Showing posts with label God. Show all posts
Showing posts with label God. Show all posts
Soh wrote: Hi, i think this will interest you on the various stages of awakening and depths of nondual awareness and its nature : http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html
5:11 PM

Soh wrote: On how it relates to christian mysticism, i just wrote today:

Hi Mr S

In anatta there is a feeling of divinity, of being the one intelligence, god, mind, life, awareness etc but not as a background but purely as all ongoing appearances. As Rongzom Pandita said, all appearances are divine. If there is a feeling of eternity it is not of an unchanging background but of infinite interpenetration of time and space and as if past present future are inseparable from this moment.

If no background and no entity is not clear, this feeling of all pervading divinity easily gets reified into either a universal mind or solipsist thinking. Or an ultimate background behind everything. Which is all forms of inherency and subtle duality thinking.

All is the one life one intelligence one clarity flow. Hence with anatta insight, naturally one eats god, taste god, see god, smell god, sleep god. Liberate god - for god has no face of its own, only infinite faces. To be restricted in anyway, such as grasping at an image of awareness as a formless background, is to impose artificial limitations and separation on awareness and miss out the vibrant textures and forms of awareness. In truth there is no one face of god but ten thousand faces.

As I wrote in 2012, “Every moment is an encounter of my thousand faces. The sound of thunder, every drop of rain, every heart beat, every breath, every thought. Experience, experience, experience, experience!”

Anatta will open the effortless gateway to the taste and actualization of everything as god or divinity, so it will certainly complement well your practice of christian mysticism or islamic sufism:


“Well, its not really new... it is just clear now how there is an imputation we put on Awareness as being "separate' from experience, as some sort of "stand alone" awareness". I have always experienced awareness as experience inseparably so, but didn't notice the subtle imputation that gives still a separate implication of being a remainder, when all things are absent. Being wouldn't know itself outside of experience. If being did know itself in total voidness, that very "knowing" would itself be an experience, hence the void would not be void. God cannot be separated from creation, because the potential for creation is already Known.” - Mr. J, 2012

“What is presence now? Everything... Taste saliva, smell, think, what is that? Snap of a finger, sing. All ordinary activity, zero effort therefore nothing attained. Yet is full accomplishment. In esoteric terms, eat God, taste God, see God, hear God...lol. That is the first thing I told Mr. J few years back when he first messaged me 😂 If a mirror is there, this is not possible. If clarity isn't empty, this isn't possible. Not even slightest effort is needed. Do you feel it? Grabbing of my legs as if I am grabbing presence! Do you have this experience already? When there is no mirror, then entire existence is just lights-sounds-sensations as single presence. Presence is grabbing presence. The movement to grab legs is Presence.. the sensation of grabbing legs is Presence.. For me even typing or blinking my eyes. For fear that it is misunderstood, don't talk about it. Right understanding is no presence, for every single sense of knowingness is different. Otherwise Mr. J will say nonsense... lol. When there is a mirror, this is not possible. Think I wrote to longchen (Sim Pern Chong) about 10 years ago.” - John Tan

“It is such a blessing after 15 years of "I Am" to come to this point . Beware that the habitual tendencies will try its very best to take back what it has lost. Get use to doing nothing. Eat God, taste God, see God and touch God.

Congrats.” – John Tan to Sim Pern Chong after his initial breakthrough from I AM to no-self in 2006, http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2013/12/part-2-of-early-forum-posts-by-thusness_3.html

“An interesting comment Mr. J. After realization… Just eat God, breathe God, smell God and see God… Lastly be fully unestablished and liberate God.” - John Tan, 2012

xabir Snoovatar
Yesterday

Redditor A: Hi, what led you to send this to me?

Quite impressive timing, it felt like an answer to a tendency I was having to look for that "background" (kind of interwoven, really) awareness, probably as a reaction to stress in my life recently.

Soh replied: I saw some of your postings and video on formless consciousness. Thought you had the I AM awakening.

I'm Soh, and Thusness (John Tan) is my mentor... I've been through similar stages in my journey. Both of us are co authors of the blog

regarding "background", John Tan wrote in 2009,

“The Absolute as separated from the transience is what I have indicated as the 'Background' in my 2 posts to theprisonergreco.

84. RE: Is there an absolute reality? [Skarda 4 of 4]
Mar 27 2009, 9:15 AM EDT | Post edited: Mar 27 2009, 9:15 AM EDT
Hi theprisonergreco,

First is what exactly is the ‘background’? Actually it doesn’t exist. It is only an image of a ‘non-dual’ experience that is already gone. The dualistic mind fabricates a ‘background’ due to the poverty of its dualistic and inherent thinking mechanism. It ‘cannot’ understand or function without something to hold on to. That experience of the ‘I’ is a complete, non-dual foreground experience.

When the background subject is understood as an illusion, all transience phenomena reveal themselves as Presence. It is like naturally 'vipassanic' throughout. From the hissing sound of PC, to the vibration of the moving MRT train, to the sensation when the feet touches the ground, all these experiences are crystal clear, no less “I AM” than “I AM”. The Presence is still fully present, nothing is denied. -:) So the “I AM” is just like any other experiences when the subject-object split is gone. No different from an arising sound. It only becomes a static background as an afterthought when our dualistic and inherent tendencies are in action.

The first 'I-ness' stage of experiencing awareness face to face is like a point on a sphere which you called it the center. You marked it.

Then later you realized that when you marked other points on the surface of a sphere, they have the same characteristics. This is the initial experience of non-dual. Once the insight of No-Self is stabilized, you just freely point to any point on the surface of the sphere -- all points are a center, hence there is no 'the' center. 'The' center does not exist: all points are a center.

After then practice move from 'concentrative' to 'effortlessness'. That said, after this initial non-dual insight, 'background' will still surface occasionally for another few years due to latent tendencies...

86. RE: Is there an absolute reality? [Skarda 4 of 4]
To be more exact, the so called 'background' consciousness is that pristine happening. There is no a 'background' and a 'pristine happening'. During the initial phase of non-dual, there is still habitual attempt to 'fix' this imaginary split that does not exist. It matures when we realized that anatta is a seal, not a stage; in hearing, always only sounds; in seeing always only colors, shapes and forms; in thinking, always only thoughts. Always and already so. -:)

Many non-dualists after the intuitive insight of the Absolute hold tightly to the Absolute. This is like attaching to a point on the surface of a sphere and calling it 'the one and only center'. Even for those Advaitins that have clear experiential insight of no-self (no object-subject split), an experience similar to that of anatta (First emptying of subject) are not spared from these tendencies. They continue to sink back to a Source.

It is natural to reference back to the Source when we have not sufficiently dissolved the latent disposition but it must be correctly understood for what it is. Is this necessary and how could we rest in the Source when we cannot even locate its whereabout? Where is that resting place? Why sink back? Isn't that another illusion of the mind? The 'Background' is just a thought moment to recall or an attempt to reconfirm the Source. How is this necessary? Can we even be a thought moment apart? The tendency to grasp, to solidify experience into a 'center' is a habitual tendency of the mind at work. It is just a karmic tendency. Realize It! This is what I meant to Adam the difference between One-Mind and No-Mind.” - John Tan, 2009, excerpt from Emptiness as Viewless View and Embracing the Transience https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/04/emptiness-as-viewless-view.html

in 2007, John Tan said to me

(11:29 PM) Thusness: when we say there is a background that does not change, we are falling into this trap.
(11:29 PM) AEN: oic..
(11:29 PM) Thusness: so when there is stress, u cannot say that something behind is always not stressed.
(11:29 PM) Thusness: this is an illusion
(11:30 PM) Thusness: u cannot say that u have insight into the unchanging
(11:30 PM) Thusness: instead, u must 'c' the condition for the arising of stress.
(11:30 PM) Thusness: otherwise where is the solution?
(11:31 PM) Thusness: when u practice, u practice to c.
(11:31 PM) Thusness: that is the clarity of buddha's nature.
(11:31 PM) Thusness: that is, it is pain.
(11:31 PM) Thusness: clearly so.
(11:31 PM) AEN: icic
(11:31 PM) Thusness: it must be as clear as it can be.
(11:31 PM) Thusness: arises and ceases
(11:31 PM) Thusness: get it?
(11:32 PM) AEN: ya
(11:32 PM) Thusness: now the clarity is never affected
(11:32 PM) Thusness: why?
(11:32 PM) Thusness: because there is pain
(11:32 PM) Thusness: otherwise it becomes dull.
(11:32 PM) Thusness: something is wrong
(11:33 PM) Thusness: or it becomes a stone
(11:33 PM) Thusness: that is why mindfulness leads to enlightenment
(11:34 PM) Thusness: now when we c this, we do not have image
(11:34 PM) Thusness: we cannot have
(11:34 PM) Thusness: because it is not anything at all
(11:34 PM) Thusness: there is no way to know
(11:35 PM) Thusness: but if u say all those attributes, it becomes predictable
(11:35 PM) Thusness: it becomes something
(11:35 PM) Thusness: it has an image
(11:35 PM) Thusness: it is a background
(11:35 PM) AEN: oic
(11:36 PM) Thusness: when one experience something like the background, it is a form of samadhi
(11:36 PM) Thusness: it is a merge with the image
(11:37 PM) Thusness: but if one arises and ceases without background, then that is insight
(11:37 PM) AEN: oic
(11:37 PM) AEN: u mean stage 1 and 2 is samadhi?
(11:37 PM) AEN: but u said theres difference rite
(11:37 PM) AEN: between samadhi and stage 1
(11:37 PM) Thusness: yeah
(11:38 PM) Thusness: what is important is to have insight, the directness until u reaches non-dual
(11:38 PM) Thusness: then when non-dual is peak, there is self-liberation.
(11:38 PM) Thusness: however self liberation has 2 very important characteristics
(11:38 PM) Thusness: one is completely non-attached
(11:38 PM) Thusness: the other is fearlessness
(11:38 PM) AEN: icic
(11:39 PM) AEN: fearlessness means if u look down from a tall building u also not scared? :P
(11:39 PM) Thusness: no lah
(11:39 PM) Thusness: means no fear
(11:39 PM) Thusness: even the entire body is gone
(11:39 PM) AEN: oic then isnt wat i said true
(11:39 PM) Thusness: everything is gone
(11:39 PM) AEN: lol
(11:39 PM) AEN: icic
(11:40 PM) Thusness: it is very important
(11:40 PM) Thusness: and non-attachment
(11:40 PM) Thusness: then u can experience the highest form of non-dual
(11:40 PM) Thusness: that is self-liberation in all moments
(11:40 PM) AEN: oic
(11:41 PM) Thusness: tat is why one must continue to practice second door
(11:41 PM) Thusness: the passing away
(11:41 PM) Thusness: that is the reason i posted in the steven case.
(11:41 PM) AEN: icic
(11:42 PM) AEN: btw u said if theres background its samadhi
(11:43 PM) AEN: but u also said samadhi is different from stage 1 and 2 rite
(11:43 PM) AEN: cos theres no clarity or something
(11:43 PM) Thusness: the most is samadhi
(11:43 PM) AEN: huh
(11:43 PM) Thusness: but u must also understand that, the presence experience is not a background hor
(11:43 PM) Thusness: it is only misunderstood as a background
(11:43 PM) AEN: oic
(11:44 PM) Thusness: the actual experience is not a form of background
(11:44 PM) AEN: so a person when they enter samadhi, they may not experience presence
(11:44 PM) AEN: but a stage 1 and 2 experience presence and mistakes it as background
(11:44 PM) Thusness: only when we attempt to understand, we misinterpret it.
(11:44 PM) AEN: oic
(11:44 PM) Thusness: so when it becomes a background, u can only get it as a merge with that image thought has created from the experience of presence.
(11:45 PM) AEN: icic
(11:45 PM) Thusness: in this case there is the experience of it, but there is no prajna wisdom.
(11:45 PM) AEN: oic
(11:45 PM) Thusness: there is no wisdom because ignorance is taking place and is strong.
(11:45 PM) AEN: icic
(11:46 PM) Thusness: therefore there is no insight, but there is experience.

i practiced self enquiry between 2008 to feb 2010, then I realized I AM, and in the following months i progressed in terms of the four aspects of i am, entered nondual in august 2010, then realized anatta in oct 2010

in my AtR community or the atr group (a facebook group), more than 50+ people realised anatta, and most of them went through the same phases of insights as myself and john

my progress from I AM to anatta is pretty fast, within a year. for most people they get stuck at I AM for years and decades and many with no breakthroughs from there even until death. but with the right pointers and contemplation, one can break through much faster, hence I always try my best to share my 2 cents with the right people.

usually for those that realized I AM i will tell them to focus on the four aspects of I AM, two stanzas of anatta, the two nondual contemplations and bahiya sutta

do see:

https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2018/12/four-aspects-of-i-am.html

https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/03/on-anatta-emptiness-and-spontaneous.html

https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2018/12/two-types-of-nondual-contemplation.html

http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2008/01/ajahn-amaro-on-non-duality-and.html

"i practiced self enquiry between 2008 to feb 2010, then I realized I AM, and in the following months i progressed in terms of the four aspects of i am, entered nondual in august 2010, then realized anatta in oct 2010"


my breakthrough to anatta was from contemplating bahiya sutta which i wrote in http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2010/10/my-commentary-on-bahiya-sutta.html

after I AM, it is important to go into nondual and anatta and then progress into twofold emptiness. twofold emptiness for me is in following years after anatta.

life after anatta is truly amazing after anatta.. especially when it stabilizes and deepens. truly wondrous. i wrote a bit about it in http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/04/why-awakening-is-so-worth-it.html

xabir Snoovatar

the christian mystic bernadette roberts is close but unfortunately she didnt emphasize on anatta as a seal, that would have been more crucial.

here's an interview with her, you may be able to find some correlates with the john tan's 7 stages ( http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html ) above

bernadette's interview:

http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2007/07/bernadette-roberts-interview.html

excerpt:

Bernadette: That occurred unexpectedly some 25 years after the transforming process. The divine center - the coin, or "true self" - suddenly disappeared, and without center or circumference there is no self, and no divine."

....


Initially, when I looked into Buddhism, I did not find the experience of no-self there either; yet I intuited that it had to be there. The falling away of the ego is common to both Hinduism and Buddhism. Therefore, it would not account for the fact that Buddhism became a separate religion, nor would it account for the Buddhist's insistence on no eternal Self - be it divine, individual or the two in one. I felt that the key difference between these two religions was the no-self experience, the falling away of the true Self, Atman-Brahman.

Unfortunately, what most Buddhist authors define as the no-self experience is actually the no-ego experience. The cessation of clinging, craving, desire, the passions, etc., and the ensuing state of imperturbable peace and joy articulates the egoless state of oneness; it does not, however, articulate the no-self experience or the dimension beyond. Unless we clearly distinguish between these two very different experiences, we only confuse them, with the inevitable result that the true no-self experience becomes lost. If we think the falling away of the ego, with its ensuing transformation and oneness, is the no-self experience, then what shall we call the much further experience when this egoless oneness falls away? In actual experience there is only one thing to call it, the "no-self experience"; it lends itself to no other possible articulation.

Initially, I gave up looking for this experience in the Buddhist literature. Four years later, however, I came across two lines attributed to Buddha describing his enlightenment experience. Referring to self as a house, he said, "All thy rafters are broken now, the ridgepole is destroyed." And there it was - the disappearance of the center, the ridgepole; without it, there can be no house, no self. When I read these lines, it was as if an arrow launched at the beginning of time had suddenly hit a bulls-eye. It was a remarkable find. These lines are not a piece of philosophy, but an experiential account, and without the experiential account we really have nothing to go on. In the same verse he says, "Again a house thou shall not build," clearly distinguishing this experience from the falling away of the ego-center, after which a new, transformed self is built around a "true center," a sturdy, balanced ridgepole.

----


"The truth of the body, then, is the revelation that Christ is all that is manifest of God or all that is manifest of the unmanifest Father. Self or consciousness does not reveal this and cannot know it. In the "smile" there was no knower or one who smiles, nor was there anyone or anything to smile at or to know; there was simply the smile, the "knowing" that is beyond knower and known. The wrong interpretation of the absence of knower and known is that in that in the Godhead knower and known are identical. But the identity of knower and known is only true of consciousness, which is self knowing itself. But the Godhead transcends this identity -- it is void of knower or known. The "knowing" that remains beyond self or consciousness cannot be accounted for in any terms of knower and known. The truest thing that could be said is that the "body knows."" (see Resurrection, page 185, What Is Self?)

...

"Christ is not the self, but that which remains when there is no self.
He is the form (the vessel) that is identical with the substance, and he
is not multiple forms, but one Eternal form. Christ is the act, the
manifestation and extension of God that is no separate from God. We
cannot comprehend 'that' which acts or 'that' which smiles, but we all
know the act-- the smile that is Christ himself. Thus Christ turns out
to be all that is knowable about God, because without his acts, God
could not be known. Act itself is God's revelation and this revelation
is not separate from God, but Is God himself. This I believe is what
Christ would have us see; this is his completed message to man. But who
can understand it?

the breakthrough into anatta must come from realizing it as a seal, as always already so, a truth about the nature of consciousness and reality which is always so.. rather than a state or a stage

"Soh wrote in 2007 based on what John Tan wrote:


First I do not see Anatta as merely a freeing from personality sort of experience as you mentioned; I see it as that a self/agent, a doer, a thinker, a watcher, etc, cannot be found apart from the moment to moment flow of manifestation or as its commonly expressed as ‘the observer is the observed’; there is no self apart from arising and passing. A very important point here is that Anatta/No-Self is a Dharma Seal, it is the nature of Reality all the time -- and not merely as a state free from personality, ego or the ‘small self’ or a stage to attain. This means that it does not depend on the level of achievement of a practitioner to experience anatta but Reality has always been Anatta and what is important here is the intuitive insight into it as the nature, characteristic, of phenomenon (dharma seal).

To put further emphasis on the importance of this point, I would like to borrow from the Bahiya Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.10.irel.html) that ‘in the seeing, there is just the seen, no seer’, ‘in the hearing, there is just the heard, no hearer’ as an illustration. When a person says that I have gone beyond the experiences from ‘I hear sound’ to a stage of ‘becoming sound’, he is mistaken. When it is taken to be a stage, it is illusory. For in actual case, there is and always is only sound when hearing; never was there a hearer to begin with. Nothing attained for it is always so. This is the seal of no-self. Therefore to a non dualist, the practice is in understanding the illusionary views of the sense of self and the split. Before the awakening of prajna wisdom, there will always be an unknowing attempt to maintain a purest state of 'presence'. This purest presence is the 'how' of a dualistic mind -- its dualistic attempt to provide a solution due to its lack of clarity of the spontaneous nature of the unconditioned. It is critical to note here that both the doubts/confusions/searches and the solutions that are created for these doubts/confusions/searches actually derive from the same cause -- our karmic propensities of ever seeing things dualistically.


John Tan adds: "This is the seal of no-self and can be realized and experienced in all moments; not just a mere concept.""

It is very rare unfortunately to realise anatta. Not because its very hard to breakthrough but v few teachers that are guiding are clear about it, so i consider myself very fortunate to meet with the pointers and my mentor, who also said,

"Though buddha nature is plainness and most direct, these are still the steps. If one does not know the process and said ‘yes this is it’… then it is extremely misleading. For 99 percent [of ‘realized’/’enlightened’ persons] what one is talking about is "I AMness", and has not gone beyond permanence, still thinking [of] permanence, formless… ...all and almost all will think of it along the line of "I AMness", all are like the grandchildren of "AMness", and that is the root cause of duality.” - John Tan, 2007   


-----



Mr. SOS
 
1:29 PM
Well, I'm a Christian and believe that I am liberated by the loving grace of the good God who's son Jesus Christ paid our karmic debts for us. That doesn't preclude the salvific power of knowledge though, for you shall know the truth and it will set you free.

Jesus saw some little ones nursing. He said to his disciples, "These little ones who are nursing resemble is those who enter the kingdom." They said to him, "So shall we enter the kingdom by being little ones?" Jesus said to them, "When you (plur.) make the two one and make the inside like the outside and the outside like the inside and the above like the below, and that you might make the male and the female be one and the same, so that the male might not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye and a hand in place of a hand and a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image - then you will enter [the kingdom]."



Mr. SOS
 
1:34 PM
As for the 2nd part of that logos of Jesus, where He says when you make eyes in place of an eye... I wonder if that refers to what Buddhists call the rainbow body.
User Avatar
xabir 2:51 PM
what triggered my insight into anatta (no-self) is the bahiya sutta, where it is taught in the seen just the seen, no you in terms of that. so this may be somewhat related to 'eyes in place of an eyes'. if there is no you, naturally there is also no duality, no inside and outside etc. i wrote this shortly after my anatman breakthrough:

https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2010/10/my-commentary-on-bahiya-sutta.html

excerpt:

Thanks for the sharing...

I was reminded of Bahiya Sutta while you said 'seeing is seeing'...

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2008/01/ajahn-amaro-on-non-duality-and.html

In the seen, there is only the seen,
in the heard, there is only the heard,
in the sensed, there is only the sensed,
in the cognized, there is only the cognized.
Thus you should see that
indeed there is no thing here;
this, Bahiya, is how you should train yourself.
Since, Bahiya, there is for you
in the seen, only the seen,
in the heard, only the heard,
in the sensed, only the sensed,
in the cognized, only the cognized,
and you see that there is no thing here,
you will therefore see that
indeed there is no thing there.
As you see that there is no thing there,
you will see that
you are therefore located neither in the world of this,
nor in the world of that,
nor in any place
betwixt the two.
This alone is the end of suffering.” (ud. 1.10)

-----

My own comments:

Non-duality is very simple and obvious and direct... and yet always missed! Due to a very fundamental flaw in our ordinary dualistic framework of things... and our deep rooted belief in duality.

In the seen, there is just the seen! It is completely non-dual... there is no 'the seen + a perceiver here seeing the seen'.... The seen is precisely the seeing! There is not two or three things: seer, seeing, and the seen. That split is entirely conceptual (though taken to be reality)... it is a conclusion due to a referencing back of a direct experience (like a sight or a sound) to a centerpoint. This centerpoint could be a vague identification and contraction to one's mind and body (and this 'center of identification within the body' could be like two inches behind your eyes or on the lower body or elsewhere), or the centerpoint could be an identification with a previous nondual recognition or authentication like the I AM or Eternal Witness experience/realization. It could even be that one has gained sufficient stability to simply rest in the state of formless Beingness throughout all experiences, but if they cling to their formless samadhi or a 'purest state of Presence', they will miss the fact that they are not just the formless pure existence but that they are/existence is also all the stuff of the universe arising moment to moment... And when one identifies oneself as this entity that is behind and separated from the seen, this prevents the direct experience of what manifestation and no-self is.

But in direct experience it is simply not like that: there is nothing like subject-object duality in direct experience.... only This - seen, heard, sensed, cognized. Prior to self-referencing, this is what exists in its primordial purity.

So, in the seen, there's just That! Scenery, trees, road, etc... but when I label these as such, instead of putting a more subjective term such as 'experiencing'.... they tend to conjure images of an objective world that is 'out there' made of multiple different objects existing in time and space separated by distances.

But no, the Buddha says: in the seen, just the seen! There is no thing 'here' (apart from the seen).... nor something 'there' (as if the seen is an objective reality out there). From the perspective of the logical framework of things, the world is made of distance, depth, entities, objects, time, space, and so on, but if you take away the reference point of a self... there is simply Pure Consciousness of What Is (whatever manifests) without distance or fragmentation. You need at least two reference points to measure distance... but all reference points (be it of an apparent subjective self or an apparent external object) are entirely illusory and conceptual. If there is no 'self' here, and that you are equally everything... what distance is there? Without a self, there is no 'out there'...

The seen is neither subjective nor objective.... it just IS....

There is pure seeing, pure hearing, everything arising without an external reference other than the scenery being the seeing without seer, the sound being the hearing without hearer (and vice versa: the hearing being just the sound, the manifestation).

But even the word 'hearing', 'seeing', 'awareness' can conjure an image of what Awareness is.... As if there is really an entity called 'hearing' or 'seeing' or 'awareness' that remains and stays constant and unchanged.

But.... if you contemplate on "How am I experiencing the moment of being alive?", or, "How am I experiencing the moment of hearing?", or "How am I experiencing the moment of seeing?" or "How am I experiencing the moment of being aware?"

All the bullshit concepts, constructs and images of an 'aliveness', a 'hearing', a 'seeing', an 'awareness' simply dissolves in the direct experiencing of whatever arises... just 'seeing is seeing, hearing is hearing, thinking is thinking and they are all flowing independently', with 'no self holding all these sensory experiences together'.

If readers find my explanation a bit too hard to grasp, please read Ajahn Amaro's link because he explains it much better than me.
Labels: Buddha, I AMness, Non Dual |


“Hand in place of a hand” reminds me also of a zen instruction by a teacher i always recommend people, Ven. Jinmyo Renge sensei who also offers teachings online. She taught:

Only the hand can feel the hand.
If there is any sense of 'viewing down at the hand', that is because of that sense of locatedness in the head. So the 'antidote' to that is to practise the immediacy and directness of bodily sensation.
Only the foot can feel the foot.
Only the breath can feel the breath.
Only the tanden can feel the tanden.
It doesn't need a 'middle-man', a some 'one' to do the practice. It needs that some 'one' to get out of the way and let it be as simple and direct as it really is.



[10:06 am, 12/09/2021] Soh Wei Yu: Wrote yesterday:


Its all god
All divine
Appearances are divine

All is the one life one intelligence one clarity flow

Eat god taste god see god smell god sleep god

Liberate god - for god has no face of its own, only infinite faces


Everything - what a wonder, what a miracle

The ordinary are all miraculous activities and spiritual powers



Presence is infinite potentiality

Empty and hence infinite potentiality is possible
[10:06 am, 12/09/2021] Soh Wei Yu: Its like more brahman than brahman but its nature is empty
[10:42 am, 12/09/2021] Soh Wei Yu: Also all is spontaneously perfect. Its luminosity and emptiness. Absolutely no effort towards achieving something required.. its rather a release of ignorance, conditionings and fixations
[10:45 am, 12/09/2021] John Tan: U wrote?
[10:54 am, 12/09/2021] Soh Wei Yu: Yeah
[10:57 am, 12/09/2021] Soh Wei Yu: Its effect is like everything dissolved into spontaneity and presence.. spontaneous presencing
[11:01 am, 12/09/2021] John Tan: Yes
[11:01 am, 12/09/2021] John Tan: Outside, talk later
[2:01 pm, 12/09/2021] John Tan: Should not say everything is dissolved into spontaneity and presence also. Spontaneity and non-dual presence is simply one's natural condition. The conceptual and conventional are based on a paradigm of entities and characteristics resulting experiences appearing as dualistic and inherent.

When u go through the 2 stanzas, first stanza of non-doership is spontaneity and second stanza of luminosity is presence.

Why does seeing through a background construct, entities and characteristics result in insubstantial non-dual. If u r clear, then there is no arguments of empty of self nature and freedom from all elaborations. But the mind trying to integrate the two conceptually will face some challenges.

The key actually rest in anatta insight. If there is no background, one is left with the transient and exploring the nature of the transience. Groundlessness has to lead one this this insight, once this is clear, there will be no contradiction.
[3:01 pm, 12/09/2021] Soh Wei Yu: Yeah its clear spontaneous presence/spontaneous perfection is what is always already the case and has nothing to do with stages or achievement, buddha vs sentient being etc. Only adventitiously obscured

There is a feeling of divinity, of being the one intelligence, god, mind, life, awareness etc but not as a background but purely as all ongoing appearances. If there is a feeling of eternity it is not of an unchanging background but of infinite interpenetration of time and space and as if past present future are inseparable from this moment
[3:04 pm, 12/09/2021] Soh Wei Yu: If no background and no entity is not clear, this feeling of all pervading divinity easily gets reified into either a universal mind or solipsist thinking
[3:05 pm, 12/09/2021] Soh Wei Yu: Which is all forms of inherency thinking
[3:13 pm, 12/09/2021] John Tan: This is good. Read what I wrote to u when jack left.


 [11:45 PM, 12/19/2020] Soh Wei Yu: i didnt know yi nian xing zhe wrote this: 我吃着上帝,睡着上帝,用着上帝,坐着上帝,困了还躺在“床”——我的上帝身上。对我来说,那缔造我生活的每一个、每一种、每一位、每一面,都是我的上帝。
[11:46 PM, 12/19/2020] Soh Wei Yu: http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_5b4d23f60100ic0r.html
[12:05 AM, 12/20/2020] John Tan: 🤣🤣🤣
[12:05 AM, 12/20/2020] Soh Wei Yu: very funny hor
[12:05 AM, 12/20/2020] Soh Wei Yu: he has so many articles write the same style as you one
[12:05 AM, 12/20/2020] John Tan: Interesting
[12:05 AM, 12/20/2020] John Tan: Yeh
[12:06 AM, 12/20/2020] John Tan: Even Hong when Liang also
[12:07 AM, 12/20/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Ic.. yeah
[12:07 AM, 12/20/2020] John Tan: Some expressions are coincidentally same
[12:07 AM, 12/20/2020] John Tan: And y must it be expressed that way🤣🤣🤣
[12:08 AM, 12/20/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Lol yeah... 😂

 

“What is presence now? Everything... Taste saliva, smell, think, what is that? Snap of a finger, sing.  All ordinary activity, zero effort therefore nothing attained. Yet is full accomplishment. In esoteric terms, eat God, taste God, see God, hear God...lol. That is the first thing I told Mr. J few years back when he first messaged me 😂 If a mirror is there, this is not possible. If clarity isn't empty, this isn't possible. Not even slightest effort is needed. Do you feel it? Grabbing of my legs as if I am grabbing presence! Do you have this experience already? When there is no mirror, then entire existence is just lights-sounds-sensations as single presence. Presence is grabbing presence. The movement to grab legs is Presence.. the sensation of grabbing legs is Presence.. For me even typing or blinking my eyes. For fear that it is misunderstood, don't talk about it. Right understanding is no presence, for every single sense of knowingness is different. Otherwise Mr. J will say nonsense... lol. When there is a mirror, this is not possible. Think I wrote to longchen (Sim Pern Chong) about 10 years ago.” - John Tan from years back

 

“It is such a blessing after 15 years of "I Am" to come to this point . Beware that the habitual tendencies will try its very best to take back what it has lost. Get use to doing nothing. Eat God, taste God, see God and touch God.

Congrats.” – John Tan to Sim Pern Chong after his initial breakthrough from I AM to no-self in 2006,
http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2013/12/part-2-of-early-forum-posts-by-thusness_3.html

“An interesting comment Mr. J. After realization… Just eat God, breathe God, smell God and see God… Lastly be fully unestablished and liberate God.” - John Tan, 2012

 

(Soh: Lest readers misinterpret that John is affirming a substantialist notion of a ‘God’, it should be noted that by the phase of Anatta realization, there is simply no more reifications or conceivings of a metaphysical ‘God’ or ‘Creator’ of any kind, and John was simply using the lingo of Mr. J to convey the complete absence of a background substratum of Presence and the total luminosity of Presencing-as-manifestation to Mr. J using Mr. J’s ‘esoteric lingo’. Even the word ‘Presence’ is not referring to some static entity here - ‘Presencing’ is perhaps a better term, for as James M. Corrigan wrote, “...Awareness is not something other than the “presencing” (i.e. naturing) of appearances. It is not a thing. It is not part of a thing. It is not an “aspect” of a process… ...it is the process—not some aspect of it”

 

[11:59 PM, 6/16/2020] John Tan: (On the See god, eat god… post) Don't underestimate this.  An insight as important as anatta post the insight. Focus on this part. It is very important, if you can Intuit the insight that lead to this, the rest is not important.  There are many intellectual obscurations and at times the mind is being block and just can't release itself.  Same insight but just can't apply it on different situation relating to different mental proliferation.  The Freedom and release from such an insight is not freedom from conceptuality but a freedom from seeing distinction thereby leading to a direct authentication.  Because it is such an important insight, I will write something for you maybe later.  Focus on it diligently.





Compare with chinese article by Yi Nian Xing Zhe:

 http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_5b4d23f60100ic0r.html

上帝是什么?

(2010-05-10 14:29:55)
标签:

杂谈

分类: 《你问我应》

问:什么是上帝?

 

很显然,上帝是一切。上帝是花、草、树木,每一粒沙,每一撮尘土,每一丝光。没有什么不是上帝。上帝遍布每个存在,它在空间上一处也不遗漏,它在时间上一刻也不间断,上帝缜密在整个宇宙上帝是物质也是密度,是精神也是觉受。

 

我生活在上帝的世界:我吃着上帝,睡着上帝,用着上帝,坐着上帝,困了还躺在“床”——我的上帝身上。对我来说,那缔造我生活的每一个、每一种、每一位、每一面,都是我的上帝。我不得不敬重它们,因为它们以不可改变的坚定,热爱着、支持着我的存在,它们组成了我的世界、我的生活我的生命。

 

我是一个热爱上帝的人,我热爱它的每一种样子、每一个身份、每一次表现、每一贡献。我毫无条件的热爱,因为它是纯粹的仁慈。如果没有我给我制造痛苦,我一直享受在上帝无条件供奉的天堂世界里。那儿一切都有,一切满足,我感恩上帝照料和承托。

 

认识上帝的世界,始于从“我”的梦中醒来。我面见每一上帝和上帝的每一张脸,我时刻和它面对面,在与上帝零距离的爱里,我收获喜悦,我流出感恩,我不得不变成谦卑本身,我没有别的路子。花朵不得不开放,水不得不往下流,上帝手指之处,是我的归处、我的方向和我的目标。我听从上帝的,我沿着河流的方向走。

 

上帝是看得见的一切,上帝是听得见的一切,上帝是闻得的见一切;上帝是品尝到的一切,上帝是感触到的一切,上帝也是每一种想象、每一个念头、每一串故事。上帝即在内在,也在外在。上帝在我六根通行的道路上。上帝遍布生命所可到达、所可去往、所能觉知的一切时处。

 

这是一个上帝的世界,你造了它。你创造了上帝,然后上帝创造了你,然后你们共同创下了一切。这是一个美好的世界,认识“上帝即我,我是一切”是个有趣的故事。借着上帝提供的镜子:花、草、树木、一切,让心认出它层出不穷的脸或面孔。活着是一个逐渐认出自己,并不断自己无穷模样的过程,多么丰盛,生命!上帝固定,但它永远在变化中,因为心在变。

 

你了解心和上帝吗?这是了解的终点。一旦了解上帝和心,你就再也不须知道更多,因为你一切得到满足,而“存有”比你需要的还多。认识上帝和心,这是生命最无穷之奥妙。多么美好,生而能知,生而有觉。

 

 

Too lazy to translate so I'll leave the Google translation (Google translation seems to have improved over the years although no where near perfect yet)


What is God?
(2010-05-10 14:29:55)
Reprint▼
label:
Miscellaneous talk
Category: "You Ask Me Should"

Question: What is God?

 

Obviously, God is everything. God is flowers, grass, trees, every grain of sand, every pinch of dust, every gleam of light. Nothing is not God. God is pervasive in every existence, it does not leave out any place in space, it is uninterrupted in time, and God is meticulous in the entire universe. God is matter and density, spirit and perception.

 

I live in the world of God: I eat God, sleep with God, use God, sit with God, and lie on the "bed"-my God when I am sleepy. To me, every one, every kind, every person, every aspect that created my life is my God. I have to respect them because they love and support my existence with unchangeable firmness. They make up my world, my life, and my life.

 

I am a person who loves God, I love every look, every identity, every performance, and every contribution of it. I love it unconditionally, because it is pure kindness. If it were not for me to inflict pain on me, I would always enjoy being in the heavenly world unconditionally worshipped by God. There is everything there, everything is satisfied, I am grateful for God's care and support.

 

Knowing the world of God begins when I wake up from my "me" dream. I meet every god and every face of God, and I face it face to face at all times. In the zero-distance love with God, I reap joy, I am grateful, I have to become humble, and I have nothing else. Way. The flowers had to open, the water had to flow down, where God’s finger was my home, my direction and my goal. I obeyed God, I walked in the direction of the river.

 

God is everything you can see, God is everything you can hear, God is everything you can smell; God is everything you taste, and God is everything you feel. God is also everything you imagine, every thought, every A string of stories. God is both inside and outside. God is on my six passages. God is everywhere in life, where you can reach, where you can go, and where you can be aware.

 

This is a God's world, you made it. You created God, then God created you, and then you created everything together. This is a wonderful world, and it is an interesting story to know "God is me and I am everything". Through the mirror provided by God: flowers, grass, trees, everything, let the heart recognize its endless faces or faces. Living is a process of gradually recognizing yourself and constantly admiring your infinite appearance. How rich, life! God is fixed, but it is always changing because the heart is changing.

 

Do you understand the heart and God? This is the end of understanding. Once you understand God and your heart, you no longer need to know more, because you are satisfied with everything and the "being" is more than you need. Knowing God and the heart is the most infinite mystery of life. How beautiful it is to be born to know and to be conscious.