Posts
中文版：Thusness的内观 (Thusness's Vipassana)
Also see:
A note by Soh
Soh: The problem is that most vipassana teachers are missing the anatta insight and the way they teach doesn’t directly lead to insight.
Their anatta understanding is still inferential, even if they have peak experiences of some aspects of no-self. It is not the same as what we call the realisation of anatman.
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/12/vipassana-must-go-with-luminous.html It will be good that when doing vipassana, at the same time you contemplate experientially the two stanzas of anatta or Bahiya Sutta, that will lead to the anatman breakthrough.
https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2009/03/on-anatta-emptiness-and-spontaneous.html
https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2010/10/my-commentary-on-bahiya-sutta.html
https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2008/01/ajahn-amaro-on-non-duality-and.html
Conversation — 2005~2007
Ck: John, how do I practice vipassana in daily life?
Thusness: Just observe every sensation until one day you are able to experience “emptiness as form.” Then it becomes effortless. Truth is, you cannot imagine the bliss when one clearly experiences that. But there is no point to overstress anything. :)
Ck: "Just observe every sensation"... give me an example?
Thusness: When you breathe, you don't have to care what is the right way of breathing, whether you breathe hard or soft, smooth or fine... just experience as much clarity as you can. Just that experience... regardless of what it is like. Same for all other experiences.
Ck: What about sound? How is it?
Thusness: When you hear, just the sound... the totality of the sound. There is no “how” but just to do away with all arbitrary thoughts. Hear the sound as clearly as you can be.
Ck: Then what about thoughts? Thoughts are very sticky.
Thusness: Thoughts seldom arise if the practice is correct. If they arise, then not to chase after their meaning. Not to answer yourself what it means, not to dwell in “what”... then you will resort to just the moment of awareness.
Ck: When I try to be just openly aware, I notice that I jump from sense to sense. Like one moment hearing, then touch, etc.
Thusness: That is okay. Our nature is so.
Ck: What’s the right way to do it?
Thusness: Don't think that you should concentrate. Your only duty is to sense with as much clarity as possible.
Ck: And for all the sensations, I don't dwell in the “what”?
Thusness: Your mind is looking for a way, a method, but what is needed is only the clarity. However, because our mind is so molded and affected by our habitual propensities, it becomes difficult to do what is direct and simple. Just stop asking “how,” “what,” “why,” and submerge into the moment. And experience. I prefer you to describe, not to ask how, what, why, when, where, and who. Only this is necessary.
Ck: Okay.
Thusness: If you practice immediately, you will understand. If you entertain who, what, where, when, and how, you create more propensities and dull your own luminosity.
Ck: I shuffle between self-inquiry, observing sensations and thoughts, being aware... it’s okay right?
Thusness: Yes.
Ck: Means once I start work I'll have even more propensities...
Thusness: That is when you do not understand what awareness is, but it is true to a certain extent. :)
Thusness: Tell me what you think is awareness? In your own words. Just say.
AEN: Just the knowingness, the sensation or thoughts etc.
Thusness: Look at the skin of your hands.
AEN: Okay.
Thusness: Looks real?
AEN: Yeah.
Thusness: Touch it... feel it as much as you can. Can you not think of a background?
AEN: Yeah.
Thusness: And know that, that is awareness?
AEN: Yeah.
Thusness: That is all.
John: So far what do you understand about awareness?
AEN: Hmm like you say... awareness is never lost.
John: What is awareness right now? When you say thought arises, is thought awareness?
AEN: Thought is not awareness, but there is awareness of thought.
John: So what is thought? And where is awareness? Same like taste, is the taste awareness?
AEN: I think you can’t define awareness to a “thing.”
John: So is taste or thought a thing? :) You practice meditation now right?
AEN: Never practiced for quite some time. Taste or thought is not a thing.
John: So do you think awareness is a party behind thinking thought or experiencing taste? :)
AEN: No.
John: Taste is not a thing, then what is it?
AEN: Just the awareness.
John: Experience this awareness with totality. :)
Thusness: What is the role of insight meditation? Why bare attention? Why naked awareness? When insight meditation is taught and Buddha said “when hearing just the sound”... this and that... what Buddha wanted is to experience directly what awareness is—the arising, the ceasing, the clarity, the non-dual nature. In Dependent Origination.
AEN: I see.
Thusness: Not to note it with thought or place any conclusion on any experience. “This is impermanence” is not about noting and placing any conclusion about a phenomenon arising. But experience impermanence directly, not in words.
AEN: I see... yeah.
Thusness: Be impermanence and know what it is really... See what clarity is, not what it should be. It is luminous and yet empty... experience it directly... it is so.
AEN: I see.
Thusness: Break the solidity until there is no holding, simply thus. Don't watch... there is no watcher... there is just momentary manifestation and that is already luminosity and emptiness.
AEN: But in conventional saying we often say watching. Easier to understand.
Thusness: Yeah but I am not talking about conventional or ultimate. If it is just a form of expression there is nothing wrong with it. But the fact is we are really experiencing it as if there is a watcher... that is the problem.
Conversation — 2007
Thusness: Lately I have been experiencing more vividly “Emptiness as form.” Insight meditation (vipassanā) like what Buddha taught is very important. When seeing, just the seen. When hearing, just the heard.
AEN: I see. Isn't this non-duality?
Thusness: Yeah… but the depth of clarity. It is difficult for me to tell you. Just train yourself into that.. if you didn’t, your life will be wasted. Even with all the things I tell you. :) After non-duality, you must experience until at least this level, “Emptiness as form.”
AEN: By the way, emptiness as form is not form as emptiness? It's like the Dharma Dan Heart Sutra model? First is form as form, then emptiness is emptiness, then form is emptiness, then emptiness is form?
Thusness: Just the manifestation until tremendous clarity. No need… just non-dual and the depth of non-duality.
John Tan, 2006
Reply part 1:
Is Absorption not aware of other things? This is difficult to say. Although many articles and books about mindfulness seem to suggest that it is so, this is not necessarily true when we progress towards the more subtle experience. Clarity can come a time where it is so clear that it is an absorption, it is a sort of Insight-Absorption but it is different from absorption derived from concentration. It is clarity absorption where it touches the heart of ‘things’, that is itself. For example being taste itself, it is absorbed yet completely clear. This is truly blissful and beyond description. I have not come across any book touching this yet and I hope Toni's new book can write something about it. :)
Reply part 2:
The AMness can be said to be a form of absorption where the object of concentration is the Self. It can be a question “Who am I” that leads one to the experience of the subject-object becoming one. Till a point the practitioner simply experiences a pure sense of existence. However such mode of experience has no understanding of its luminous clarity and its nature as anatta. The key point about mindful awareness is there is no keeping of the mind on anything and by not resting on anything, it fuses into everything; therefore it cannot be concentrated; rather it is to relax into nothingness empty of self, empty of any artificial doing so that the natural luminosity can take its own course. There is no focusing, there is only allowing the mirror bright clarity to shine with its natural radiance. In essence there is no one there, only the phenomenon arising and ceasing telling their stories.
Conversation — 13 April 2009
AEN: s4bnw: Let's do some inference. The direct path provides a direct way of realising our buddha nature, which is in effect, directly helping one to progress faster, spiritually-wise compared to those who take the gradual path, which means they take more time and more round-about way to see buddha nature, isn't it?
Thusness: Yes. In general yes. It also depends on a practitioner’s dedication. Buddha said before if one can be fully vipassanic for 7 days, one can reach full enlightenment right? If a person can have that sort of crystal clarity like "I AMness" in all arising sensations for day and night 7 days, I believe he will reach enlightenment.
AEN: I see.
Thusness: Like I hear sound, till it becomes "I AMness", crystal clarity... till it burns away all labels, all divisions, just crystal clear SOUND. If all whatever arises can have that sort of clarity, pristineness, then I can't imagine... if the concentration is that great. :) Actually it is crystal clarity and effortlessness. To me it can only be done when a practitioner already penetrates the deepest nature of non-dual awareness. That is why he knows why and how deep within him. It is this non-dual clarity.
AEN: I see. By the way, then gradual path is what? You mean what you said is direct path?
Thusness: Gradual. Then it is the same. Like do vipassana till one is able to do that.
AEN: I see.
Thusness: Realisation is only one knows the how and why... but that is already quite a deep realisation. After stabilizing non-dual then one knows why. Why Buddha taught vipassana. That crystal clear mirror presence yet empty.
AEN: I see.
Thusness: Actually if we can have the fullest and effortless experience of this non-dual mirror presence, then nothing matters. Whether DO [dependent origination] or Brahman, it is the same.
AEN: What do you mean?
Thusness: Means at the greatest clarity and completely effortless experience of our non-dual mirror presence, there is no difference. At that point, there are no concepts, labelling, self, views... it is just complete oneness and reality. So no difference.
AEN: But non-dual is not yet emptiness insight right?
Thusness: Emptiness or DO [dependent origination] are also rafts... if one can completely dissolve the last trace without any views, then there is no difference. Just simply naked awareness, that is sufficient. However we don't know what is naked awareness. We have only a very very vague idea of what non-dual awareness is.
Thusness: For those that experience Eternal Witness, they thought they know... but in truth, only a glimpse... therefore one undergoes non-dual, anatta, emptiness and then spontaneous perfection. If we can fully experience non-dual mirror like Awareness in full effortlessness, then we have to be empty, centerless and traceless. Otherwise there is no true effortlessness and spontaneity. Most likely it will be a contrived experience.
AEN: You mean through concentration?
Thusness: Without understanding of DO [dependent origination] and emptiness. Because our existing dualistic and inherent views is the cause of that contrivance.
AEN: I see.
Thusness: What s4bnw said is quite true. Don't argue for nothing. Direct path is not for everyone and you have not faced the problem yet.
Conversation — 2007
Thusness: At the more refined level of non-dual experience, when the sense of self is gone to a great level, there is absolutely nothing but only everything... what does that mean? Many though said so but is still not there even he is already at the level of non-dual.
AEN: Not where?
Thusness: He must feel completely nothing and only the ‘concreteness’, ‘solidness’, realness... must feel the ‘solidness’ and that is things.... that is awareness.
AEN: I see. Thusness says: "many though said so but is still not there even he is already at the level of non dual." --> huh not where?
Thusness: There are different levels of non-dual experience. Feeling crystal clarity and 'no one there' is the same as only the solidness, hardness, sound, vividness, realness. That 'sense of self' must be completely gone. :) You must remember this.
AEN: I see... this is like mindfulness right.
Thusness: So now you know why Buddha taught mindfulness? And why Advaita didn't. :) This is important. It is the direct way. You see, the teaching and the practice is in line.
AEN: I see.
Thusness: So non-dual as in no-self. Into impermanence and just the manifestation and DO and authenticate this with insight meditation. However it is taught wrongly. :P
AEN: I see.
Thusness: But when one experiences deeper and understands better, why Buddha taught and said those things will become clear. You will realise that Advaita always talks about the Self. But when a person that is enlightened, he doesn't like to use this word. Self is a by-product. It is the production of thought.
Thusness: Even if you call it Brahman, it is still sinking back to a source. But when one gets clearer and clearer, and knows more about manifestation. There is only arising and ceasing of phenomenon according to conditions. That is dharmakaya. It is understood in crystal clarity.
Thusness: Just understand that there is no self until it sinks to the inmost consciousness. And know the different layers of consciousness but do not think that it is different type of consciousness.
John Tan, 2007:
“It is extremely difficult to express what is ‘Isness’. Isness is awareness as forms. It is a pure sense of presence yet encompassing the ‘transparent concreteness’ of forms. There is a crystal clear sensation of awareness manifesting as the manifold of phenomenal existence. If we are vague in the experiencing of this ‘transparent concreteness’ of Isness, it is always due to that ‘sense of self’ creating the sense of division… ...you must stress the ‘form’ part of awareness. It is the ‘forms’, it is the ‘things’.”
John Tan, January 2010:
“If we ask “Who am I”, does the question already condition the experience from beginning? If we look for a 'who' and enter into the realm of pure, it naturally becomes a pure subject. Is the subject that important in the realm of pure? Similarly when we say 'here and now', has the mind already pre-assumed the existence of space and time?
If for a moment we are able to free ourselves from of all sort of definitions and labellings, feel the bare sensations without words, feel 'aliveness', feel 'existence' then search with our entire being its 'location'. Have the same sort of 'awakeness' for 'location' as we have for “I AM”. Is impermanence a movement from here to there?
If we penetrate deeply, it will reveal that there is nothing here, nothing now, nothing self, yet, there is vivid appearance. There is only always vivid appearance which is the very living presence that dependently originates whenever condition is. And what that dependently originates does not arise, does not cease, does not come, does not go.
We may then have an intuitive glimpse that direct path and vipassana are intimately related. :)“
Someone asked:
“A quick question about Thusness Vipassana.
It's about clarity right?
Like when I focus on sound, I can see that mind sort of created a visual to describe sound and ‘color’ it, but even without the mind there is clear knowing. The sound without mind's coloring is borderless.”
Soh replied:
You must experience the intensity of luminosity:
Soh, 2011:
“Good insight. Stability of experience has a predictable relationship with the unfolding and deepening of insights. For example how seamless and effortless can non-dual experience be, if in the back of one's mind, subtle views of duality and inherency and tendencies continue to surface and affect our moment to moment experience - for example conjuring an unchanging source or mind that results in a perpetual tendency to sink back and referencing experience back to a source.
For example even after it is seen that everything is a manifestation of awareness or mind, there might still be subtle tendencies to reference back to a source, awareness or mind and therefore the transience is not appreciated in full. Nondual is experienced but one sinks back into substantial nonduality - there is always a referencing back to a base, an "awareness" that is nevertheless inseparable from all phenomena.
If one arises the insight that our ideas of an unchanging source, awareness or mind is just another thought - that there is simply thought after thought, sight after sight, sound after sound, and there isn't an inherent or unchanging "awareness", "mind", "source". Non-dual becomes implicit and effortless when there is the realisation that what awareness, seeing, hearing really is, is just the seen... The heard... The transience... The transience itself rolls and knows, no knower or other "awareness" can be found. Like there is no river apart from flowing, no wind apart from blowing, each noun implies its verb... Similarly awareness is simply the process of knowing not separated from the known. Scenery sees, music hears. Because there is nothing unchanging, independent, ultimate apart from the transience, there is no more sinking back to a source and instead there is full comfort resting as the transience itself.
Lastly do continue practicing the intensity of luminosity... When looking at tennis ball just sense the tennis ball fully.... Without thinking of a source, background, observer, self. Just the tennis ball as a luminous light. When breathing... Just the breathe... When seeing scenery, just sights, shapes and colours - intensely luminous and vivid without an agent or observer. When hearing music... Sound of bird chirping, the crickets… Just that - chirp chirp. A zen master noted upon his awakening... When I am hearing the bell ringing, there is no I and no bell... Just the ringing. The direct experiencing of no-mind and intensity of luminosity.. This is the purpose of the practice of the four foundations of mindfulness that is taught by the Buddha.”
And you must give rise to insight of anatta:
Therefore contemplating on the two stanzas of anatta (see:
