of mind, appearances and external objects are all deconstructed.
It doesn't mean a blank nothing.
Vivid Appearances will unfailingly manifest, that is what Mipham meant by coalescence of appearance and emptiness.

From the perspective of mind (alaya), negation is non-affirming and thorough.
From the non-conceptual gnosis standpoint, nothing is obstructed nor denied.
What appears is unconditioned, spontaneous, natural and beyond elaborations.
Labels: Emptiness |

https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/11/no-mind-no-appearances-and-no-apparent.html

----

All is Mind, No Mind, Dependent Origination
"All is mind must also be deconstructed by DO and emptiness.

Otherwise you end up subsuming.  When practitioners express all is mind, they are not to be taken literally, they are expressing a deep non-dual experiential taste.  Not as a view.

We go through all process of deconstructions and taste the luminous appearances then adopt the view of DO [dependent origination] and emptiness for the conventional world.

That is why DO and emptiness is the enlightened view."

"[9:09 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: I understand what dzogchen meant. Imo,  DO and emptiness is the spontaneous presence and natural perfection expression in the conventional world. (Soh: also related, Dzogchen, Rigpa and Dependent Origination )
[9:14 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: But I do not know dzogchen so no comment.

It is just how I see. The beauty of DO and emptiness in expressing the luminous appearance for the conventional world."

- John Tan, 2020

"[8:16 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: It is the direct taste that is important.
[8:18 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: In the direct taste freeing of the background, what is left is the obviousness.
[8:21 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: The luminous display is free from all elaborations.  Neither mind nor not mind, phenomena nor not phenomena.

So can one b free from all proliferations and see clearly this luminous display and how is this to b expressed comventionally?
[8:22 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: Post all these deconstructions, do u still need to talk about mind at all?  Do u still see object?"

"[8:25 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: That is not important imo
[8:26 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: It is how the mind is freed from all proliferated views or religions or any form of conditioning first.
[8:28 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: The freeing is most crucial but not discarding the validity of how they provide explanations for the functioning of the world.
[8:28 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: So first in anatta, the deconstruction of the background self. That perhaps is the most important deconstruction.
[8:31 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: Then we look at object, how do we even come to the idea that phenomena possess characteristics at all?  Why  redness seem to stick to a red flower?
[8:36 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: Then we look deeper into duality and look at how the dualistic structure is constructed...we see objectivity and subjectivity, do we clearly see and understand that the very feeling of objectivity can only arise because of an innate feeling of subjectivity?  Can we feel this understanding in our bone and marrow or just a knowledge?  The idea of self and other...this deep conditioning is often over look.
[8:37 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: Like no suffering, no no suffering...
[8:39 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: Then when we picks up all these conventions, views,  we have no issues with them for they provide a way of explaining and accounting how the world and universe functions.  How well they explain the world.
[8:41 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: U can see how the world is totally make up of energetic vibration also and practice accordingly as long the path can guide u and it works and functions, but ultimately empty."

"[10:32 AM, 7/25/2020] John Tan: The only truth is to see the emptiness of the conventional.  Equipoise strictly speaking is free from all elaborations.  That is exactly the experiential insight and taste of anatta, in the seen just the seen, therefore no seer, no seeing, nothing seen.

[10:38 AM, 7/25/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[10:42 AM, 7/25/2020] Soh Wei Yu: like kalaka sutta https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN4_24.html


Labels: All is Mind, Dependent Origination |

- https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/07/all-is-mind-no-mind-dependent.html

----

 https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2019/10/not-mind-or-other-than-mind.html

Not mind or other than mind
[27/10/19, 1:14:30 PM] Soh Wei Yu: All appearances are appearance of oneself in dzogchen but not cosmic consciousness
[27/10/19, 1:49:11 PM] John Tan: Quite good youtube. Who is he?
[27/10/19, 1:52:33 PM] John Tan: All appearances are one's radiance clarity. However since both object and subject are seen through, it cannot be said to be mind or other than mind.
[27/10/19, 1:53:56 PM] Soh Wei Yu: He is a quite famous dzogchen teacher i think
[27/10/19, 1:54:00 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[27/10/19, 1:54:07 PM] John Tan: What appears are neither in here nor out there.
[27/10/19, 1:54:53 PM] John Tan: The very idea of in or out, me and other are conceptually designated.
[27/10/19, 1:56:31 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic.. i think he is trying to point out non solipsism and non cosmic consciousness.. different mindstreams. In another video he said how his view is not solipsism
[27/10/19, 1:58:04 PM] John Tan: The "neither this nor that" of freedom from extremes is not the same as "neither this nor that" of non-conceptuality.
[27/10/19, 1:58:10 PM] Soh Wei Yu: _______
[27/10/19, 1:58:15 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[27/10/19, 1:58:22 PM] John Tan: Can provide the link.
[27/10/19, 1:58:47 PM] John Tan: He is ______?
[27/10/19, 1:59:01 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Yeah
[27/10/19, 1:59:26 PM] John Tan: His lecture seems to be better than his writings...lol
[27/10/19, 1:59:32 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Lol
[27/10/19, 1:59:37 PM] Soh Wei Yu: you read his writings before?
[27/10/19, 1:59:50 PM] John Tan: But still a subtle sense of awareness
[27/10/19, 1:59:55 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic..
[27/10/19, 2:02:47 PM] John Tan: He is using simple English...like mind is the creator which is no good
[27/10/19, 2:03:27 PM] Soh Wei Yu: you mean book or lecture
[27/10/19, 2:03:43 PM] John Tan: Both
[27/10/19, 2:04:31 PM] John Tan: His lectures link that you sent me but explanation is quite good.  However the taste of anatta is not there.
[27/10/19, 2:05:08 PM] John Tan: Means it can still be an explanation of non-dual.
[27/10/19, 2:09:03 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic.. ya i get the impression of one mind from his old writings
[27/10/19, 2:11:12 PM] John Tan: For anatta to be clear, that background is gone that is why experiences become direct. It has to because there is nothing there to dualify as simple as that...no need li li loh loh (be longwinded)...
[27/10/19, 2:11:36 PM] John Tan: Grasper and grasped disappeared.
[27/10/19, 2:16:10 PM] John Tan: Now when there is no self, you are left with those aggregates.  What are those aggregates?
[27/10/19, 2:54:57 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Empty radiance in total exertion
Labels: Anatta |

https://www.facebook.com/groups/AwakeningToReality/posts/25004286339186127/?__cft__[0]=AZUJrJtuTwxk8GrS1VFcUt9jZco6JjUNtYOtxAXtH0uP5zA4AtMlfN0K3kYA-oioPhVUIQJoBJjnBJRaH105tbisJ3-nTbZOF2lh21qCwmjzM296PPy4-ktDwuJBf37pDEJt9htg5_mSjXcien9K11O1BvlAmqNjGat7tTPLWZVTLDAwZGLwTodaPcaGQ-AGgVE&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R]-R

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Top Contributor

Jake Yeager

This is related to a conversation between Thusness/John Tan and Sim Pern Chong in early 2007:

Sim:

It is like what i have said before there is various depths to non-duality.

There appears to be 2 distinct 'levels' of non-duality...to me.

In the first level, mental thoughts are still quite active. Here thoughts arises but there is no thinker. Here no subject-object split is clearly understood.

At this level there is the ‘insight’ of no-self but momentum continues.

However momentum stops being re-enforced.

And there is another distinct level that mental thoughts loses it attraction all together. In this level, there feels like cognitions have

been de-constructed.

Thusness:

There are several reasons:

1. Here most of the propensities that resulted from holding to the illusion view of a background begin to subside.

2. When background subsides, Natural awareness takes place and there is natural tendency to feel everything directly, the burden is being more equally distributed to the rest of the five senses instead of being skewed to just

‘thinking’ alone.

3. A subtle “insight” is about to take place or has already taken place. It is the “insight” that ‘content’ is the problem of all problems. It is what that conjured out all sorts of illusions, fears and worries.

4. The practice of the second door is gaining strength at the pre-conscious

level.

Sim:

This is a blissful level and it feels like resting on 'nothing'.

Thusness/John:

It is resting on ‘nothing of content’ but it is resting on ‘peace, clarity, blissfulness, vitality’. Here focus is gradually shifting from "content" of the mind to "qualities" of the mind. The qualities of mind has nothing to do with “content".

Sim:

But without the first level non-duality, the second level cannot be moved into.

Thusness/John Tan:

This need not be the case. The first level of ‘insight’ is more important from my point of view. It is what that leads to Oneness. A person that practices mindfulness may enter the second level u mentioned without first having that ‘non-dual’ insight of the first level, this in fact has been my case for many years. It is due to the ability to sustain for a prolong period of bare attention or non-conceptuality. The understanding of no-self here can still remain as ‘no-personal self' or as a form of mirror bright clarity that is free of labels but the mirror still exist in a dualistic form. In the second level, the sense of ego diminishes but the attachment of a background is still strong and insight into

"non-dual" has not really aroused.

Edited by Thusness 31 Jan `07, 9:33PM

(Source: https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../thusnesss... )

——

However, Gary Weber and Bernadette Roberts lack the insight of anatta. The former is into I AM and impersonality (see: different degrees of no self that I wrote: https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../different-degress...) while the latter is the transition from I AM into nondual but not yet realising the seal of anatta (Bernadette is discussed in https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../no-mind-and-anatta... )

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

Thusness's Conversations Between 2004 to 2012

Thusness's Conversations Between 2004 to 2012

• 2w
• Like
• Reply
• Remove Preview
• Edited

3

Craig Nichols

Soh Wei Yu Is the *permanent* ending of self-referential "blah blah" thoughts / a silent mind associated with any ATR stage in particular?

• 2w
• Like
• Reply

Active

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Top Contributor

Craig Nichols it is related to what john tan calls transforming five skandhas to eighteen dhatus

I have like tons of conversations on this subject in earlier years with john tan (somehow unpublished yet, i should probably post as a separate blog post) but im travelling now and will post later

• 2w
• Like
• Reply

2

Active

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Top Contributor

Craig Nichols but do note it can just be impersonality without anatta insight as in the case of gary, etc.

• 2w
• Like
• Reply

Active

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Top Contributor

Craig Nichols it is very difficult for me to copy texts from iphone from my source document (chat logs) due to new restrictions so this should suffice for now, see the first conversation dated 14 sept 2007: Session Start: Friday, 14 September, 2007

https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../some-2007...

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

Some 2007 conversations from phone notes

Some 2007 conversations from phone notes

• 2w
• Like
• Reply
• Remove Preview
• Edited

Active

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Top Contributor

Craig Nichols just updated the page again

• 2w
• Like
• Reply

Active

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Top Contributor

With the “

2008:

(11:56 AM) Thusness: longchen is like entering the 18 dhatus.

(11:56 AM) AEN: icic..

(11:57 AM) Thusness: or into DO (dependent origination)

(11:57 AM) Thusness: just the arising and passing away

(11:57 AM) Thusness: without the need for a center, a locality in a non-conceptual mode. 

(11:58 AM) AEN: oic..

(11:59 AM) Thusness: depending on the depth of clarity and the ability to drop, there is a very deep joy in whatever arises in a normal condition.

(12:00 PM) Thusness: it is a sort of bliss of luminous presence without the sense of self, division, locality and conceptuality

(12:00 PM) Thusness: it can also turn into a sort of absorption.

(12:00 PM) Thusness: that is the result of clear insight of our empty luminosity.

(12:00 PM) Thusness: not the result of deep concentration.

(12:01 PM) Thusness: this is very difficult to understand.

(12:01 PM) Thusness: it is an effortless absorption.

———

Session Start: Friday, August 22, 2008

(12:29 AM) Thusness: U must watch the second video

(12:29 AM) AEN: which one

(12:29 AM) AEN: the one that explains oneness rite

(12:30 AM) Thusness: And know the difference betw” etc

• 2w
• Like
• Reply

2

Craig Nichols

Soh Wei Yu thank you so much for your detailed reply. I read through the chat log. Is it OK if I ask how it proceeded for you?

In other words, is what John Tan wrote about 5 aggregates into 18 dhatus the specific set of insights that led to how self-referential thoughts (blah blah thoughts, the kind of incessant ongoing internal monologue) fell away for you and left you with a silent mind?

• 2w
• Like
• Reply

Active

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Top Contributor

Craig Nichols Craig Nichols boarding plane now to overseas. Will post briefly, the details are in my e journal.

Inclination to silence and samadhi is there even at I AM phase. Similar to ramana maharshi, eckhart tolle (have you read the power of now?) and gary.

As john tan said years ago, “Like being silent and experience luminosity is in everyone that break-through IMness.

Like hearing music or gazing sky, there is not even a sense of dual and background. When sitting quietly listening to music, the clarity of sound is no diff from my heart beats...even drips of water of a tap...

However this is not the practice of mature practitioners.”

I went through various gradations of nondual experience after anatta which matured over the next years. The details can be found in my ejournal, but as a summary its rather similar to https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../different-degrees...

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

The Different Degrees of Non-Duality

The Different Degrees of Non-Duality

• 2w
• Like
• Reply
• Remove Preview

Craig Nichols

Soh Wei Yu thanks, have a safe flight

• 2w
• Like
• Reply

Active

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Top Contributor

In feb 2007:

(10:22 PM) Thusness: i termed it myself...lol

(10:22 PM) AEN: oh haha

(10:22 PM) Thusness: as a distinct phase of crystal clarity.

(10:22 PM) AEN: oic

(10:22 PM) Thusness: going through all 3 phases.

(10:23 PM) Thusness: in the first round one is unable to break through all 3 phases

(10:23 PM) Thusness: although there is no entry or exit in non-dual.

(10:23 PM) AEN: icic

(10:24 PM) Thusness: it is not that there is a second round.

(10:24 PM) Thusness: lol

(10:24 PM) Thusness: as what longchen said. 

(10:25 PM) AEN: icic

(10:25 PM) AEN: oh but i tot u can maintain non dual in sleep? 

(10:26 PM) Thusness: there is no need to maintain anything during deep sleep.

(10:26 PM) Thusness: it is non-dual by itself.

(10:26 PM) Thusness: more pure than anything. 

(10:26 PM) Thusness: but just like what longchen said in one of his posts, there are various phases

(10:27 PM) Thusness: in the first phase, there is no thinker but thinking

(10:27 PM) Thusness: in later refinement of non-duality, there is no thoughts and thoughts have lost their attraction.

(10:28 PM) AEN: back

(10:28 PM) AEN: oic...

(10:28 PM) AEN: no thoughts meaning few thoughts rite... not no thoughts 

(10:28 PM) Thusness: but these are not phases of non dual. Rather they are the different degrees of luminosity

(10:28 PM) Thusness: yeah

(10:29 PM) AEN: ok

(10:29 PM) AEN: icic

(10:29 PM) Thusness: there is always non-dual like what longchen said.

(10:29 PM) Thusness: means he has understood it as a seal.

(10:29 PM) Thusness: no-self is a seal.

(10:29 PM) Thusness: a dharma seal.

——

Also see:

https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../are-insight-stages...

Are the insight stages strictly linear?

I wrote this based on what Thusness/PasserBy have said regarding his Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Experience on Spiritual Enlightenment - not to think of the 7 stages as strictly linear or having a hierarchy.

Some are able to understand the profound wisdom of emptiness from the start but have no direct experience of luminosity, then luminosity becomes a later phase. So does that mean the most pristine experience of "I AM" is now the last stage? On the other hand, some have experienced luminosity but does not understand how he got himself 'lost', as there is no insight to the karmic tendencies/propensities at all, therefore they cannot understand Dependent Origination adequately. But does that mean that the one that experiences emptiness is higher than the one experiencing luminosity?

Some people experience non-dual but do not go through the I AM, and then after non-dual the I AM becomes even more precious because it brings out the luminosity aspect more. Also, when in non-dual, one can still be full of thoughts, therefore the focus then is to experience the thoroughness of being no-thoughts, fully luminous and present... then it is not about non-dual, not about the no object-subject split, it is about the degree of luminosity for these non-dualist. But for some monks that is trapped in luminosity and rest in samadhi, then the focus should be on refining non-dual insight and experience. For non-dualists, depending on the level of understanding, one can move forward and backward, there is no hierarchy.

So just see the phases as different aspect of insights of our true nature, not necessarily as linear stages or a 'superiority' and 'inferiority' comparison. What one should understand is what is lacking in the form of realization. There is no hierarchy to it, only insights. Understanding this means that one will be able to see all stages as flat, no higher.

Labels: Stages of Enlightenment |

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

Are the insight stages strictly linear?

Are the insight stages strictly linear?

• 2w
• Like
• Reply
• Remove Preview