Some excerpts from a great Dzogchen practice book (which I highly recommend: 'The Cycle of Day and Night', which is about integrating the practice from waking to sleep) by a great Dzogchen master, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche.

"(5) The first of the three topics is understanding the practice. "Understanding" (rtogs-pa) is not just reasoning (brtag-pa) and analyzing (dpyad-pa), but it relies upon transmission. Our view (lta-ba) is a way of seeing or looking at things and it may include analysis and explanation. But "understanding" is fundamentally an entering into a knowledge of that view experientially. When we have no concrete knowledge of this sort, we are dependent upon the descriptions and interpretations of others, and these may change from day to day. Without real knowledge, all phenomena (chos kun) are merely false images (bden-med gzugs-brnyan); they do not exist in a real sense, but are like so many reflections in a mirror. A kitten, not knowing the image in the mirror is his own reflection, pursues it as if it were a real playmate. In Dzogchen, all appearances (snang-ba) are understood to be the potency (rtsal) of the energy of the Bodhicitta or the primordial state. These appearances are the qualifications or ornaments of that state. When we enter into knowledge we have no doubt of this. Thus we may conclusively determine (kho-thag-chod) that appearances are a magical display of the mind (sems kyi cho-'phrul).

(6) The Nature of the Mind (sems-nyid) is from the very beginning void or empty (stong-pa) and without any self or concrete substance (bdag-med). But we should not think of mind as being a mere nothing (med-pa) because it has the clarity and limpidity of the mirror. This clarity (gsal-cha) exists unobstructedly and without interruption ('gags-med), just as the moon is reflected in the water in various ways. Thoughts arising in mind are the way in which the Nature of Mind manifests itself. But just as we must understand the reflections in order to understand the nature of the mirror, so we must examine thoughts to see where they arise, where they abide, and where they go. However, when we look into this matter, we discover that there is no place where thoughts arise or abide or go. Nothing can be affirmed and what we find is void or emptiness (stong-pa nyid). This is the real character of the mind. Now, even though this may be the case, thoughts (rnam-rtog) continue to arise without interruption ('gags-med). Therefore, what we find is a primal awareness of pure presence (rig-pa'i ye-shes) where there is no duality of emptiness (stong-pa nyid) on the one hand and clarity (gsal-ba) on the other. This primal awareness is natural and spontaneously self-perfected (rang-bzhin lhun-grub). At the level of mind (sems) we do not find this nonduality because mind operates in time, while the state of pure presence (rig-pa) lies beyond the limits of mind.

(7) When we recognize that appearances are mere ornaments of the real condition of existence (chos nyid rgyan), these appearances which arise to our alertly relaxed (lhug-pa) six senses are self-liberated into their own condition (rang sar grol) whenever they arise. The six sense aggregates (tshogs drug) are the five senses plus the mind (yid). The presence of appearances prior to forming any conception or judgment is called "clarity." Appearances (snang-ba) refer to the external world, whereas the passions or afflictions (non-mongs) and the karmic traces (bag-chags) refer to the world of inner experience. The manifestation of the internal state of pure presence is primal awareness (ye-shes). The arising of pure presence (rig-pa) never lacks in spontaneous self-perfection (lhun-grub), that is to say, its essential qualities, just as the rising sun does not lack its rays. Our passions only grow powerful because we are ignorant of the state of pure presence, and so consequently we follow after our passions. But when we find ourselves in the state of the pure presence of the passions, they do not dominate us nor do we have to suppress them because they are like the ornaments of our primordial state. Thus our passions are self-liberated into their own condition (rang sar grol) whenever they arise.

(8) Appearances and pure presence are inseparable (snang rig dbyer-med). When we recognize (ngos zin) this and find ourselves in this state, then the discursive thoughts arising which grasp at the duality (gnyis su 'dzin-pa'i rnam-rtog) of subject and object, are liberated into their own condition (rang sar grol). We do not try to block or reject them in any way, but we simply remain aware in the presence of their arising. There are three procedures for self-liberation in this case, depending upon the capacity of the practitioner: 1. self-liberation through bare attention (gcer grol), 2. self-liberation upon the arising of a thought (shar grol), and 3. self-liberation as such (rang grol). The term gcer means "bare or naked attention." But this is not yet real self-liberation because, in observing ourselves, we are still applying some degree of effort. For example, when a thought arises, we look it straight in the face and it liberates into its own condition. The term shar means "to arise." At the moment the thought arise, we do not have to make the effort to look it straight in the face, but just as it arises, we find ourselves in the state of presence which is Rig-pa and it self-liberates. True self-liberation (rang-grol) occurs when this capacity is fully developed. At this level, we have arrived at the continuity of the state of Rig-pa.

(9) This verse gives the essence of the matter. The awareness (shes-pa) arising at the first sudden instant (thol-'byung skad-cig dang-po) of sense contact is that pure presence (rig-pa) which is manifested without modification or correction (ma bcos) by the mind and which is not created or produced (skye-med) by any causes. What is this state of presence? It is a condition of existence (de-bzhin-nyid) transcending the limitations of both subject and object (gzung 'dzin mtha' las 'das-pa); it is a natural and authentic (gnyug-ma) self-originated primordial awareness of pure presence (rang-byung rig-pa'i ye-shes). The term de-bzhin-nyid indicates the state characterized by both primordial purity (ka-dag) and spontaneous self-perfection (lhun-grub)."
Also see:

Genjo Koan: Actualizing the Fundamental Point

Flowers Fall: A Commentary on Zen Master Dogen's Genjokoan  

Realization, Experience and Right View and my comments on "A" is "not-A", "not A" is "A"  

"A" is "not-A", "not A" is "A"

From Bendowa, by Zen Master Dogen

Question Ten:

Some have said: Do not concern yourself about birth-and-death. There is a way to promptly rid yourself of birth-and-death. It is by grasping the reason for the eternal immutability of the 'mind-nature.' The gist of it is this: although once the body is born it proceeds inevitably to death, the mind-nature never perishes. Once you can realize that the mind-nature, which does not transmigrate in birth-and-death, exists in your own body, you make it your fundamental nature. Hence the body, being only a temporary form, dies here and is reborn there without end, yet the mind is immutable, unchanging throughout past, present, and future. To know this is to be free from birth-and-death. By realizing this truth, you put a final end to the transmigratory cycle in which you have been turning. When your body dies, you enter the ocean of the original nature. When you return to your origin in this ocean, you become endowed with the wondrous virtue of the Buddha-patriarchs. But even if you are able to grasp this in your present life, because your present physical existence embodies erroneous karma from prior lives, you are not the same as the sages.

"Those who fail to grasp this truth are destined to turn forever in the cycle of birth-and-death. What is necessary, then, is simply to know without delay the meaning of the mind-nature's immutability. What can you expect to gain from idling your entire life away in purposeless sitting?"

What do you think of this statement? Is it essentially in accord with the Way of the Buddhas and patriarchs?

Answer 10:

You have just expounded the view of the Senika heresy. It is certainly not the Buddha Dharma.

According to this heresy, there is in the body a spiritual intelligence. As occasions arise this intelligence readily discriminates likes and dislikes and pros and cons, feels pain and irritation, and experiences suffering and pleasure - it is all owing to this spiritual intelligence. But when the body perishes, this spiritual intelligence separates from the body and is reborn in another place. While it seems to perish here, it has life elsewhere, and thus is immutable and imperishable. Such is the standpoint of the Senika heresy.

But to learn this view and try to pass it off as the Buddha Dharma is more foolish than clutching a piece of broken roof tile supposing it to be a golden jewel. Nothing could compare with such a foolish, lamentable delusion. Hui-chung of the T'ang dynasty warned strongly against it. Is it not senseless to take this false view - that the mind abides and the form perishes - and equate it to the wondrous Dharma of the Buddhas; to think, while thus creating the fundamental cause of birth-and-death, that you are freed from birth-and-death? How deplorable! Just know it for a false, non-Buddhist view, and do not lend a ear to it.

I am compelled by the nature of the matter, and more by a sense of compassion, to try to deliver you from this false view. You must know that the Buddha Dharma preaches as a matter of course that body and mind are one and the same, that the essence and the form are not two. This is understood both in India and in China, so there can be no doubt about it. Need I add that the Buddhist doctrine of immutability teaches that all things are immutable, without any differentiation between body and mind. The Buddhist teaching of mutability states that all things are mutable, without any differentiation between essence and form. In view of this, how can anyone state that the body perishes and the mind abides? It would be contrary to the true Dharma.

Beyond this, you must also come to fully realize that birth-and-death is in and of itself nirvana. Buddhism never speaks of nirvana apart from birth-and-death. Indeed, when someone thinks that the mind, apart from the body, is immutable, not only does he mistake it for Buddha-wisdom, which is free from birth-and-death, but the very mind that makes such a discrimination is not immutable, is in fact even then turning in birth-and-death. A hopeless situation, is it not?

You should ponder this deeply: since the Buddha Dharma has always maintained the oneness of body and mind, why, if the body is born and perishes, would the mind alone, separated from the body, not be born and die as well? If at one time body and mind were one, and at another time not one, the preaching of the Buddha would be empty and untrue. Moreover, in thinking that birth-and-death is something we should turn from, you make the mistake of rejecting the Buddha Dharma itself. You must guard against such thinking.

Understand that what Buddhists call the Buddhist doctrine of the mind-nature, the great and universal aspect encompassing all phenomena, embraces the entire universe, without differentiating between essence and form, or concerning itself with birth or death. There is nothing - enlightenment and nirvana included - that is not the mind-nature. All dharmas, the "myriad forms dense and close" of the universe - are alike in being this one Mind. All are included without exception. All those dharmas, which serves as "gates" or entrances to the Way, are the same as one Mind. For a Buddhist to preach that there is no disparity between these dharma-gates indicates that he understands the mind-nature.

In this one Dharma [one Mind], how could there be any differentiate between body and mind, any separation of birth-and-death and nirvana? We are all originally children of the Buddha, we should not listen to madmen who spout non-Buddhist views.


Chinese translation:

道元禅师《办道话》-洪文亮老师(日中)翻译 (12/11/2009)



I was looking back at some posts by Thusness and found one that really summarizes the problems of many people (including me, once, and many others I see in forums)...


(31 October 2010)

Hi Geis,

I 'fear' commenting about other's forum because AEN will create havoc in that forum after

Jokes aside but I think it is still too early to say that insight of anatta has arisen. There seem to be a mixing up and a lack of clarity of the following experiences that resulted from contemplating on the topic of no-self:

1. Resting in non-conceptuality
2. Resting as an ultimate Subject or
3. Resting as mere flow of phenomenality

In case 1 practitioners see ‘The seen is neither subjective nor objective.... it just IS....’
In terms of experience, practitioners will feel Universe, Life. However this is not anatta but rather the result of stripping off (deconstructing) identity and personality.

When this mode of non-conceptual perception is taken to be ultimate, the terms “What is”, “Isness”, “Thusness” are often taken to mean simply resting in non-conceptuality and not adding to or subtracting anything from the ‘raw manifestation’. There is a side effect to such an experience. Although in non-conceptuality, non-dual is most vivid and clear, practitioners may wrongly conclude that ‘concepts’ are the problem because the presence of ‘concepts’ divides and prevent the non-dual experience. This seems logical and reasonable only to a mind that is deeply root in a subject/object dichotomy. Very quickly ‘non-conceptuality’ becomes an object of practice. The process of objectification is the result of the tendency in action perpetually repeating itself taking different forms like an endless loop. This can continue to the extent that a practitioner can even ‘fear’ to establish concepts without knowing it. They are immobilized by trying to prevent the formation of views and concepts. When we see ‘suffering just IS’, we must be very careful not to fall into the ‘disease’ of non-conceptuality.

In Case 2 it is usual that practitioners will continue to personify, reify and extrapolate a metaphysical essence in a very subtle way, almost unknowingly. This is because despite the non-dual realization, understanding is still orientated from a view that is based on subject-object dichotomy. As such it is hard to detect this tendency and practitioners continue their journey of building their understanding of ‘No-Self based on Self’.

For Case 3 practitioners, they are in a better position to appreciate the doctrine of anatta. When insight of Anatta arises, all experiences become implicitly non-dual. But the insight is not simply about seeing through separateness; it is about the thorough ending of reification so that there is an instant recognition that the ‘agent’ is extra, in actual experience it does not exist. It is an immediate realization that experiential reality has always been so and the existence of a center, a base, a ground, a source has always been assumed. This is different from 'deconstructing of identity and personality' which is related to non-conceptuality but 'actual' seeing of the non-existence of agent in transient phenomena.

Here practitioners will not only feel universe as in case 1 but there is also an immediate experience of our birth right freedom because the agent is gone. It is important to notice that practitioners here do not mistake freedom as ‘no right or wrong and remaining in a state of primordial purity’ ; they are not immobilized by non-conceptuality but is able to clearly see the ‘arising and passing’ of phenomena as liberating as there is no permanent agent there to ‘hinder’ the seeing. That is, practitioner not only realize ‘what experience is’ but also begin to understand the ‘nature’ of experience.

To mature case 3 realization, even direct experience of the absence of an agent will prove insufficient; there must also be a total new paradigm shift in terms of view; we must free ourselves from being bonded to the idea, the need, the urge and the tendency of analyzing, seeing and understanding our moment to moment of experiential reality from a source, an essence, a center, a location, an agent or a controller and rest entirely on anatta and Dependent Origination.

In my opinion, the blog that hosts the articles on “Who am I” and “Quietening the Inner Chatter” provide more in depth insights on non-duality, Anatta and Emptiness. The author demonstrates very deep clarity of ‘what experience is’ and the ‘nature (impermanent, empty and dependent originates according to supporting conditions)’ of experience.

Just my 2 cents. :-)
Update 2021:
    • Din Robinson
      I would say more that nothing can really be known but Being is an absolute that needs no knowing of it since knowing appears in it, as it

      • Reply
      • 1d

    Din Robinson
    and if you think I know what I'm talking about, I don't, I'm just making it up as I go along...

    • Reply
    • 1d
    Soh Wei Yu
    John Tan and I are "against" "don't know mind". In fact usually it refers to a state of marigpa (ignorance) called the indeterminancy of alaya. (see next post)
    [14/5/18, 9:56:36 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Anyway she asked dae Kwang who let’s go
    [14/5/18, 9:57:07 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Dae Kwang said precisely, he ask her back I think she said don’t know then he say correct, even Buddha’s don’t know, this don’t know is Buddha nature
    [14/5/18, 9:57:22 AM] John Tan: Nonsense
    [14/5/18, 9:57:42 AM] Soh Wei Yu: What nonsense?
    [14/5/18, 9:58:01 AM] John Tan: Such half past six answers is not zen
    [14/5/18, 9:58:08 AM] John Tan: Degraded
    [14/5/18, 9:58:22 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Oh but also he say
    [14/5/18, 9:58:29 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Heart Sutra no eyes no nose no... etc
    [14/5/18, 9:58:35 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Then he ask what is no eyes
    [14/5/18, 9:58:48 AM] Soh Wei Yu: He ask someone he doesn’t know
    [14/5/18, 9:58:53 AM] Soh Wei Yu: He say wall is white
    [14/5/18, 9:59:46 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Seung sahn always emphasise don’t know
    [14/5/18, 9:59:50 AM] Soh Wei Yu: I think it’s just non conceptuality
    [14/5/18, 9:59:55 AM] Soh Wei Yu: I mean the don’t know part
    [14/5/18, 9:59:57 AM] John Tan: I know
    [14/5/18, 10:00:29 AM] John Tan: This is a disease rather than wisdom
    [14/5/18, 10:01:44 AM] John Tan: What "don't know" points to is "non-conceptual" functioning.
    [14/5/18, 10:03:30 AM] John Tan: Lack of investigation and stable insights we will not be able to distinguish stable insights of non-conceptual functioning from "conceptual releasing".
    [14/5/18, 10:04:20 AM] John Tan: Originally I wanted to tell tan jui Hong but dun want to talk too much.
    [14/5/18, 10:05:11 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
    [14/5/18, 10:05:35 AM] Soh Wei Yu: I think u shld tell jui.. anyway jui has realised anatta I think might be into total exertion but not sure
    [14/5/18, 10:06:15 AM] John Tan: Next time
    [14/5/18, 10:06:21 AM] John Tan: Is he Singaporean
    [14/5/18, 10:09:06 AM] John Tan: Freeing from reified constructs is a whole new world of practice. That is "don't know mind" starts from there.
    [14/5/18, 10:14:26 AM] Soh Wei Yu: U mean jui?
    [14/5/18, 10:14:31 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Ya jui is singaporean, u met before
    [14/5/18, 10:14:37 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
    [14/5/18, 10:14:37 AM] John Tan: Yes
    [14/5/18, 10:14:40 AM] John Tan: Ic
    [14/5/18, 10:23:21 AM] John Tan: Also understanding reified constructs and experiencing reified constructs in oneself is the most crucial aspect.
    [14/5/18, 10:24:31 AM] John Tan: That is the first part of an anatta is key to understanding grasping.
    [14/5/18, 10:25:25 AM] John Tan: Only when we understand constructs and reification, can we understand grasping.
    [14/5/18, 10:27:23 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
    [14/5/18, 10:27:49 AM] John Tan: So understanding mental constructs r very imp
    [14/5/18, 10:28:11 AM] John Tan: That includes the energy and mind-body reactions
    [14/5/18, 10:32:53 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic..
    ‎[14/5/18, 10:46:32 AM] Soh Wei Yu: ‎image omitted
    [14/5/18, 10:46:43 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Overemphasize non conceptual I think
    [14/5/18, 10:48:17 AM] John Tan: That is lack of insight and investigation
    [14/5/18, 10:49:16 AM] John Tan: Means due to lack of working with conceptual mind, the "reasons" and the "way" isn't appropriately expressed
    [14/5/18, 10:49:33 AM] John Tan: There is the beauty of mathematics
    [14/5/18, 10:49:59 AM] John Tan: Like calculus to understand complex movement and rate of change
    [14/5/18, 10:51:03 AM] John Tan: There is glendin that can express total exertion and anatta properly.
    [14/5/18, 10:51:52 AM] John Tan: There r energies, prana, awareness teachings of functionality not due to "conceptualities"
    [14/5/18, 10:54:06 AM] John Tan: What just "don't know mind". By doing that, he has caused confusion in himself and others due to lack of investigation. The way of non-conceptual function is not to be solved by mind.
    [14/5/18, 11:13:12 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic.. not to be solved by the mind but by what way?
    [14/5/18, 11:15:23 AM] John Tan: By the "don't know mind" they r talking
    [14/5/18, 11:15:37 AM] John Tan: The problem is they do not know
    [14/5/18, 11:15:39 AM] John Tan: Lol

    • Reply
    • 1d
    • Edited

  • The Disease of Non-Conceptuality
    The Disease of Non-Conceptuality
    The Disease of Non-Conceptuality

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 1d

  • Soh Wei Yu
    On how "Don't Know Mind" is actually a state of ma-rigpa (or at most the coarse form of unripened rigpa), Mipham Rinpoche puts it nicely:
    quote: "In this, there is not any of the clear insight of vipaśyanā, which discerns things precisely, and so the masters call it marigpa (“non-recognition, ignorance, unknowing”). Since you cannot define it and say “This is what it’s like”, or “This is it!” such a state is called lungmaten (“undecided, indeterminate”). And since you cannot say what kind of state it is you are resting in, or what your mind is thinking, it is also called tha mal tang nyom (“an ordinary state of apathetic indifference”). In fact, you are stuck in an ordinary state within the ālaya."
    Contra rigpa (knowledge): "Although there is no dualistic separation here between an experience and an experiencer, still the mind is certain about its own true nature, and there is a sense that, “There is nothing whatsoever beyond this.” When this occurs, because you can not conceptualize it or express it in words, it is acceptable to apply such terms as: “free from all extremes”, “beyond description”, “the fundamental state of clear light” and “the pure awareness of rigpa.”
    As the wisdom of recognizing your own true nature dawns, it clears away the blinding darkness of confusion, and, just as you can see clearly the inside of your home once the sun has risen, you gain confident certainty in the true nature of your mind."
    A Lamp to Dispel Darkness
    A Lamp to Dispel Darkness
    A Lamp to Dispel Darkness

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 1d
    • Edited

  • Soh Wei Yu
    And likewise, Tsoknyi Rinpoche and many other teachers pointed out that rigpa is marked by certainty. I have said likewise in my journal.
    Absolute Certainty
    "First, acknowledging it is called recognizing one's nature. Next, we must be decisive about what is recognized. This is more complicated, because who really decides? Is it conceptual mind that settles it? Or is it rigpa itself that decides? or is it your teacher who makes up your mind - "The guru said so, so it must be true"? Or will modern technology validate it for you? Could you go to the Rigpa Lab and check your heart and brain with instruments to decide if your rigpa is fine and fit, if your nonduality is in good shape?
    How do you resolve this point? It may be tough to have to immediately endorse your own experience, but we can decide upon it if we feel even 60 percent confident that it's actually rigpa. As the basis for verifying, we use our teacher's words, the words of an authentic scripture, and our own experience. When our state of experiencing rigpa really is rigpa, there is within that an automatic feeling of certainty. To arrive at that certainty you need to give some time to the process, and you also need to have passion. There is a point at which the certainty is built-in, automatic certainty. Once we get to this natural, unshakable certainty, we feel so sure that even if the Buddha himself came before us and said, "Hey, you're wrong, it's not rigpa!" we would thank him for coming, but it would not change our certainty at all. At a certain point the qualities of empty essence, cognizant nature, and unconfined capacity become so utterly obvious that we really know. At this point, we have gained the certainty that whatever occurs in our minds can be freed by itself."
    - Tsoknyi Rinpoche, Fearless Simplicity: The Dzogchen Way of Living Freely in a Complex World
    Labels: Tsoknyi Rinpoche |
    Absolute Certainty
    Absolute Certainty
    Absolute Certainty

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 1d

  • Soh Wei Yu
    And likewise John Tan said in the quote above,
    "I think I mentioned I am not into without view. The freeing from seeing through self is not a form of "not knowing", contrary it is deep wisdom that allows one to understand our nature directly.”"

    • Reply
    • 1d

  • Soh Wei Yu
    "However due to ignorance, we have a very inherent and dual view, if we do see through the nature of presence, the mind continues to be influenced by dualistic and inherent tendencies. Many teach to overcome it through mere non conceptuality but this is highly misleading." -
    Anatta and Pure Presence
    Anatta and Pure Presence
    Anatta and Pure Presence

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 1d

  • Soh Wei Yu
    [30/9/17, 10:50:32 PM] Soh Wei Yu: The he Say open mouth already wrong. Cut off thinking.. then he use the Zen stick hit the floor.. is the mind and The hit same or different? Answer is just hit. No inside outside etc.. where you come from.. where does the one return to etc. All just hit. But after the interview I hear they discussing among themselves do u understand? They all just shrug, dunnu what the Teacher talking about
    [30/9/17, 10:55:20 PM] John Tan: Zen is a non verbal expression of suchness
    [30/9/17, 10:56:00 PM] John Tan: Attending to express in the most direct and intuitive way the actualization of anatta
    [30/9/17, 10:57:05 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic..
    [30/9/17, 10:57:12 PM] John Tan: But the extreme of it is the insight will prevent further insights
    [30/9/17, 10:57:45 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Cos falling into non conceptual disease?
    [30/9/17, 10:58:32 PM] John Tan: And actualization is on-going...After the koan an, one has to mature oneself to embrace both side of the coins...
    [30/9/17, 10:59:12 PM] Soh Wei Yu: What are the both sides?
    [30/9/17, 10:59:21 PM] Soh Wei Yu: View and nondual experience?
    [30/9/17, 10:59:37 PM] John Tan: Yes
    [30/9/17, 10:59:52 PM] John Tan: Non-verbal direct experience is important
    [30/9/17, 11:00:05 PM] John Tan: Only the over emphasis is the issue
    [30/9/17, 11:00:17 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
    [30/9/17, 11:01:52 PM] John Tan: Too much emphasis on just non-verbal stuff will prevent one from further insights into our nature as the mind can't clearly see
    [30/9/17, 11:02:59 PM] John Tan: But too much analysis and thinking is a grave obstruction to energy and intuitive felt sense practice 🤣
    [30/9/17, 11:03:05 PM] John Tan: Have to balance
    [30/9/17, 11:16:37 PM] John Tan: Sat chit Ananda can b a very refined stage too
    [30/9/17, 11:16:54 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Like different stages of I amness?
    [30/9/17, 11:17:04 PM] John Tan: Yes
    [30/9/17, 11:17:16 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic..
    [30/9/17, 11:17:58 PM] John Tan: Just don't like to say I hv experience this and ... Too old to go into debate anymore...
    [30/9/17, 11:18:09 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Lol
    [30/9/17, 11:19:46 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Just now he ask the question what is the one clear thing beyond life and death even before interview.. then I sat on the question and just experienced blissful being ness. Like beingness is blissful... actually anything nondual is blissful that’s why breathing can also be incredibly blissful
    [30/9/17, 11:21:27 PM] John Tan: Yes but u R in anatta or total exertion or non-obstruction self arising phenomenon
    [30/9/17, 11:21:42 PM] John Tan: Or in silence?
    [30/9/17, 11:22:05 PM] John Tan: Or in non-dual awareness?
    [30/9/17, 11:22:14 PM] John Tan: All are non dual🤣🤣🤣
    [30/9/17, 11:22:19 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Lol
    [30/9/17, 11:22:57 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Depends on the question I think, like before birth who am I leads to more like silent being, just mind
    [30/9/17, 11:23:22 PM] John Tan: Just I M
    [30/9/17, 11:23:46 PM] John Tan: fully into beingness
    [30/9/17, 11:25:09 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ya

  • Reply
  • 1d

    • Reply
    • 23h

    Din Robinson
    hi Soh Wei Yu, I would appreciate if you could talk to me directly without using quotes and tell me what you are saying in as few words as possible

    • Reply
    • 22h

    Soh Wei Yu
    The key to liberation is deeper and deeper insights into anatta and emptiness. Not just resting in a state of non conceptuality or “not knowing”.

    • Reply
    • 14h

  • Din Robinson
    thanks you, that was very concise 🤓

      • Reply
      • 12h

  • Soh Wei Yu
    Also related:
    The Trap of Non-Conceptuality
    Also see: The Disease of Non-Conceptuality
    For me, the idea that conceptuality is a trap is actually a trap itself that depletes the potential of spiritual practice. It entails throwing away a very valid dimension of experience - after all, thinking is part of reality as well. And since it is thinking that creates the illusion of duality, it is at the level of thought that illusions must be dismantled. At the level of "reality" there is nothing to be done.
    "Observe and see" [which is the only instruction you say you follow,] is also doing something. A spiritual path without instructions is not a path. And from the moment there are instructions, all of them may be valid, depending on the practitioner.
    The neo-Advaita has this characteristic of tending to be nihilistic in relation to the path and means of liberation. "There is no one, there is nothing that needs to be done." This reveals a profound misunderstanding concerning the nature of experience: Everything happens in experience, even without an agent to perform it - the spiritual path is no exception.
    The simplicity of "not thinking" is a comfortable nest that prevents us from asking important and bothersome questions. There is "presence" in the act of observation, but that presence has to be investigated in order to make its nature known. Otherwise, we are substituting a belief - in the self - for another - in some immutable and eternal presence. Both ego and presence are obvious and undeniable for those who establish them.
    Buddhism also dissolves all concepts, but only when they have already done their job of deconstructing all concepts. "Silencing" conceptuality too soon is to throw away the ladder (of analytical thinking) before we've used it to go beyond the wall (of conceptual ignorance).
    – Andre A. Pais
    The Trap of Non-Conceptuality
    The Trap of Non-Conceptuality
    The Trap of Non-Conceptuality

  • Reply
  • Remove Preview
  • 23h

Comments by Soh:

Hence, the realization of anatman is not merely a state of suspending concepts, which does not confer the prajna wisdom that puts an end to ignorance.

"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 an insight, realization, eureka moment of actually seeing and realizing the nature of mind:

"'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 Dixon, 2014