tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post5514019130978634671..comments2024-03-18T10:07:38.422+08:00Comments on Awakening to Reality: Tips on Self Enquiry: Investigate Who am I, Not 'Ask' Who am ISohhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16416159880942160813noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-48874915457197908832021-08-12T23:17:45.076+08:002021-08-12T23:17:45.076+08:00I have read many Christian mystics of past eras an...I have read many Christian mystics of past eras and contemporary ones that describe the I AM realization, so I have no doubt that it is commonly realised among Christian contemplatives now and then.Sohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16416159880942160813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-61445519688415272862021-08-12T23:15:42.072+08:002021-08-12T23:15:42.072+08:00(7:52 PM) Thusness: heard of.
(7:52 PM) Thusness: ...(7:52 PM) Thusness: heard of.<br />(7:52 PM) Thusness: why?<br />(7:53 PM) AEN: nothing much.. lol<br />(7:54 PM) Thusness: but u know wat i meant right?<br />(7:54 PM) AEN: yea<br />(7:55 PM) Thusness: however it is okie to experience the "I AMness" first. :)<br />(7:56 PM) Thusness: with the teaching and the experience of your teacher as guidance, moving into non-duality and the experience of dharmakaya.<br />(7:56 PM) AEN: icic..<br /><br />Session Start: Thursday, 31 May, 2007<br /><br />(8:29 PM) Thusness: just meditated for 15 mins...ahaha<br />(8:29 PM) AEN: lol<br />(8:29 PM) AEN: icic<br />(8:29 PM) AEN: so how was it<br />(8:29 PM) Thusness: forgot to tell u the part on "even ajahn chah says "the heart is just the heart; thoughts and feelings are just thoughts and feelings. let things be just as they are! let form be just form, let sound be just sound, let thought be just thought. why should we bother to attach to them? if we think and feel in this way, then there is detachment and separateness.<br />(8:30 PM) AEN: icic<br />(8:30 PM) AEN: so wat u wanted to say<br />(8:31 PM) Thusness: is very important.<br />(8:31 PM) Thusness: that is the experience of the 2nd door.<br />(8:31 PM) Thusness: our thoughts and feelings will be on one side and our heart will be on the other. just like oil and water - they are in the same bottle but they are separate"<br />(8:31 PM) Thusness: this part is advaita.<br />(8:32 PM) Thusness: so there is the 2nd door without the clarity of non-dual.<br />(8:32 PM) Thusness: but the first part is very important in terms of experience.<br />(8:32 PM) AEN: oic..<br />(8:33 PM) Thusness: some is non-duality without second door.<br />(8:33 PM) Thusness: but each door is to deal with a particular aspect of 'self'<br />(8:33 PM) AEN: icic<br />(8:33 PM) AEN: longchen now knows second door rite<br />(8:33 PM) Thusness: yeah<br />(8:34 PM) AEN: icic<br />(8:34 PM) Thusness: but the depth of the experience, dunno.<br />(8:34 PM) Thusness: eheheh<br />(8:34 PM) AEN: oic<br />(8:34 PM) AEN: how come second door will lead to 'things as they are'<br />(8:35 PM) Thusness: did u read what i said in the post to amadeus?<br />(8:35 PM) Thusness: on the immense clarity of isness?<br />(8:36 PM) AEN: tink so<br />(8:36 PM) AEN: cant remember now<br />(8:36 PM) Thusness: Isness is not just letting the passing away and not adding and subtracting to the moment.<br />(8:36 PM) AEN: oic<br />(8:37 PM) Thusness: it is the immense clarity, aliveness and vividness of the moment.<br />(8:37 PM) Thusness: the former is the passing away without clarity.<br />(8:37 PM) Thusness: the later is the clarity those not to the level of non-duality<br />(8:38 PM) Thusness: these 2 aspects must fuse into one to arise the realisation of self-liberation.<br />(8:38 PM) AEN: icic..<br />(8:38 PM) AEN: so the third is immense clarity of passing away<br />(8:39 PM) Thusness: did u c what i wrote to amadeus?<br />(8:39 PM) Thusness: on the post "when truth takes over"<br />(8:39 PM) Thusness: i said still with all the vividness, it is gone.<br />(8:39 PM) Thusness: but who can understand...ehhehee<br />(8:39 PM) AEN: oic..<br />(8:39 PM) Thusness: maybe watchit...lol<br />(8:40 PM) AEN: watch it understands 2nd door and clarity?<br />(8:41 PM) Thusness: not exactly, the experience is there.<br />Sohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16416159880942160813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-8847924919970365262021-08-12T23:15:23.023+08:002021-08-12T23:15:23.023+08:00(7:30 PM) AEN: btw ajahn chah speaks a lot on 3 dh...(7:30 PM) AEN: btw ajahn chah speaks a lot on 3 dharma seals and vipassana<br />(7:30 PM) AEN: but somewhere he also mentions about 'that which knows'.. sounds a bit like 'i am' lol<br />(7:30 PM) AEN: i tink ajahn mun's lineage ppl also say tat<br />(7:30 PM) Thusness: yes<br />(7:30 PM) AEN: u also remember rite<br />(7:30 PM) Thusness: it becomes advaita.<br />(7:30 PM) AEN: oic<br />(7:31 PM) AEN: he said 'Thus the Buddha taught to abide as 'that which knows' [2] and simply bear witness to that which arises. Once you have trained your awareness to abide as 'that which knows', and have investigated the mind and developed insight into the truth about the mind and mental factors, you'll see the mind as anatta (not-self).<br />(7:31 PM) Thusness: there is nothing and no 'I' apart from manifestation.<br />(7:31 PM) AEN: icic<br />(7:31 PM) Thusness: no<br />(7:32 PM) Thusness: buddha taught there is only the arising and ceasing, there is nothing apart from that. Just the correct and right view.<br />(7:32 PM) AEN: icic..<br />(7:32 PM) Thusness: when we have the wrong view, we see things in the form of life and death.<br />(7:32 PM) Thusness: when we have the right view, we see the unborn, uncreated.<br />(7:33 PM) AEN: oic<br />(7:33 PM) Thusness: ever manifesting.<br />(7:33 PM) Thusness: buddha taught there is only the arising and ceasing, there is nothing apart from that. Just whether the view is correct or wrong view.<br />(7:34 PM) AEN: back<br />(7:34 PM) AEN: icic..<br />(7:34 PM) Thusness: when one is able to experience our nature as it is, the bliss experienced is different.<br />(7:35 PM) AEN: oic<br />(7:35 PM) Thusness: The experience and bliss of an eternal witness observing the transient and the full experience of just the transient is different.<br />(7:36 PM) Thusness: the bliss and clarity of no-self is of a different dimension.<br />(7:37 PM) AEN: icic<br />(7:37 PM) Thusness: u must understand that buddhism does not deny clarity, luminosity.<br />(7:37 PM) Thusness: but we must realise what clarity is.<br />(7:37 PM) AEN: oic<br />(7:37 PM) AEN: btw u read ajahn chah's bk b4? how u find them<br />(7:37 PM) Thusness: yes i have read it b4. :)<br />(7:38 PM) Thusness: i find that ajahn chah is proned towards "I AMness".<br />(7:38 PM) Thusness: that is the trace of self is still there.<br />(7:38 PM) Thusness: I do not know, since he is already (being claimed to be) an arhat. :P<br />(7:39 PM) Thusness: i prefer u to read dharma dan...lol<br />(7:39 PM) AEN: oic he did state tat?<br />(7:39 PM) AEN: as in he's arhat<br />(7:39 PM) AEN: i heard about it also<br />(7:39 PM) AEN: icic<br />(7:39 PM) Thusness: i do not know...<br />(7:40 PM) AEN: i heard from e-sangha dunnu isit the same monk that criticised ajahn maha boowa... that ajahn mun and its lineage ppl, ajahn chah, ajahn maha boowa etc lean towards eternalism... then the other lineage like ajahn buddhadhasa lean towards nihilism or something like that<br />(7:40 PM) AEN: oic but how u know he's arhat<br />(7:40 PM) Thusness: i mean ppl say, not i know.<br />(7:40 PM) AEN: icic<br />(7:41 PM) Thusness: the teaching of buddha's is very profound and subtle.<br />(7:41 PM) Thusness: we need to practice hard to validate what that is taught.<br />(7:41 PM) AEN: oic<br />(7:42 PM) Thusness: otherwise mostly we will misinterpret.<br />(7:42 PM) Thusness: most likely<br />(7:42 PM) Thusness: ehehehe<br />(7:42 PM) AEN: icic..<br />(7:43 PM) Thusness: a person must be able to experience the dissolution of the self to a great extent before the teaching of buddha can be fully appreciated.<br />(7:43 PM) Thusness: that is even after he/she has experienced non-duality.<br />(7:44 PM) AEN: oic..<br />(7:46 PM) Thusness: but try not to comment on ajahn chah.<br />(7:46 PM) AEN: yea<br />(7:46 PM) Thusness: i do not want u to have another issue like lao tze.<br />(7:46 PM) Thusness: :)<br />(7:46 PM) AEN: hahaha<br />(7:46 PM) AEN: oh ya is tmr lol<br />(7:49 PM) Thusness: yes...lol<br />(7:50 PM) AEN: btw ajahn brahm under ajahn chah u know?<br />(7:52 PM) Thusness: yeah<br />Sohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16416159880942160813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-49413629947516407102021-08-12T23:15:06.919+08:002021-08-12T23:15:06.919+08:00(7:08 PM) Thusness: why was the Phagguna Sutta tau...(7:08 PM) Thusness: why was the Phagguna Sutta taught?<br />(7:09 PM) Thusness: because Buddha has realised the subtlety of imprints.<br />(7:09 PM) AEN: icic<br />(7:10 PM) Thusness: Even if one has experienced non-duality, it will not be easy for him to go beyond this 'seed' if he overlooked and continue to employ dualistic interpretation.<br />(7:10 PM) AEN: icic<br />(7:10 PM) Thusness: therefore Buddha corrected these practitioners.<br />(7:10 PM) Thusness: even they have experienced no-self.<br />(7:11 PM) Thusness: unknowingly, the re-enforced and create imprints.<br />(7:11 PM) AEN: icic<br />(7:11 PM) Thusness: Phagguna Sutta is the language of no-self and emptiness.<br />(7:11 PM) Thusness: not only there is no 'I', there is no 'mine'.<br />(7:12 PM) AEN: oic<br />(7:12 PM) Thusness: not that 'thoughts' has no 'I', it is has no 'mine'.<br />(7:12 PM) AEN: icic..<br />(7:12 PM) Thusness: this then is dharmakaya. First is non-duality, then it is the experience of dharmakaya.<br />(7:12 PM) AEN: oic<br />(7:13 PM) AEN: so dharmakaya is non duality without any propensities left?<br />(7:13 PM) Thusness: when we say we are not 'thoughts', we are not 'feelings', we are not 'forms'<br />(7:13 PM) Thusness: then does that mean that there is an 'I' that is not transient?<br />(7:13 PM) AEN: icic..<br />(7:14 PM) AEN: wat u tink about the teaching of tathagathagarbha as being 'primordially pure and unstained' or something like that<br />(7:14 PM) Thusness: there is a clarity that is untouched but it must be viewed in terms of emptiness.<br />(7:14 PM) AEN: oic<br />(7:15 PM) Thusness: if this tathagathagarbha nature is taught but without knowing emptiness, then it is erroneous views.<br />(7:15 PM) AEN: icic..<br />(7:16 PM) AEN: pure and unstained shld be understood in terms of emptiness and self-liberation?<br />(7:17 PM) Thusness: yeah<br />(7:17 PM) Thusness: but stressing that pure and unstained should not be misunderstood as there is something behind.<br />(7:17 PM) Thusness: it is from beginning pure and unstained.<br />(7:18 PM) Thusness: we never lost our clarity.<br />(7:18 PM) Thusness: even for a moment.<br />(7:18 PM) Thusness: but when I said that, I do not mean that there is a clarity behind phenomenon.<br />(7:18 PM) AEN: icic..<br />(7:19 PM) Thusness: pain is clarity, otherwise why is there pain. How is it that we feel it is so real?<br />(7:19 PM) Thusness: isn't it clear.<br />(7:19 PM) AEN: oic<br />(7:19 PM) Thusness: when there is momentum, there is 'self', isn't this clear?<br />(7:19 PM) AEN: icic<br />(7:20 PM) Thusness: everything is as clear as it can be, as luminous.<br />(7:20 PM) AEN: oic..<br />(7:21 PM) Thusness: actually u just have to see manifestation, see conditions and that is all.<br />(7:21 PM) Thusness: there is no need to look for buddhahood.<br />(7:21 PM) Thusness: naked awareness is just this.<br />(7:23 PM) AEN: icic..<br />(7:23 PM) AEN: no need to look for buddhahood as in<br />(7:23 PM) Thusness: one can experience non-duality, understand non-duality thoroughly and yet still continue to reinforce the seed of 'I' due to our conventional language.<br />(7:24 PM) Thusness: but when one uses language of emptiness and no-self as in the case of Phagguna Sutta, the deconstruction is every moment.<br />(7:24 PM) AEN: oic..<br />(7:26 PM) Thusness: then we will know that how true the dualistic language has bonded and moulded me into experiencing an 'I' and using the way of Phagguna Sutta to deconstruction the views of the world and together with the experience of non-duality, one experiences the true breadth and depth of non-duality.<br />(7:27 PM) AEN: icic..<br />(7:27 PM) AEN: oh theres one part in ajahn chah's book that he mentioned his experience of deconstruction too<br />(7:27 PM) AEN: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ajchah_lib/01_key.htm<br />(7:27 PM) AEN: search 'space'<br />Sohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16416159880942160813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-60557960039243356282021-08-12T23:14:49.497+08:002021-08-12T23:14:49.497+08:00(6:42 PM) Thusness: this is a wrong view in the ab...(6:42 PM) Thusness: this is a wrong view in the absolute sense and not prajna wisdom.<br />(6:43 PM) AEN: oic so tats said in conventional sense?<br />(6:44 PM) Thusness: in the conventional sense, it should not be spoken that way too. The way ajahn chah puts it is no good. It becomes advaita.<br />(6:44 PM) Thusness: with all respect, that is not what the buddha taught. :)<br />(6:44 PM) AEN: oic<br />(6:44 PM) Thusness: i will explain to u later...i go eat first.<br />(6:45 PM) AEN: ok cya<br />(6:46 PM) Thusness: u have posted Phagguna Sutta in simpo site. What is such a teaching important?<br />(6:47 PM) AEN: uh bcos it concerns our nature?<br />(6:51 PM) Thusness has changed his/her status to Idle<br />(6:56 PM) AEN: just now i went to ABC, flipped through dalai lama's book and come across this chapter talking about mind's luminosity, then hhdl mentioned something like the window and stain and stain can be removed<br />(6:56 PM) AEN: then later went palelai and got 2 bks from ajahn chah, one part also mention this<br />(6:57 PM) AEN: like just now that part<br />(7:00 PM) Thusness has changed his/her status to Online<br />(7:01 PM) AEN: http://buddhism.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=248318&page=2 -- wanderer typed:<br />(7:01 PM) AEN: <br /><br />(3) Know that your true nature has never ever been stained by such temporary defilements. Therefore such defilements are removable.<br /><br />You have to recognize that at that moment you are angry, but you are NOT anger.<br /><br />Knowing that you are NOT anger is important, because then anger is removable.<br />(7:01 PM) AEN: <br />Just like when there is a stain on your window, you know that the stain is not part of your window, that is why you will clean away the stain. If you don't believe that the stain is removable, if you thought that the stain were part of the window, then you wouldn't even attempt to clean it away.<br /><br />Likewise, when your anger arises, recognize the fact that you want to and you can actually remove anger is because it was never part of your true nature. Know that the stain is clean-able. The anger and all other defilements are removable. Your original nature (often referred to as Buddha Nature, or Tathagatha-garbha, or kham) is primordially pure and unstained.<br />(7:02 PM) Thusness: u see this is how modern teachers teach about buddha's teaching.<br />(7:02 PM) Thusness: if that is the case, then who need buddha's teaching at all.<br />(7:02 PM) Thusness: and why the correction in the Phagguna Sutta?<br />(7:02 PM) AEN: icic..<br />(7:03 PM) Thusness: what would buddha say in phagguna sutta if this was said in the phagguna sutta?<br />(7:03 PM) AEN: there is no 'who', but conditions arise?<br />(7:04 PM) Thusness: do not say that 'not me'...change it to 'no me'.<br />(7:04 PM) Thusness: not me implies that there is a 'me', an 'I'.<br />(7:04 PM) Thusness: there are few groups of practitioners.<br />(7:05 PM) Thusness: one has not experienced anything at all, the I is an individual 'I'.<br />(7:06 PM) Thusness: there are also those that experienced 'I AMness' but has not experienced infinite expansion of 'I'<br />(7:06 PM) Thusness: there is another group that experienced the 'I' as the infinite I.<br />(7:08 PM) Thusness: there are those that experienced non-duality but continue to be under the influence of propensities, unable to experience the breadth and depth of non-dual.<br />(7:08 PM) Thusness: there are those that are completely one in non-dual, free of propensities of 'I'.<br />(7:08 PM) AEN: oic..<br />Sohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16416159880942160813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-39258513872724661782021-08-12T23:14:20.361+08:002021-08-12T23:14:20.361+08:00No, actually I am very familiar with writings of A...No, actually I am very familiar with writings of Ajahn Maha Boowa, Ajahn Chah, etc.<br /><br />What Ajahn Maha Boowa calls the radiant mind but still reified as a knower, that is equivalent to the I AM stage. This means he equates anagami with the I AM phase. Then he relates the collapse of the Witness into nonduality as arahantship. However he still retains the false view of Mind as unchanging and distinct from transient aggregates even if beyond the duality of knower and known. That is Advaita view. It does not go beyond One Mind. "The citta does not arise or pass away; it is never born and never dies" - Ajahn Maha Boowa.<br /><br />Ajahn Mun is also prone to eternalist views like Ajahn Maha Boowa.<br /><br />I do not equate these realisations with Buddhist awakening. Thusness Stage 5~7 is Buddhist awakening. Related: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/08/insight-buddhism-reconsideration-of.html , https://www.reddit.com/r/streamentry/comments/igored/insight_buddhism_a_reconsideration_of_the_meaning/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf%20<br /><br />Ajahn Sumedho on I AM:<br /><br />“The still point gives you perspective on the conditions, on the turning wheel, on the confusion, on the mess. It puts you into a relationship to it that is one of knowing it for what it is, rather than making a personal identity out of it. Then you can see that this knowing is your true nature – your real home – this pure state, pure consciousness, pure awareness. You are learning to remember that, to be that. It’s what you really are, rather than what you think you are according to the conditioning of your mind.”<br /><br />On Ajahn Chah and I AM:<br /><br /><br />Session Start: Thursday, 31 May, 2007<br /><br />(2:47 PM) AEN: tibetan teachings seems to often say bcos the nature of our mind is luminous defilements can be removed.. like wanderer's saying the mind is not the dust, so can be removed<br />(2:48 PM) AEN: even ajahn chah says "the heart is just the heart; thoughts and feelings are just thoughts and feelings. let things be just as they are! let form be just form, let sound be just sound, let thought be just thought. why should we bother to attach to them? if we think and feel in this way, then there is detachment and separateness. our thoughts and feelings will be on one side and our heart will be on the other. just like oil and water - they are in the same bottle but they are separate"<br />(2:49 PM) AEN: then the buddha taught,<br />(2:49 PM) AEN: Reply with Quote<br />Luminous is this mind,<br />Brightly shining, but it is<br />Colored by the attachments<br />That visit it.<br />This unlearned people do not<br />Really understand,<br />And so do not cultivate the<br />Mind.<br />(2:49 PM) AEN: <br />Luminous is this mind,<br />Brightly shining,<br />And it is free of the<br />Attachments that visit it.<br />This the noble follower<br />Of the way really understands;<br />So for them there is<br />Cultivation of the mind.<br /><br />- Anguttara Nikaya<br />(2:52 PM) AEN: wat u tink<br />(6:29 PM) Thusness: think of?<br />(6:42 PM) AEN: something like there is stain on ur window, u know stain is not part of ur window tats y u can clean it away<br />Sohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16416159880942160813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-17207161701365315422021-08-10T06:51:55.403+08:002021-08-10T06:51:55.403+08:00Hi again, Soh —
I think there is a lot of misunde...Hi again, Soh —<br /><br />I think there is a lot of misunderstanding out there about the Thai Forest Tradition (must like with Dzogchen). Ajahn Maha Booa is pretty clear that the "radiant mind" or "original mind" is itself ignorance and that this must end….he's actually more clear about not reifying radiance than some Thai Forest masters are. I like his lesson to Mae Chee Kaew in the latter's biography:<br /><br />“If it [radiance] is truly Nibbāna, why does this refined state of the<br />mind display a variety of subtle conditions? It is not constant<br />and true. Focus on that luminous center to see clearly that<br />its radiance has the same characteristics — of being transient,<br />imperfect and unessential — as all the other phenomena<br />that you have already transcended. The only difference<br />is that the radiance is far more subtle and refined".<br /><br />As for Ajahn Chah, when he was asked if there was something beyond the 5 aggregates, he said, "Consciousness is not an individual, not a being, not a self, not an other, so finish with that -- finish with everything! There is nothing worth wanting! It's all just a load of trouble. When you see clearly like this then everything is finished."<br /><br />Ajahn Mun is a figure so shrouded in mystery by this point I don't know what to make of him.<br /><br /> It's true that sometimes Thai Forest people use wonky definitions of stream entry, and I don't know if that's a translation issue or a misunderstanding of the suttas (there's a lot of anti-intellectualism in the TFT). It's like the want to make the first stage of Enlightenment about realizing a separation of mind and body, which is indeed rather "I Am"-ish. But it's not like they don't talk about the anatta of all 5 aggregates in other contexts, it just seems like more of an advanced insight.<br /><br /> I honestly have never been able to "get" Ajahn Sumedho, but I know he's spent the past few years studying with Ajahn Ganha, whom Ajahn Brahm is convinced is an Arahant. So I'm willing to remain open minded about him, even though I agree that his wording seems distractingly eternalistic. He's said that his wording is a "skillful means," but it seems to me like it leads to confusion.<br /><br />I'm not entirely convinced that what the Christians speak of with the "unitative" realization is actually quite the same as "I Am" realization, though I think they are touching on the same "phenomenon" (for lack of better word)….the "pristine awareness." Christians tend to emphasize that humans cannot ever be the same as God in their essence, just united in their energies. It's a subtle distinction, but perhaps important. And I agree with you that Christians have largely lost track of the mystical aspect of Christianity, though the Eastern churches are better than the Western ones in this regard. <br /><br />Thank you, again, for your input! I'm trying to cultivate stillness and see for myself what paradigm I related the most to.TheSynergistnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-12638504866498112532021-08-10T02:38:16.204+08:002021-08-10T02:38:16.204+08:00"Christians usually interpret (either correct..."Christians usually interpret (either correctly or incorrectly) to be a proclamation of Jesus' uniqueness rather than a mystical experience anybody can undergo. "<br /><br />This is because most mainstream Christians are like blind men trying to interprete the words of Seers. How can they ever hope to understand what Jesus was talking about? Only the mystics know, and there are plenty in Christianity throughout history.<br /><br />If you take Jesus words in context and read the whole bible, it is clear that Jesus is a mystic that went through similar realisations. http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/12/jesus-christ-cosmic-consciousness-alan.htmlSohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16416159880942160813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-41211129169575354852021-08-10T02:29:17.112+08:002021-08-10T02:29:17.112+08:00Also, I AM is precisely what mystics call God. I A...<br />Also, I AM is precisely what mystics call God. I AM, God, Pure Beingness, these are pure synonyms for the mystics. The same realization.<br /><br />Have you seen this article: https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/mistaken-reality-of-amness.html<br /><br />John Tan, 2006: "Like a river flowing into the ocean, the self dissolves into nothingness. When a practitioner becomes thoroughly clear about the illusionary nature of the individuality, subject-object division does not take place. A person experiencing “AMness” will find “AMness in everything”. What is it like?<br /><br />Being freed from individuality -- coming and going, life and death, all phenomenon merely pop in and out from the background of the AMness. The AMness is not experienced as an ‘entity’ residing anywhere, neither within nor without; rather it is experienced as the ground reality for all phenomenon to take place. Even in the moment of subsiding (death), the yogi is thoroughly authenticated with that reality; experiencing the ‘Real’ as clear as it can be. We cannot lose that AMness; rather all things can only dissolve and re-emerges from it. The AMness has not moved, there is no coming and going. This "AMness" is God.<br /><br />Practitioners should never mistake this as the true Buddha Mind! "I AMness" is the pristine awareness. That is why it is so overwhelming. Just that there is no 'insight' into its emptiness nature. Nothing stays and nothing to hold on to. What is real, is pristine and flows, what stays is illusion. The sinking back to a background or Source is due to being blinded by strong karmic propensities of a 'Self'. It is a layer of ‘bond’ that prevents us from ‘seeing’ something…it is very subtle, very thin, very fine…it goes almost undetected. What this ‘bond’ does is it prevents us from ‘seeing’ what “WITNESS” really is and makes us constantly fall back to the Witness, to the Source, to the Center. Every moment we want to sink back to Witness, to the Center, to this Beingness, this is an illusion. It is habitual and almost hypnotic."<br /><br />John Tan: "(1:36 AM) Thusness: do u feel like u r God?<br />when one experiences "I AM", he feels like he is God<br />(1:37 AM) Thusness: that sort of experience leh<br />(1:37 AM) AEN: oic..<br />(1:37 AM) Thusness: can that experience be ordinary?<br />(1:37 AM) AEN: nope<br />(1:37 AM) Thusness: it is transcendental" - http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/12/i-am-experienceglimpserecognition-vs-i.htmlSohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16416159880942160813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-47549587254217825702021-08-10T02:29:11.991+08:002021-08-10T02:29:11.991+08:00Most, I think >90% of Thai Forest teachers went...Most, I think >90% of Thai Forest teachers went through I AMness. There is a lot of emphasis on luminosity in Thai Forest compared to other forms of contemporary Theravada. It is also known as the luminous and radiant Citta, the Poo Roo, so on and so forth. When Ajahn Chah uses the oil and water analogy to point at Citta, that is a pointer to the I AM. Ajahn Sumedho talks about an unconditioned consciousness, he is talking about I AM. Ajahn Maha Boowa went through I AM then collapse of witness into one mind. So on and so forth, I can list many examples but I think this should suffice. <br /><br />The brightness of mind is actually unfabricated, it is as Buddha taught in Phabhassara Sutta, the luminous mind's luminosity is merely obscured by adventitious stains. I AM realization is actually a direct realization of Mind's unfabricated Presence-Awareness.<br /><br />Few teachers in Thai Forest truly realise the Stage 5 sort of anatta but this is the case in all traditions as well. Examples of those who realise Stage 5 anatta in Thai Forest: Ajahn Brahmavamso - https://www.dhammatalks.net/Books6/Ajahn_Brahm_BAHIYA_S_TEACHING.htm , Ajahn Nyanamoli Thero - http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/search/label/Ajahn%20Nyanamoli%20Thero , Phra Kovit Khemananda - http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/search/label/Phra%20Kovit%20Khemananda <br /><br />What Bernadette Roberts went through is no different from I AM.<br /><br />http://www.innerexplorations.com/ewtext/br.htm<br /><br />"The contemplative seeks to go a step further and move from awareness of<br />the center point of equilibrium of the affective system, to the still<br />point or true center of being (I AM).<br /><br />Now the will is the center of the affective system, Roberts says, and<br />the provider of energy for the affective system. Also, underlying the<br />will is the still point or true center of being. So when the will does<br />not move, or is free of desire, the affective system does not move, a<br />state of desirelessness exists, and it is easier to access the<br />still-point (I AM).<br /><br />This center or will, can be known independent of the cognitive system,<br />which also touches the center of the affective system.<br /><br />Once the contemplative knows the still-point (IAM) and turns attention<br />there, the movement of the affective system comes to a stop, and there<br />is a sense of stillness and peace.<br /><br />The nature of this unitive state is union of human and divine will and<br />power, so that will is now God's will, not contrary to that. Here is<br />where one may become further tested by the world. Now situations arise<br />that would test movement of the will, test the integrity of the unitive<br />state. The requirement is for attention to be unceasingly on the<br />still-point (I AM)."<br /><br />- https://www.nonduality.com/berna.htm<br />Sohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16416159880942160813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-35494519829643578352021-08-09T04:37:37.703+08:002021-08-09T04:37:37.703+08:00Hi, Soh,
Thanks for your helpful response!
I thi...Hi, Soh,<br /><br />Thanks for your helpful response!<br /><br />I think then I am a bit confused by this label "I Am." I have read all of Bernadette Roberts books, and she doesn't describe anything as "I am", not even in her first book "The Path to No Self"….instead she talks about a unity of self and God. She describes the center point as "the place where the self ends and God begins," or something like that. It's a similar phenomenon to what you see in other classical Christian contemplative writings, including St. John of the Cross and Eckart, which you just quoted — the stuff about the Divine Center. I never thought of this as being "I Am" because the "divine center" tends to be characterized as an absence of an "I"….it's God, not self. It relates to St. Paul statement in Galatians 2:20 about "I am dead, but Christ lives in me."<br /><br />I do agree that Keating might talk about "I Am", though he's a bit more integrative of other traditions than other Christian writers are. And yes, there is the Gospel of John quote, which Christians usually interpret (either correctly or incorrectly) to be a proclamation of Jesus' uniqueness rather than a mystical experience anybody can undergo. Perhaps Christians are worried about using the term "I AM" for exactly this reason — they don't want to claim equality with God. <br /><br />When you word it as "AM" rather than "I AM", it actually makes more sense, and seems more compatible with the Christian mystics. "Am" puts more focus on just pure being ness, rather than a "true self"….the being ness could be God rather than Self. Perhaps there is indeed this one experience, but people interpret it differently, with some people labeling it as "true self" and others as "God"….does that make sense?<br /><br /> "Are there people who, for example, not going through Thusness Stage 1 skips to anatta? It is possible but very often they will miss out something and need another phase to bring out the luminosity aspect."<br /><br />Interesting. I'm mostly used to practicing w/ Theravada folks, where imho there is kinda a tendency to rush to Anatta and/or body contemplations (this is huge in the Thai Forest tradition). The preparatory stage of "brightening the mind," which is alluded to in the Suttas, gets neglected.TheSynergistnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-55875236939169742202021-08-09T03:42:37.531+08:002021-08-09T03:42:37.531+08:00By the way as you already know, I see the I AM rea...<br />By the way as you already know, I see the I AM realization as important and tell others to start from there. It is good that it is pointed out in the Christian tradition.<br /><br />Compare this with Thusness Stage 1, the Ground of Being:<br /><br /><br />"Like a river flowing into the ocean, the self dissolves into nothingness. When a practitioner becomes thoroughly clear about the illusionary nature of the individuality, subject-object division does not take place. A person experiencing “AMness” will find “AMness in everything”. What is it like?<br /><br />Being freed from individuality -- coming and going, life and death, all phenomenon merely pop in and out from the background of the AMness. The AMness is not experienced as an ‘entity’ residing anywhere, neither within nor without; rather it is experienced as the ground reality for all phenomenon to take place. Even in the moment of subsiding (death), the yogi is thoroughly authenticated with that reality; experiencing the ‘Real’ as clear as it can be. We cannot lose that AMness; rather all things can only dissolve and re-emerges from it. The AMness has not moved, there is no coming and going. This "AMness" is God.<br /><br />Practitioners should never mistake this as the true Buddha Mind! "I AMness" is the pristine awareness. That is why it is so overwhelming. Just that there is no 'insight' into its emptiness nature." (Excerpt from Buddha Nature is NOT "I Am" - http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2007/03/mistaken-reality-of-amness.html )<br /><br /><br />Plenty of others I haven't quoted.<br /><br />Are there people who, for example, not going through Thusness Stage 1 skips to anatta? It is possible but very often they will miss out something and need another phase to bring out the luminosity aspect. See: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/06/pellucid-no-self-non-doership.html<br /><br />Best IMO to go step by step (From I AM to non dual and anatta to emptiness).Sohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16416159880942160813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-31930452499515463262021-08-09T03:41:14.862+08:002021-08-09T03:41:14.862+08:00Most Christian mystics I know go through the I AM....Most Christian mystics I know go through the I AM. Most mystics of any religion go through that phase.<br /><br />Jesus talked about it: <br />"Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am." - http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/12/jesus-christ-cosmic-consciousness-alan.html<br /><br />Founding father of modern Singapore attained Self-Realisation (I AM) through his Catholic Father Laurence Freeman's teachings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RoSGUuAj1o<br /><br />Bernadette Roberts went through I AM phase before non dual: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2007/07/bernadette-roberts-interview.html<br /><br />Father Thomas Keating taught: "beyond the spiritual level is the true self; and beyond that is the divine indwelling (which is God). St. John of the Cross says, „The center of the soul is God“. That last place is the only guarantee that you are coming from the authentic self. The true self is really a manifestation of the Unmanifest. And no one knows what the Unmanifest is except the Unmanifest itself and how it wants to manifest in our particular uniqueness."<br /><br /><br />Meister Eckhart stresses on I AMness:<br /><br />Sermon 60 wrote:I have sometimes spoken of a light that is in the soul, which is uncreated and uncreatable. I continually touch on this light in my sermons: it is the light which lays straight hold of God, unveiled and bare, as He is in Himself, that is, it catches Him in the act of begetting. So I can truly say that this light is far more at one with God than it is with any of the powers with which it has unity of being. For you should know, this light is no nobler in my soul's essence than the humblest, or the grossest of my powers, such as hearing or sight or any other power which is subject to hunger or thirst, cold or heat, and that is because being is indivisible. And so, if we consider the powers of the soul in their being, they are all one and equally noble: but if we take them in their functions, one is much higher and nobler than the other.<br /><br />Therefore I say, if a man turns away from self and from all created things, then—to the extent that you do this—you will attain to oneness and blessedness in your soul's spark, which time and place never touched. This spark is opposed to all creatures: it wants nothing but God, naked, just as He is. It is not satisfied with the Father or the Son or the Holy Ghost, or all three Persons so far as they preserve their several properties. I declare in truth, this light would not be satisfied with the unity of the whole fertility of the divine nature. In fact I will say still more, which sounds even stranger: I declare in all truth, by the eternal and everlasting truth, that this light is not content with the simple changeless divine being which neither gives nor takes:<br /><br />rather it seeks to know whence this being comes, it wants to get into its simple ground, into the silent desert into which no distinction ever peeped, of Father, Son or Holy Ghost. In the inmost part, where none is at home, there that light finds satisfaction, and there it is more one than it is in itself: for this ground is an impartible stillness, motionless in itself, and by this immobility all things are moved, and all those receive life that live of themselves, being endowed with reason. That we may thus live rationally, may the eternal truth of which I have spoken help us. Amen.<br /><br />Sohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16416159880942160813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3225985453951330898.post-45022619894292041922021-08-09T03:15:15.495+08:002021-08-09T03:15:15.495+08:00Do some people skip the "I AM" stage ent...Do some people skip the "I AM" stage entirely? Christian contemplatives don't talk about it much, from what I can tell.TheSynergistnoreply@blogger.com