- Reply
 - 1w
 - Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 - Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 1w
 
- Reply
 - 5d
 - Reply
 - 5d
 
- Reply
 - 5d
 
- Reply
 - 5d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 5d
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 
- [6:07 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Oic... right now for me there doesn’t seem to be solid objects.. like you say just radiance clarity but not in an undifferentiated oneness sense
[6:08 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Just now driving around singapore, city seems like I’m experiencing singapore for the first time
[6:08 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Now I’m meditating at Bedok reservoir
[6:08 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: 🤣
[6:09 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Good open space like Australia
[6:11 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Like pure open awareness
[6:11 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Lol
[6:11 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Without center without boundaries
[6:12 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Lol
[6:12 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: However it is often misinterpreted as always...something behind
[6:12 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Yeah..
[6:14 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Don't hold on to any experience, not the radiance. Allow the knowledge of emptiness to seemlessly integrate into radiance clarity.
[6:15 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Let the radiance be as light as feather but immense like universe.
[6:15 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Don't be intense.
[6:19 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Oic...
[6:19 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Today the sense of tightness seems loosening and yet the radiance is still as clear.. I had headache two days ago dunno why
[6:19 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Maybe some tenseness
[6:19 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Yes
[6:19 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Because u don't know how to relax
[6:20 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: U have wrong understanding attempting to focus on intensity unknownly, wanted to feel more
[6:21 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Therefore I kept telling u relax, don't hold, be as light as feather and as immense as universe.
[6:21 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: With practice Awareness will stand out, more braman than braman...lol.
[6:22 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: However that is an emergence effect due to evenness of pristine empty clarity. - Reply
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - 4d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 4d
 
Aditya Prasad shared a link.
Conversation Starter
I was just reading this article by Abhaya Devi: https://www.wayofbodhi.org/sahaja-yoga-of-saraha/
And realized that I may have been misinterpreting these kinds of instructions for a while. For example:
- "Awakening has nothing to do with where you are. Wherever you may be, just turn back and recognize your own mind."
Why turn "back" if phenomena are (or rather, appear to be) all around us? For me this strengthens the sense of a background.
- "Free from all conceptuality, leaving the mind in its natural stainless state, bodhi dawns effortlessly."
This inspires me to search for something stainless. Again, I relax back into the stainless background.
- "The way we live in Samsara is like looking into a mirror and seeing many forms without seeing the mirror itself."
But of course there is no such mirror.
The reason this surprises me is that Abhaya Devi is one of the few Dzogchen teachers that 
Soh
 says has right view. So I'm not sure how to interpret these instructions.48 Comments
Comments

Depends. Even Malcolm talked about distinguishing mirror from reflections to realise I AM. But he is also clear about no mirror.
They are clear about the different phases of realisations.

Could be but i need to read more
Why not you message her
Im sure both of them [Prabodha and Abhaya Devi] realised anatta. I have read many article from them
Jenny Jennings Foerst
Aditya Prasad
,
 you cannot via intellectualizing them skip over those "steps" in 
practice. Or let's just say very, very few people have been able to skip
 over them without deluding themselves. Moreover, poetry is method in pointing-out transmission. You are supposed to feel the metaphors, not analyze them. 
This is important. 

Author
Jenny
 Jennings Foerst Yes, I agree. That's not what's happening here. Each 
metaphor is useful at a particular stage in practice, but can actually 
drag one backward if used at the wrong time.
Jenny Jennings Foerst
Aditya Prasad
 Why would they be "used" at the wrong time? I'm talking about 
mahamudra. The metaphors cannot drag someone backward if they are 
related to as poetry.
Author
Jenny Jennings Foerst Well, I've always been overly literal and not very good with poetry 
.
The
 instructions I am working with these days (largely thanks to our mutual
 friend) emphasize the foreground. For me, right now, instructions to 
"turn back" or identify something "stainless" reinforce a bad habit I've
 picked up. I recognize that this may not be so for everyone.

Author
Regarding "stainless," I find this helpful:
Ven.
 Jinmyo Renge osho Dainen-ji: "The stainlessness of this moment is not 
only the fact that colours and forms are as they are or that sensations 
are as they are; the fact is that this moment cannot be grasped. There 
is no particular angle that you can take upon this moment because it is 
too vast and it is constantly changing. You arise within it, I arise 
within it, we all arise within it."
Thusness:
 "The tata is very good. The Stainless is also good but just to be 
picky... the 'it' must be eliminated... stainlessness is the ungraspable
 of the arising and passing phenomena. Without essence and locality of 
any arising... nothing 'within or without it'."

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Stainless

I
 skimmed through, but it seems an interesting article. Make sure to 
check the comment section, where the oneness issue, and the comparison 
to Vedanta, seem to be addressed. 
WAYOFBODHI.ORG
Oneness without oneness – On Mahasiddha Shavaripa
So
 generally these instructions are given once one is stable in Shine. 
Which is the stillness aspect of mind isolated from the movement. When 
one is proficient then one does these instructions, then shine is 
released. 
when you practice shine you are isolating the stillness from movement. so you are watching the movement as if apart from you. 
when that stillness is released then you become the motion itself. so there is no distinction between stillness and motion. 
it's then that you are capturing what the instructions point to. 
when you're isolating a background all you are doing is emphasizing the stillness aspect. 
then
 you have the issue of movement. movement is an issue. thoughts, 
sensations, sense perceptions. all of it distracts from the stillness. 
so there is an inherent duality. 
nonetheless you have to be able to isolate stillness and motion as distinct experiences. 
Dzogchen begins when you release that stillness or background witness. 

Author
Albert Hong
 Thanks. I've always understood it a little differently: at first, you 
are isolating the background, and any movement is a distraction. Then at
 some point the movement is no longer a distraction -- but you have not 
exactly "become" the movement. I think of this like I AM, or baby rigpa.
 Finally, you "become" the movement -- which sounds more like 
nonduality, or AtR's stage 4, no?Looking
 again, Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche does indeed say that Dzogchen only begins
 with the "becoming" (released shiné). If so, then either he does not 
consider "baby rigpa" to be Dzogchen, or else I am wrong about that 
second phase being baby rigpa. 
Soh
.Aditya Prasad
 the movement doesn't distract because you're absorbed into a concept of
 stillness. It's very much like putting one's finger over a faucet. the
 issue of motion or movement becomes much more of an issue with Shine. 
You become super aware of the most subtle currents of motion. Which all 
distract and irritate. 
One
 has to release or let go of the focus on one aspect of experience. then
 presence isn't a thing, but rather endlessly rolling without effort or 
fixation. 
I
 don't know much about baby Rigpa to comment on it. From the teachings 
of Lama Lena, she speaks about how one at first may objectify Rigpa then
 gradually this deepens. 

Author
Albert Hong
 Are we talking about the same thing? I'm not saying that the thoughts 
don't occur (like a finger over the faucet), but that they don't 
distract. Movement is not an issue because "that which knows" can never 
be distracted (in this model). It knows the stillness and movement 
equally intimately.I apologize, we could be talking about something else. 
what you're talking about just sounds like basic mindfulness. 

Author
Albert Hong
 I'm sure there's some overlap there, but when most people learn basic 
mindfulness, I don't think they feel like they are (or even have) a 
timeless, stainless, pure consciousness. At that point, perhaps "turning
 back" or looking for something "stainless" may be counterproductive. 
Dunno.the isolation of a consciousness to look back at is isolating a type of experience. 
turning
 back is to release that experience. not to create a new ground or space
 or consciousness. but to end the foci, which always makes subtle or 
gross objects. 
the issue is always making an object and even making Rigpa an object. 
Aditya Prasad
 You're right, in Mahamudra they work more or less this way. The advices cited are from different stagesJenny Jennings Foerst
Yes, 
Albert Hong
 puts is well. @Aditya Prasad
,
 you attempt to look back and be interested in "what" is looking. But 
this emptiness practice is not to establish a background--quite the 
opposite. The earnest attempt reveals the false polarity of shine and 
vipassana, so that polarity collapses, deconstructs, which is quite an 
experience, quite a realization.In
 Mahamudra, one cannot just intellectually bypass the earnest attempt at
 reflexive "looking." You see, there must be experiential recognition of
 the impossibility of "background."
Timelessness
 is the stillness, silence, and space. Yet the "world" keeps changing. 
The first is "mind perspective" and the second is "event perspective." 
When they are integrated, the view is called "simultaneous mind," which 
is third yoga in Mahamudra.
Later, there is an end to perspective-taking altogether. But that is after more rounds of deconstruction. 

Author
Jenny
 Jennings Foerst Mixing paths is tricky business (and I probably 
wouldn't have done it but for the opening I had with Advaita when 
young). Using your language, once one has mixed the mind and event 
perspectives, it feels unhelpful to continue to "look back" and try to 
identify something stainless. There isn't anything stainless (in the 
sense of being permanent but untouchable) -- and for someone who's been 
stuck believing so for a long time, using that language can cause its 
own problems. Luckily I'm getting those instructions (from someone we 
both know), but I'm "supplementing" with these kinds of teachings, and 
trying to work out which are relevant at which stages.
Jenny Jennings Foerst
Aditya Prasad
 Have you stabilized simultaneous mind? Is that what you are saying (among other things)?
Author
Jenny
 Jennings Foerst Maybe trying to "use your language" wasn't such a good 
idea after all! To be honest, none of the language or metaphors from the
 POW retreat connected with me in any way, so I don't want to attempt an
 answer. Luckily our mutual friend is talented and able to find language
 that I can relate to. Suffice it to say that "looking back" is not part
 of my practice right now.
"I crossed over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place."[1]
"But how, dear sir, did you cross over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place?"
"When
 I pushed forward, I was whirled about. When I stayed in place, I sank. 
And so I crossed over the flood without pushing forward, without staying
 in place."
Right Effort

DHAMMATALKS.ORG
SN 1:1  Ogha-taraṇa Sutta | Crossing over the Flood
Interesting website
Sahaja
 yoga is Mahamudra, not Dzogchen. And cited Saraha. He is a Mahamudra 
father. The instructioons are right, the subtleties that confuse you may
 originate on the translation. They're right Mahamudra advices. But bear
 in mind that Mahamudra is a progressive path, and every of the four 
yogas has different instructions.
I
 have found that by introverting very intensely, one finds a phenomenon 
that is ontologically "different" from a physical or psychological inner
 which directly triggers the realization of transpersonal being.
This is a very fair experiential start for exploring these things having actually got a taste of it.
It
 is not about "world-denying". It is simply a pragmatic phenomenological
 fact that people whose focus and attention entrainment is on the 
physical in a very limited sense of awareness will not benefit from such
 ideal things as "the meditation of non-meditation" etc etc.

Author
Adrian Brown
 Yes, I can see it being helpful to reach I AM. I'm mostly curious about whether it is helpful beyond that.Good question, my current position is to say mixed use.
By "turning inward" you see the roots of how things reify themselves within your own mind for example.
But
 that only works if you have the right pointers beforehand or are very 
conscientious in your exploration and not just rapt away.

Turning back from the senses is not helpful to realise anatta. It is for I AM, tracing radiance to the source.
Bahiya sutta is more useful for anatta.

Author
Soh Wei Yu
 Thanks. That's why I love AtR and what you do. I never considered 
before how following even "very high teachings" might actually hold one 
back.
Abhaya devi is clear about anatta but is pointing people to the I AM first. Just like malcolm and many other zen teachers, etc
WAYOFBODHI.ORG
Breaking the Silence – The Teachings of Bodhidharma

Both of them (abhaya devi and prabodha) are clear about the thusness seven stages. 
You
 notice that these teachers who have gone through these phases 
themselves are open to what john tan wrote. Prabodha even said the seven
 stages represents essence of buddhism
Those who do not understand it or gone through it themselves may not resonate

Author
Soh Wei Yu
 Thanks, I'll read it. Right off the bat, though, it's strengthening the I AM for me: "He showed how the perception and the perceived never harm the silence of the basic space."

Aditya Prasad
 yes. Also it says ordinary people are seeing reflections without seeing the mirror.The emphasis here is realise the Mind (I AM)

Author
Soh Wei Yu
 I thought you said the emphasis in this article (the one you just linked about Bodhidharma) was anatta?
then the basic space here is not a background:
“In
 resting like a mountain, gazing at the empty wall of mind’s nature, he 
showed how the mind of dualities and conceptual proliferations comes to 
rest in the basic space of the perception and the perceived1. In moving 
like a wild goose spreading its wings, he showed how the perception and 
the perceived never harm the silence of the basic space.”

Thusness, 2013: 
"there
 is a very intense and much deeper state i assure u...but there is clear
 understanding that the manifestation is it....however awareness is like
 an unbounded and limitless expanse field
the luminosity is intensely clear
the experience is like Non-Dual Awareness broke lose and exist as a unbounded FIELD
there is a difference in seeing sound and a hearer and realizing sound as awareness itself
u cannot focus and there cannot be any sense of effort
there cannot be any sense of boundaries
just itself
u must be very very stable and mature in the anatta state
and u cannot be in an enclosed room...
it is the effortlessness and crystal clear transparency and intensity of luminosity...
but
 duality must no more trouble the practitioner, phenomena is clearly 
understood as the radiance...so nothing is obscuring then in total 
effortless and emanation arises and the expanse just continues"
On how this differs from one mind:
"one mind is subsuming
therefore there is a sense of dual
in this case there isn't
it
 is like a drop of water landed on the surface of a clear ocean. the 
nature of water and ocean are one and the same...nothing containing 
anything
when sounds and music arise...they are like water and waves in ocean...everything is it"
.......................
Jackson
 Peterson wrote about Transparency, the experience and intensity of 
transparency is important (even though Jax is holding one mind view 
rather than anatta):
Transparency
When sitting, fully relaxed, with no mental topics in mind;  consciousness will become ever more clear and sharp. 
At
 some point the material substance of your head will seem to become 
clear and transparent, leaving no sense of boundary to awareness. 
Suddenly
 a shift can happen, such that instead of feeling like a located 
physical entity, your cognitive nature becomes crystal clear, empty 
space: a space that co-exists with phenomena, but is timeless and 
changeless, pervasive presence. 
It’s
 like being a material entity located within a physical body, in which 
that localized entity suddenly transforms into space.  It’s like 
consciousness as space had contracted into being a localized contraction
 of aware space, that suddenly reverted to its status as being empty, 
borderless space. 
In Dzogchen, this is called “zangtal” or penetrating transparency. 
In
 this moment it feels like you are the empty space of the universe 
instead of being a localized “thing” in the universe. All material 
identifications and psychological self images vanish. 
Imagine
 there is an infinite ocean of transparent, Clear Light Awareness; which
 can contract into ice-cube like spheres of localized consciousness.  
But that contracted consciousness of Clear Light Awareness can suddenly 
revert to its uncontracted state, its “natural state”.  
Only then do the intrinsic wisdoms of the Clear Light, Natural State, fully unfold. 
-----------------
Daniel M. Ingram:
"So
 you have these two extremes - both of which I find pretty annoying 
(laughs) - and uhm, not that they are not making interesting points that
 counterbalance each other. And then, from an experiential point of 
view, the whole field seems to be happening on its own in a luminous 
way, the intelligence or awareness seems to be intrinsic in the 
phenomena, the phenomena do appear to be totally transient, totally 
ephemeral. So I would reject from an experiential point of view, 
something in the harshness of the dogma of the rigid no-selfists that 
can't recognise the intrinsic nature of awareness that is the field. If 
that makes sense. Cos they tend to feel there's something about that's 
sort of (cut off?)..."
Interviewer: "And not only awareness..."
Daniel:
 "Intelligence. Right, and I also reject from an experiential point of 
view the people who would make this permanent, something separate from, 
something different from just the manifestation itself. I don't like the
 permanence aspect because from a Buddhist technical point of view I do 
not find anything that stands up as permanent in experience. I find that
 quality always there *while there is experience.* Because it's 
something in the nature of experience. But it's not quite the same thing
 as permanence, if that makes sense. So while there is experience, there
 is experience. So that means there is awareness, from a certain point 
of view, manifestation - awareness being intrinsically the same thing, 
intrinsic to each other. So while there is experience, I would claim 
that element (awareness) is there - it has to be for there to be 
experience. And I would claim that the system seems to function very 
lawfully and it's very easy to feel that there's a sort of intelligence,
 ok, cool... ...the feeling of profundity, the feeling of 
miraculousness, the wondrous component. So as the Tibetans would say, 
amazing! It all happens by itself! So, there is intrinsically amazing 
about this. It's very refreshingly amazing that the thing happens, and 
that things cognize themselves or are aware where they are, 
manifestation is truly amazing and tuning into that amazingness has 
something valuable about it from a pragmatic point of view."

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Awakening to Reality

5/24/2012 8:05 PM: John: But experientially same but just the degree of right understanding
5/24/2012 8:07 PM: John: Not exactly one mind
5/24/2012 8:07 PM: John: Do u feel everything as Self now?
5/24/2012 8:08 PM: John: As in that experience of I M powerfully present at this moment
5/24/2012 8:09 PM: Soh Wei Yu: yes presence, but as change
5/24/2012 8:11 PM: John: As if like Awareness clear and open like space, without meditation yet powerfully present and non-dual
5/24/2012 8:12 PM: John: Where the 4 Aspects of I M r fully experienced in this moment
5/24/2012 8:14 PM: Soh Wei Yu: Yeah
5/24/2012
 8:14 PM: Soh Wei Yu: I think the four aspects is only fully experienced
 after nondual and anatta, especially effortlessness and no need to 
abide
5/24/2012 8:15 PM: John: This experience will become more and more powerful later yet effortless and uncontrieved
5/24/2012
 8:17 PM: John: How so? If it is not correct insights and practice, how 
is it possible for such complete and total experience of effortless and 
uncontrieved Presence be possible?
5/24/2012 8:18 PM: Soh Wei Yu: I do not see it is possible without the proper insights and practice
5/24/2012 8:20 PM: Soh Wei Yu: In anatta every activity is it, is buddha nature, so no contrivance at all
5/24/2012 8:21 PM: Soh Wei Yu: No need to meditate to get anywhere
5/24/2012 8:21 PM: Soh Wei Yu: But meditation is still important to cultivate certain aspects like tranquility
5/24/2012
 8:22 PM: John: Indeed and this is being authenticated by the immediate 
moment of experience. How could there be doubt abt it. The last trace of
 Presence must be released with seeing through the emptiness nature of 
whatever arises.
5/24/2012 8:22 PM: Soh Wei Yu: I see..
5/24/2012
 8:25 PM: John: After maturing and integrating ur insights into 
practice, there must be no effort and action.... The entire whole is 
doing the work and arises as this vivid moment of shimmering appearance,
 this has always been what we always called Presence.
...
Thusness, 2012:
"Has
 awareness stood out? There is no concentration needed. When six entries
 and exits are pure and primordial, the unconditioned stands shining, 
relaxed and uncontrived, luminous yet empty. The purpose of going 
through the 7 phases of perception shift is for this... Whatever arises 
is free and uncontrived, that is the supreme path. Whatever arises has 
never left their nirvanic state... ... your current mode of practice 
[after those experiential insights] should be as direct and uncontrived 
as possible. When you see nothing behind and magical appearances are too
 empty, awareness is naturally lucid and free. Views and all 
elaborations dissolved, mind-body forgotten... just unobstructed 
awareness. Awareness natural and uncontrived is supreme goal. Relax and 
do nothing, Open and boundless, Spontaneous and free, Whatever arises is
 fine and liberated, This is the supreme path. Top/bottom, 
inside/outside, Always without center and empty (2-fold emptiness), Then
 view is fully actualized and all experiences are great liberation."

Yogi Prabodha Jnana wrote in http://www.wayofbodhi.org/knowing-one-thing-liberates-all/:
Dear Atul,
It
 is not only about recognizing the reflections as reflections, but also 
recognizing that there is no mirror (no mind)! Knowing that everything 
is a projection of mind, is just part of the hundreds and thousands of 
explanations that lead the disciple. Further, when you directly see and 
understand (recognize) the nature of yourself, the nature of your own 
mind, only then you see and truly understand the meaning of even the 
statement, “everything is projection of mind”.
Regards,
Prabodha
WAYOFBODHI.ORG
Knowing One Thing Liberates All
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 - Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 - Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 - Reply
 - 3d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 - Reply
 - 3d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 - Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 3d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 2d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 2d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 2d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 2d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 1d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 1d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 - Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 3d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - Remove Preview
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 - Edited
 - Reply
 - 2d
 - Edited
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
- Reply
 - 2d
 
What's so new about what Richard talks in Actual Freedom?
I have seen
Soh Wei Yu
 mentioning AF off and on in different places. So I decided to check out his website at http://www.actualfreedom.com.au/
 . First, there was a lot of bashing of all traditional spiritual paths 
as if they have missed the point that he is talking about, and then he 
mentions how spiritual paths have not been able to rectify the sorry 
state of affairs in the world. And then he winds up saying that there is
 no sorry state of affairs in the world after all, here:"The day finally dawns where the definitive moment of being here, right now, conclusively arrives; something irrevocable takes place and every thing and every body and every event is different, somehow, although the same physically; something immutable occurs and every thing and every body and every event is all-of-a-sudden undeniably actual, in and of itself, as a fact; something irreversible happens and an immaculate perfection and a pristine purity permeates every thing and every body and every event; something has changed forever, although it is as if nothing has happened, except that the entire world is a magical fairytale-like playground full of incredible gladness and a delight which is never-ending."
How is it different from what Nagarjuna says as "Nirvana is Samsara"? or what Gaudapada says, " All Jīvas are, by their very nature illumined from the very beginning" as the final realizations.
His final realization is put in these words:
"Thus the search for meaning amidst the debris of the much-vaunted human hopes and dreams and schemes has come to its timely end. With the end of both ‘I’ and ‘me’, the distance or separation between both ‘I’ and ‘me’ and these sense organs – and thus the external world – disappears. To be living as the senses is to live a clear and clean awareness – apperception – a pure consciousness experience of the world as-it-is. Because there is no ‘I’ as a thinker (a little person inside one’s head) or a ‘me’ as a feeler (a little person in one’s heart) – to have sensations happen to them, I am the sensations. The entire affective faculty vanishes ... blind nature’s software package of instinctual passions is deleted. There is nothing except the series of sensations which happen ... not happening to an ‘I’ or a ‘me’ but just happening ... moment by moment ... one after another. To live life as these sensations, as distinct from having them, engenders the most astonishing sense of freedom and magic. Consequently, I am living in peace and tranquillity; a meaningful peace and tranquillity. Life is intrinsically purposeful, the reason for existence lies openly all around. Being this very air I live in, I am constantly aware of it as I breathe it in and out; I see it, I hear it, I taste it, I smell it, I touch it, all of the time. It never goes away – nor has it ever been away – it was just that ‘I’/‘me’ was standing in the way of the meaning of life being apparent."
I fail to understand how traditional non-dual paths, taken to their end, are talking any different.
Any thoughts?
131 Comments
Comments
I
 believe it is merely refinement of the view. Whereas the non dual 
direct experience of presence is the same. It is a matter of deeply 
hidden views which obscure and trap the presence. 
And various methods and views work their way to meet such obscurations. 
In the end you suffer or you don't. And that is something you in your unique personal mind stream have to come to terms with. 
I would say that not all paths and views lead to the same arenas. 
But certainly specific practitioners within their respective lineages definitely meet in similar arenas. 
But all of it is imho not really relevant. 
Either you are uncontrived and totally free from suffering, or you are not. 
If
 I recall, Actualism is just the emphasis on constant PCE or pure 
consciousness experience, which is non duality. It is also what is 
considered no mind, because one is thrown completely into the foreground
 of appearances. 
There
 is no particular insight into Anatta in the way Atr frames it. Hence 
such experiential states come and go, where with Anatta realization, no 
mind is the natural situation without contriving it. 
It's
 much different than one mind where everything is the taste or flavor of
 luminosity. That is an emphasis on wholeness rather than unique, 
diverse manifestations as the texture, which is more no mind. 
We refine the view constantly but we keep the direct, immediate, undeniable experience of presence. 
actualism is the repeated letting go (“seeing the silliness”) of conditionings and obscurations obscuring anatta
So
 when there no thinker or feeler or seer or hearer, etc. then foreground
 is the presence. each sound, each sensation, each thought is exactly 
the texture as presence. it's not one whole presence but each single, 
unique experiencing as presencing. 
then
 the foreground is further deconstructed. we can still be obstructed by 
this inherent view. we may take the phenomena world to be actual. the 
sounds, the sensations. 
because
 it is HD or more real then real. But that is where mutuality and 
interdependence is very useful. To understand seeing-seen as conditioned
 arising ends the solidity of a seer or seen or seeing. All of it just 
conventions that have no where to land. 
again further refining and freeing the presencing as forms leading to ease and naturalness. 
agree, seeing transience and emptiness of view itself is 
 
Now why would one need to refine the view?
in
 a sense not all views are equal and it is views that orientate and 
clarify non duality in substantial forms or non substantial forms. 
it
 is safe to assume we already come with views of all kinds. views that 
generally desire a Monistic view or any other inherency kink we desire. 
And those are practically impossible to see because they are so 
habitually imprinted on the being. 
that
 is where applying an intellectual view is very useful. since we have 
the intellectual faculty. it is wise to use a view, learn a view, and 
apply a view that clarifies what exactly presence is. 
that
 is useful for some people or it isn't. some are inclined and can intuit
 the value of that. for most it is irrelevant and they will treat 
whatever said here as irrelevant conceptual nonsense. 
but
 these aren't just ideas of course. they are lived. they inform the 
whole subtle body to our seemingly coarse physical body. the holding of 
any inherent view is an imaginary stain on our being, our whole 
energetic field. and that knot will not go away until we recognize 
emptiness. 
Author
Albert Hong
 what about Richard's view that other traditional paths do not have what he is saying? Yeah
 it’s strange his criticisms are based on a complete misunderstanding of
 Buddhism, and after all these years he still hasn’t corrected that 
view.
Good
 points....very informative site but I also see lots of contradictions 
...also he is very into clear stages as per traditional (patriarchal) 
Buddhism......men like to systematize everything..... the more recent 
iterations of non duality awakening I find to be non-hierarchical (not 
always of course)......and feminine insofar as they incorporate 
physicality...

Actualism
 is nothing special. Just anatta and not yet into twofold emptiness. 
Usually my point is something else and not exactly to promote AF 

June 2009:
(2:38 AM) AEN:	http://actualfreedom.com.au/richard/default.htm
(2:38
 AM) AEN:	Thus the search for meaning amidst the debris of the 
much-vaunted human hopes and dreams and schemes comes to its timely end.
 With the end of both ‘I’ and ‘me’, the distance or separation between 
both ‘I’ and ‘me’ and the sense organs – and thus the external world – 
disappears. To be living as the senses is to live a clean and clear and 
pure awareness –
apperception
 – a pure consciousness experience of the world as-it-is. Because there 
is no ‘I’ as a thinker (a little person inside one’s head) or a ‘me’ as a
 feeler (a little person in one’s heart) – to have sensations happen to 
them, one is the sensations. The entire affective faculty vanishes ... 
blind nature’s software package of instinctual passions is deleted.
(2:39
 AM) AEN:	Then there is nothing except the series of sensations which 
happen ... not happening to an ‘I’ or a ‘me’ but just happening ... 
moment by moment ... one after another. To live life as these 
sensations, as distinct from having them, engenders the most astonishing
 sense of freedom and magic. One is living in peace and tranquillity; a 
meaningful peace and tranquillity.
(2:39
 AM) AEN:	Life is intrinsically purposeful, the reason for existence 
lies openly all around. It never goes away – nor has it ever been away –
 it was just that ‘I’/‘me’ was standing in the way of the meaning of 
life being apparent. Now the universe is experiencing itself in all its 
magnificence as an apperceptive human being. Life is not
a
 vale of tears; peace-on-earth is an actual freedom from the human 
condition; it is indeed possible to be actually free, here on earth, as 
this body, in this life-time.
To seek and to find; to explore and uncover; to investigate and discover ... these actions are the very stuff of life!
(2:44 AM) AEN:	his story of moving from I AM to no self http://actualfreedom.com.au/.../abriefpersonalhistory.htm
(1:14
 PM) AEN:	the actualism website states: You could say that mysticism 
pursues the subjective to the  vanishing point of the self – everything 
becomes subjectivity. In  other words, ‘I’ envelope the world to the 
point where the  distinction between subject and object no longer makes 
sense and  the objective is ‘sucked into’ the subjective with no 
distinction  between the two.
Actualists
 pursue objectivity to the vanishing point of the self –  ‘I’ become so 
whittled down that eventually the distinction between  the objective and
 the subjective collapses, but this time it is the  objective that 
replaces the subjective – everything becomes (as it  already is) 
objective – factual. No 37 to No 61(R)
i tink actualism is v sectarian
(1:14 PM) AEN:	they tink that throughout history, they are the first to realise no self, not even buddha
(1:15 PM) AEN:	and they started this whole new movement like religion but not really a religion called 'Actualism'
lol
(6:09 PM) Thusness:	who is geis?
(6:09 PM) AEN:	i also dunnu
someone in sgforums
(6:11 PM) Thusness:	This is very good...this is anatta
(6:11 PM) AEN:	u're talking about geis or tHe website
not the same leh 
(6:12 PM) Thusness:	the website
(6:12 PM) AEN:	icic..
ya i posted on their forum
(6:13 PM) Thusness:	posted what?
(6:13 PM) AEN:	some of my experiences and asked for advise. i also mentioned ur link.. lol
(6:15
 PM) AEN:	funny thing is they think even alan watts, bernadette roberts,
 u.g.krishnamurti, buddha, etc haven realised what they realised
(6:16 PM) Thusness:	coz they dun really understand buddhism...they thought it is new. 
(6:16 PM) AEN:	lol ya
(6:16 PM) Thusness:	there are also differing degree to it.
(6:16 PM) AEN:	icic..
(6:18
 PM) Thusness:	there is also a problem when one cannot fully penetrate 
the depth of anatta experientially, at the beginning phase, one may turn
 to become nihilistic...
(6:18 PM) Thusness:	but since he experienced "I AM", it is unlikely
(6:19 PM) AEN:	oic
what do u mean by nihilistic
(6:19 PM) Thusness:	means the depth of directly experiencing this sensation
(6:19
 PM) Thusness:	or sensate reality without thoroughly no-self 
experientially...though insight arises...but the sense of self is still 
there...there is this problem...
(6:20 PM) AEN:	oic..
but how is it nihilistic
u mean
not experiencing the luminosity thoroughly?
(6:21 PM) Thusness:	it is difficult to tell u because u have not come to that struggle yet.
(6:22 PM) AEN:	icic..
(6:22
 PM) Thusness:	a struggle when the tendency is still there yet one 
becomes extremely physical due to the direct experience of 
sensations...unable to get beyond the sense of self.
(6:22 PM) Thusness:	it is very difficult to tell u.
(6:23 PM) Thusness:	by the way how u come to know about the site?
(6:23
 PM) AEN:	extremely physical as in? richard said there is no greater 
reality only "the universe experiencing itself as this flesh and blood 
body"
from DhO... someone posted
(6:23 PM) Thusness:	ic
(6:24 PM) AEN:	apparently theprisonergreco frequent that site last time
(6:24 PM) Thusness:	where is the place u posted the blog
(6:24 PM) AEN:	http://groups.yahoo.com/group/actualfreedom/message/6100
(6:24 PM) Thusness:	now are u clearer the difference between stage 4 and 5?
(6:25 PM) AEN:	dunno leh
so u mean richard is stage 4 or 5
(6:25 PM) Thusness:	i don't mean that lah
how come u always like to map
(6:25 PM) AEN:	lol
(6:26 PM) Thusness:	i only want u to have a clear insight the difference
(6:26 PM) Thusness:	at least u have a clearer picture of 4, 5 and 6.
(6:27 PM) AEN:	icic..
(6:27 PM) Thusness:	hari and rob burbea and this richard will help u understand further.
it is difficult to have one to have that clear insight of the distinction.
especially between 4 and 5.
(6:27 PM) AEN:	oic..
(6:28 PM) Thusness:	i got to go makan.
(6:28
 PM) AEN:	btw richard doesnt seem to be at stage 4 bcos he clearly 
mentioned that his understanding isnt subject/object union... i tink
oic
(6:28 PM) Thusness:	at least now i can c u showing me sites that have clearer experience of the distinction.
(6:28 PM) AEN:	ok
icic
(6:28 PM) Thusness:	he is already beyond that
(6:28 PM) AEN:	oic
(6:29 PM) Thusness:	his is like dharma dan
(6:29 PM) AEN:	icic..
(6:29 PM) Thusness:	i got to read what he wrote later
(6:29 PM) AEN:	ok
(9:34 PM) Thusness:	what is the url again?
(9:34 PM) AEN:	http://actualfreedom.com.au/
(1:40 AM) AEN:	jonls commented http://buddhism.sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/368699
.....

ACTUALFREEDOM.COM.AU
The Third Alternative

Session Start: Tuesday, July 21, 2009
(10:27 PM) AEN:	dunnu why but chanting a particular mantra a few times brought me into a state of presence. powerful meditation
(10:28 PM) Thusness:	what mantra?
(10:28 PM) AEN:	http://www.meditationexpert.com/.../z_usnisa_vijaya...
(10:29 PM) AEN:	i read that its a v powerful mantra... supposedly anyone who hears it wont fall into 3 lower realms
if i understand correctly
(10:29
 PM) AEN:	the website author said 'I won’t tell you about the two 
supernatural things that happened when I chanted this dharani ' haha
i din experience anything supernatural but i still find it quite powerful
(10:30 PM) Thusness:	i never do chanting b4.
(10:30 PM) AEN:	oic..
(10:30 PM) AEN:	i also seldom do
(10:58 PM) AEN:	haha
(10:58
 PM) AEN:	im realising richard took many parts of his website from other
 sources including alan watts, and now i'm seeing bhante gunaratana 
stuff frm mindfulness in plain english
and rephased a bit himself 
(10:58 PM) AEN:	and he still say only he's enlightened lol
(11:02 PM) AEN:	he's taking the whole of the 'mindfulness' chapter by bhante gunaratana http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma4/mpe13.html , edit a bit, and put into http://actualfreedom.com.au/.../attentivenesssensuousness...
(11:03 PM) Thusness:	edit with permission or not?
(11:03 PM) AEN:	no la... hahaha
for example
bhante gunaratana:
When
 you first become aware of something, there is a fleeting instant of 
pure awareness just before you conceptualize the thing, before you 
identify it. That is a stage of Mindfulness.
richard:
(11:04
 PM) AEN:	When one first becomes aware of something, there is a fleeting
 instant of the clean perception of sensum just before one recognises 
the percept (the mental product or result of perception) and also before
 one identifies with all the feeling memories associated with its qualia
 (the qualities pertaining to the properties of the form) and this ‘raw 
sense-datum’ stage of sensational perception is a direct experience of 
the actual.
use his own terminology only 
(11:05 PM) Thusness:	the whole chapter?
(11:05 PM) AEN:	yep
whole chapter
(11:05 PM) Thusness:	and he din mention it?
(11:05 PM) AEN:	nope
(11:06
 PM) AEN:	but he did admit he used alan watts books, and edited only 
here and there. but he still claims alan watts not his realisation 
(11:06 PM) Thusness:	i don't like the way he is presenting it though his experience is there
(11:06 PM) AEN:	oic
(11:06 PM) Thusness:	yeah alan is more advaita
(11:06 PM) AEN:	oic
(11:06 PM) Thusness:	and zen
his is more vipassana and anatta
(11:07 PM) AEN:	icic..
(11:07 PM) Thusness:	but discrediting Buddha's achievement and said that is his own is no good
and stealing others work for oneself is also bad
(11:08 PM) AEN:	yeah..
the alan watts one he also din say
only when ppl question him saying its from alan watts
and after much debating
(11:08 PM) AEN:	he admit maybe he took it from there a long ago 
(11:08 PM) Thusness:	ic
(11:08 PM) Thusness:	and the one on emptiness?
(11:08 PM) AEN:	which one
(11:09 PM) Thusness:	i mean the one on mindfulness
(11:09 PM) AEN:	yeah thats from bhante gunaratana
i can see its just rephrasing the mindfulness chapter
(11:10 PM) Thusness:	u found out urself?
(11:10 PM) AEN:	yes i found myself
(11:10 PM) Thusness:	ahhaha...icic
(11:10 PM) AEN:	what he called 'apperceptiveness' is gunaratana 'mindfulness'
as far as i understand
(11:10 PM) Thusness:	no good no good
(11:11 PM) AEN:	oic is different?
(11:11 PM) Thusness:	hopefully he din steal all those that he wrote from someone else
no wonder it sounded so enlightening
lol
(11:12 PM) AEN:	lol
(11:18 PM) AEN:	richard also talked about the 3 characteristics but is based on gunaratana.
(11:19
 PM) AEN:	It is really very simple: attentiveness actually sees the 
illusory nature of everything that is felt. It sees the transitory and 
delusory nature of every ideal and dream and scheme and – seeing the 
inherently unsatisfactory nature of all feeling beings – it sees that 
there is no sense grabbing onto any of these passing
feelings
 as peace and harmony cannot be found that way. Attentiveness sees the 
inherent selfishness of all ‘being’ in that it sees the way that human 
beings have arbitrarily selected a certain bundle of tender feelings, 
chopped them off from the rest of the surging flow of savage feelings 
and then realised themselves as unitive and enduring entities swimming 
in the ‘Ocean Of Oneness’
--- richard
(11:19 PM) AEN:	gunaratana:
(11:19
 PM) AEN:	Mindfulness works like and electron microscope. That is, it 
operates on so fine a level that one can actually see directly those 
realities which are at best theoretical constructs to the conscious 
thought process. Mindfulness actually sees the impermanent character of 
every perception. It sees the transitory and passing
nature
 of everything that is perceived. It also sees the inherently 
unsatisfactory nature of all conditioned things. It sees that there is 
no sense grabbing onto any of these passing shows. Peace and happiness 
cannot be found that way. And finally, Mindfulness sees the inherent 
selflessness of all phenomena. It sees the
way
 that we have arbitrarily selected a certain bundle of perceptions, 
chopped them off from the rest of the surging flow of experience and 
then conceptualized them as separate, enduring, entities. Mindfulness 
actually sees these things. It does not think about them, it sees them 
directly.
(11:20 PM) AEN:	ya i tink richard more towards vipassana 
(11:20
 PM) AEN:	but he mistaken that vipassana is a way to watch phenomena to 
dissociate oneself from phenomena and experience the transcendence of I 
AM
(11:21 PM) Thusness:	yes..
(11:21 PM) Thusness:	even most vipassana teacher taught and thought it is that too

MEDITATIONEXPERT.COM
Usnisa Vijaya Dharani

Session Start: Saturday, 5 September, 2009
(10:44 PM) AEN:	hi.. how to experience nonduality effortlessly?
(10:44 PM) Thusness:	only through deep insight of anatta and dependent origination
that is my experience
(10:46 PM) Thusness:	however with the arising insight of anatta, with practice of vipassana, it will turn effortless.
the insight of anatta is most important
(10:46 PM) Thusness:	one will only realise the true meaning of bare attention after the arising insight of anatta
(10:46 PM) AEN:	oic..
but before that also can experience bare attention rite
(10:47 PM) Thusness:	yeah but the essence of it will not be known without the insight of anatta
(10:48 PM) AEN:	oic..
(10:51
 PM) Thusness:	it will come a time when the tendency to dualify 
dissolves due to deep insight (not just meditative stage), it will turn 
effortless, vivid and powerfully present.
(10:51 PM) AEN:	icic..
(10:53
 PM) Thusness:	it almost feel like a natural state of absorption yet 
vivid present because there is no sense of observer, agent, self just 
luminous manifestation.
(10:54 PM) AEN:	oic..
(10:55 PM) Thusness:	actually the site on actual freedom is about there.
....
Session Start: Sunday, 13 September, 2009
(12:46 AM) Thusness:	actual freedom is okie if not all those nonsense blasphemies (not a good term for Buddhism 
).  The experience is there, the insight is there but there are too much plagiarism. 
.

Richard
 misinterpreted Buddha's nirvana and 'death-free' (amata) to imply some 
sort of metaphysical essence or Self. This is not what Buddha meant. 
This is explained in http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../the-deathless-in... 

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
The Deathless in Buddhadharma?

“Yes
 and very good.  There is a very big difference between substantialist 
non-dual of One-Mind and what you said.  In this experience, there is no
 background reality.  It is not about the background Awareness but 
rather the foreground aggregates that you are talking about - A thought.
  There is just aggregates that are like foams, bubbles, ethereal having
 all the same taste without substantiality and implicitly non-dual.  No 
sense of body, mind and the world, nothing actual or truly there.
Before,
 when insight of anatta first arose, you still risk the danger of seeing
 the physical as inherent and truly existing.  Therefore there is a 
period that you are lost, unsure and AF (Actual Freedom) seems appealing
 - a sign that you have not extended the insight of emptiness to 
phenomena though you kept saying twofold emptiness.
At present you focus on the following:
1.  When there is no cold or heat (Soh: See glossary at the bottom of the article)
2.  Total exertion
For
 1, it is not difficult to understand now but for 2, you have not 
directly or adequately replace the 'Self/self' with the interdependence 
of whatever arises.” - John Tan, 06/12/2011 E-mail
“André,
 to me anatta is a very specific and definite phase of seeing through 
the background self/Self quite thoroughly at least in the waking state 
but there is a tendency that experience can somehow turn very "physical,
 sense-based and causal" for me.
Every
 experience is direct, gapless, non-dual, non-conceptual and radiance 
even total exertion is present, just not empty. Almost equivalent to 
Actual Freedom as narrated by Richard. In fact I find Richard's 
description very much my version of arahat 
.
For
 Kyle, due to his view in emptiness, the experiential insight of anatta 
not only pierce through the self/Self but also triggered the arising 
insight of emptiness. However this may not be true (imo) in most cases 
if one's view isn't firmly established. For me when I first encountered 
the chariot analogy, there is an immediate and intuitive recognition 
that it is referring to anatta but I am unable to grasp the essence of 
the phrase "emptiness and non-arisen" there and then.
In
 other words, in addition to self immolation, a specific insight must 
arise, it is the prajna that clearly sees through the referent is empty 
and non-arisen. So anatta I would say is about severing the self/Self 
whereas phase 6 is the blossoming of this specific insight. Extending 
this insight from self to phenomena, from conventions to magical 
appearances is then a natural progression.
As
 for first bhumi (Soh: related: [insight] [buddhism] A reconsideration 
of the meaning of "Stream-Entry" considering the data points of both 
pragmatic Dharma and traditional Buddhism , Definition of First Bhumi) I
 am seriously not sure and never thought of it.
I
 can only say if we practice long enough, there is a frequent occurrence
 of a clear, clean and pure spring of joy that emerges from nowhere, 
floating like cloud. A very helpful antidote for negative emotions.
Even
 the experience of drinking water is like experiencing a clean and pure 
stream of luminous sensations in zero dimension similar to a mirage 
flowing spring water floating in the air.” - John Tan in the Awakening 
to Reality Discussion Group, 2019, John wrote this maybe a month or two 
before a breakthrough that Soh had which led to the writing “The Magical
 Fairytale-like Wonderland and Paradise of this Verdant Earth Free from 
Affective Emotions, Reactions and Sufferings”
“Soh:
 as Richard said, the out of control experience can happen even before 
anatta (the complete dissolution of self/Self), that is why the "doer" 
dissolves but the "be-er" is still there, but in actual freedom both 
dissolves
John Tan: Quite acute insight and thorough for the state no mind.  Means "being" is also deconstructed.”
(Soh: For those wondering what Actual Freedom is referring to:
See
 A Brief Personal History (of Richard Maynard of Actual Freedom) and 
Peace on this Earth: Actual Freedom and Actual Freedom and Buddhism)
John Tan wrote on 24 March 2019 to me,
“Not
 going back. If you want to write a guide, write with sincerity. If you 
write with a sincere heart, I am sure people will benefit as those are 
genuine insights leading to effortlessness of instant presence. However,
 never claim or even suggest the phases of insight are end of journey, 
that is very naive, untrue and misleading.
As
 for powerful vivid radiance, they are normal if you have spent quality 
time post your anatta insight. When the center is gone, externally you 
will feel like a ball of radiance appearing as the world. Internally, 
energetic radiance will beam through your body cells, vibrating on your 
crown, your face, dancing as pulsation of your flowing blood, that is 
the time you should seriously look into energy practice. If you are not 
interested in energy practice, just learn deep rhythmic abdominal 
breathing until a state of no mind into deep release, it will help to 
contain and regulate and the powerful energetic radiance.
As
 for AF, the immolation of Self/self is simply the deconstruction of 
mental construct of self as a center background. Richard has carried it 
far enough to reach total exertion which he called "realizing one's 
destiny" if I remember correctly. However the same cause reifying the 
background is now manifesting in the foreground as the "actual world", 
therefore there is no thorough liberation. Imo from the perspective of 
self immolation, he has carried it further than you and his essays can 
definitely help to guide you. It does seems final in a pseudo sense.
For
 you, it will be difficult to find a teacher but if you humble yourself,
 everyone, every event is your teacher. When I tell you to differentiate
 experience from realization and established firmly on the view as your 
guide, the purpose is not for you to go around stereotyping people, it 
is strictly for your own development.
Lastly
 due to the Awakening to Reality group and your relentless 
advertisement, I have been receiving messages. I do not want to mislead 
people and I am not a spiritual teacher and I do not wish to develop it 
into a cultic group
.
 As for me, practice is ongoing and there is no finality. So I will 
continue my never ending journey. You can WhatsApp me just don't message
 me who is at what stage… lol.”
After
 writing to me, in the following months my total exertion deepened and 
stabilized. I experienced the 'destiny' of infinite space and time that 
Richard always talked about, which became a natural state.

Richard is clear in distinguishing his realisation and experience from those of Stage 1~4.
"RICHARD: You must be referring to this:
•
 [Richard]: ‘I never advise or encourage anyone to use psychotropic 
substances (for obvious reasons). If, however, someone already has done 
so, and intends to do so again of their own accord and volition anyway, 
then I would counsel their very careful and considered use as it is 
all-too-easy for an altered state of consciousness (ASC) to emerge 
rather than a pure consciousness experience (PCE) ... there are many 
accounts available on the internet and 4 or 5 years ago I browsed 
through several web pages and never found any description that resembled
 a PCE’.
A quick search 
of the internet showed that the quote you provided comes from an essay, 
in ‘This is It and Other Essays on Zen and Spiritual Experience’, 
entitled ‘The New Alchemy’ and goes on to say, immediately after where 
you ended it, the following:
•
 [quote] ‘For it implies that experience is not something in which one 
is trapped or by which one is pushed around, or against which one must 
fight. The conventional duality of subject and object, knower and known,
 feeler and feeling, is changed into a polarity: the knower and the 
known become the poles, terms, or phases of a single event which 
happens, not to me or from me, but of itself. The experiencer and the 
experience become a single, ever-changing self-forming process, complete
 and fulfilled at every moment of its unfolding, and of infinite 
complexity and subtlety’. [endquote].
That
 polarity of subject/ object, knower/ known, feeler/ feeling, 
experiencer/ experience is an unmistakable description of mystical 
experiencing wherein the polar opposites unite (aka non-duality) – known
 in some mystical literature as ‘complexio oppositorum’ (union of 
opposites) ‘or coincidentia oppositorum’ (coincidence of opposites) – 
and thus shows that my counselling of very careful and considered use of
 psychotropic substances is a well-advised monition.
Here in this actual world neither duality nor non-duality have any existence.
....
RICHARD: Here is the full version (with the sections you selected highlighted for convenience):
•
 [Mr. Alan Watts]: ‘I can say only that the awareness of grain or 
structure in the senses seemed to be awareness of awareness, of myself 
from inside myself. Because of this, it followed that *the distance or 
separation between myself and my senses, on the one hand, and the 
external world, on the other, seemed to disappear*. [emphasis added].
•
 [Richard]: ‘With the end of both ‘I’ and ‘me’, *the distance or 
separation between both ‘I’ and ‘me’ and these sense organs – and thus 
the external world – disappears*. [emphasis added].
And
 the reason why I provide the full version is because Mr. Alan Watts 
clearly reports that it is [quote] ‘because’ [endquote] of the awareness
 of himself, from inside himself, that the distance or separation 
(between himself and his senses, on the one hand, and the external 
world, on the other) seemed to disappear ... as contrasted my report 
that it is [quote] ‘with’ [endquote] the end of both ‘I’ and ‘me’ that 
the distance or separation (between both ‘I’ and ‘me’ and these sense 
organs and thus the external world) disappears.
In
 other words, with no identity whatsoever there is no-one to be either 
in a state of separation (aka duality) or in a state of union (aka 
non-duality).
RESPONDENT: [Let’s compare]:
Alan Watts: ‘I was no longer a detached observer, a little man inside my own head ...’
Richard:
 ‘Because there is no ‘I’ as a thinker (a little person inside one’s 
head) or a ‘me’ as a feeler (a little person in one’s heart)’
RICHARD: Again here is my full version (with the section you selected highlighted for convenience):
•
 [Richard]: ‘To be living as the senses is to live a clear and clean 
awareness – apperception – a pure consciousness experience of the world 
as-it-is. *Because there is no ‘I’ as a thinker (a little person inside 
one’s head) or a ‘me’ as a feeler (a little person in one’s heart)* 
...’. [emphasis added].
Again
 the reason why I provide the full version is because to be living *as* 
the senses (as a flesh and blood body only) is a vast cry from a 
remaining, and non-detached observer, having *become* the sensations (as
 in having identified with and/or having arrogated them).
RESPONDENT: [Let’s compare]:
Alan Watts: ‘ ... /having/ sensations. I was the sensations’
Richard: ‘to have sensations happen to them, I am the sensations’
RICHARD: And again here is the full version (with the sections you selected highlighted for convenience):
•
 [Mr. Alan Watts]: ‘I was no longer a detached observer, a little man 
inside my own head */having/ sensations. I was the sensations* ...’. 
[emphasis added].
• 
[Richard]: ‘Because there is no ‘I’ as a thinker (a little person inside
 one’s head) or a ‘me’ as a feeler (a little person in one’s heart) *to 
have sensations happen to them, I am the sensations*’.[emphasis added].
And
 again the reason why I provide the full version is because of the 
marked distinction between an egoless observer/ feeler/ experiencer (aka
 identity) having become the sensations and a flesh and blood body only 
being the very senses.
RESPONDENT: [Let’s compare]:
Alan
 Watts: ‘[I was the sensations], so much so that there was nothing left 
of me, the observing ego, except the series of sensations which happened
 – not to me, but just happened – moment by moment, one after another’
Richard:
 ‘There is nothing except the series of sensations which happen ... not 
happening to an ‘I’ or a ‘me’ but just happening ... moment by moment 
... one after another’
RICHARD: And yet again here is my full version (with the section you selected highlighted for convenience):
•
 [Richard]: ‘The entire affective faculty vanishes ... blind nature’s 
software package of instinctual passions is deleted. *There is nothing 
except the series of sensations which happen ... not happening to an ‘I’
 or a ‘me’ but just happening ... moment by moment ... one after 
another*’. [emphasis added].
And
 yet again the reason why I provide the full version is because of the 
remarkable difference betwixt a flesh and blood body sans the entire 
affective faculty (and thus identity in toto) and an identity, replete 
with the full suite of emotions/ passions/ calentures it is comprised 
of, having identified with and/or having arrogated bodily sensations.

RESPONDENT: [Let’s compare]:
Alan
 Watts: ‘To become the sensations, as distinct from having them, 
engenders the most astonishing sense of freedom and release’
Richard:
 ‘To live life as these sensations, as distinct from having them, 
engenders the most astonishing sense of freedom and magic’
RICHARD: Here is what I go on to say immediately following:
•
 [Richard]: ‘Consequently, I am living in peace and tranquillity; a 
meaningful peace and tranquillity. Life is intrinsically purposeful, the
 reason for existence lies openly all around. Being this very air I live
 in, I am constantly aware of it as I breathe it in and out; I see it, I
 hear it, I taste it, I smell it, I touch it, all of the time. It never 
goes away – nor has it ever been away – it was just that ‘I’/ ‘me’ was 
standing in the way of the meaning of life being apparent’ [endquote].
And here is what Mr. Alan Watts goes on to say immediately following:
•
 [quote] ‘For it implies that experience is not something in which one 
is trapped or by which one is pushed around, or against which one must 
fight. The conventional duality of subject and object, knower and known,
 feeler and feeling, is changed into a polarity: the knower and the 
known become the poles, terms, or phases of a single event which 
happens, not to me or from me, but of itself. The experiencer and the 
experience become a single, ever-changing self-forming process, complete
 and fulfilled at every moment of its unfolding, and of infinite 
complexity and subtlety’. [endquote].
(...)
RICHARD:
 That polarity of subject/ object, knower/ known, feeler/ feeling, 
experiencer/ experience is an unmistakable description of mystical 
experiencing wherein the polar opposites unite (aka non-duality) – known
 in some mystical literature as ‘complexio oppositorum’ (union of 
opposites) ‘or coincidentia oppositorum’ (coincidence of opposites) – 
and thus shows that my counselling of very careful and considered use of
 psychotropic substances is a well-advised monition. Here in this actual
 world neither duality nor non-duality have any existence."
I think perhaps it is important is it to distinguish view and depth of realization?
So
 for eg. One can have "right view" or perhaps even experiential glimpse 
into emptiness. But without fully refining gross and subtle experience 
and abiding in emptiness.
And
 perhaps someone else can have a deep abiding realization of Annata like
 Richard seems to have with a view that perhaps served him to get over 
'spiritualism' but is obscuring further realization.
Not
 sure what the trad. Buddhist view on this would be with regards to 
rebirth. But in terms of present experience Richards experience could be
 more free of suffering than that of someone with a glimpse of 
non-abiding emptiness.
So i dont like getting too caught up in the stages. 

I
 think a good thing about Richard is that about 30 months after his 
basic freedom (anatta) breakthrough, he transitioned into abiding total 
exertion (fully free). Other than Vineeto, so far none of the other 
actually free individuals made that transition.
Anurag Jain
 he made up his mind about Buddhism and other spiritual paths before he 
embarked on his journey. He also was 'thrilled to the nth degree' to go 
and discover something no one has ever discovered.These
 two things have stayed throughout his journey and he doesn't seem to 
have the psychological capacity to step back from these points of view. 
Everything
 he will come across that suggests he isn't the first one will be 
dismissed because of his lack of psychological majority. (psychological 
maturity doesn't necessarily come from spiritual maturity, ppl can stay 
psychological immature dispute profound insight into spirituality) 

I think its also not as simple as that.
AF people are looking specifically at the physicalist subphase of anatta to be in their criteria of AF.
This
 is why when I described my experience to Vineeto, she dismissed it, 
saying her experience of universe is physical and inherently existing. 
(I do not, because I underwent twofold emptiness).
Likewise
 Richard said a few times that U.G. Krishnamurti could be experiencing 
an actual freedom. U G is in the physicalist subphase of anatta. But 
after some years he recanted that position, saying there is some 
dissimilarities, although maintaining that U G is the closest to his 
experience by far.
I
 am sure these things play a role in it as well. However, there's a 
distinct difference between John Tan and his capabilities to look at 
various teachers and traditions and Richards. Richard simply lacks this 
capacity and in my view, that is rooted in the two reasons I have 
outlined above. 

Yes
Although
 i would add, anatta is truly rare. Most people out there only realise I
 AM and up to one mind. It is quite rare as a matter of fact.. so it is 
not easy to find convincing descriptions of anatta and total exertion. 
Even John Tan said it is rare*. But that being said, there is truly a difference between John and Richard’s ability to discern.
“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
AF
 belief is that they are their bodies, according to AF spirituality is 
to believe that one is awareness. Probably a criticism of Advaita 
Vedanta, not so much Buddhism.
I think Richard cherry picks his conclusions, it could have gone unnoticed 10 years ago, not so much anymore.
His personality suffers from megalomania which he himself cannot see.
Despite reading his descriptions on PCEs they never triggered an experience of them in my system. 
HAIETMOBA for me seems to be a suppression tactic rather than a relaxing into experience.
A criticism of AF from the Dzogchen perspective.
DHARMAOVERGROUND.ORG
Imitating Freedom, a Buddhist critique of "Actual Freedom" - Discussion - www.dharmaoverground.org
The
 unawareness that is spoken of here is similar to my impression of 
suppression in using HAIETMOBA. Basically one pushes a certain 
experience in place with force. Rigpa / Dzogchen is a release of the 
force.
I
 find self-inquiry here in my system doing the same thing, so I am not 
sure one should go for I AM ness rather than anatta. But then I am more 
into transmission based systems than sutra / manual ones.

Actually
 all Dzogchen teachers I have come across leads students to I AM. At 
least initially. And that is indeed the (initial, not fully matured) 
rigpa of Dzogchen.
This
 is so even for Arcaya Malcolm, as his long time student Kyle Dixon 
himself said to me and showed me a post by Malcolm in his Zangthal 
forum. I AM first, then anatta/emptiness later.
Unfortunately I cannot share that text outside, unless you are a member of that Zangthal forum 

ZANGTHAL.COM
Forum Signup — Zangthal

Also
 my experience of self enquiry wasn’t exactly very forceful. But yes one
 should complement it with “dropping” as i wrote in atr guide 

But i can share John Tan’s comments about Malcolm’s post:
JT: "This is like what I tell u and essentially emphasizing 明心非见性. 先明心, 后见性.
First is directly authenticating mind/consciousness 明心. There is the direct path like zen sudden enlightenment of one's original mind or mahamudra or dzogchen direct introduction of rigpa or even self enquiry of advaita -- the direct, immediate, perception of "consciousness" without intermediaries. They r the same.
However that is not realization of emptiness. Realization of emptiness is 见性. Imo there is direct path to 明心 but I have not seen any direct path to 见性 yet. If u go through the depth and nuances of our mental constructs, u will understand how deep and subtle the blind spots r.
Therefore emptiness or 空性 is the main difference between buddhism and other religions. Although anatta is the direct experiential taste of emptiness, there is still a difference between buddhist's anatta and selflessness of other religions -- whether it is anatta by experiential taste of the dissolution of self alone or the experiential taste is triggered by wisdom of emptiness.
The former focused on selflessness and whole path of practice is all about doing away with self whereas the later is abt living in the wisdom of emptiness and applying that insight and wisdom of emptiness to all phenomena.
As for emptiness there is the fine line of seeing through inherentness of Tsongkhapa and there is the emptiness free from extremes by Gorampa. Both r equally profound so do not talk nonsense and engaged in profane speech as in terms of result, ultimately they r the same (imo)."
JT: "This is like what I tell u and essentially emphasizing 明心非见性. 先明心, 后见性.
First is directly authenticating mind/consciousness 明心. There is the direct path like zen sudden enlightenment of one's original mind or mahamudra or dzogchen direct introduction of rigpa or even self enquiry of advaita -- the direct, immediate, perception of "consciousness" without intermediaries. They r the same.
However that is not realization of emptiness. Realization of emptiness is 见性. Imo there is direct path to 明心 but I have not seen any direct path to 见性 yet. If u go through the depth and nuances of our mental constructs, u will understand how deep and subtle the blind spots r.
Therefore emptiness or 空性 is the main difference between buddhism and other religions. Although anatta is the direct experiential taste of emptiness, there is still a difference between buddhist's anatta and selflessness of other religions -- whether it is anatta by experiential taste of the dissolution of self alone or the experiential taste is triggered by wisdom of emptiness.
The former focused on selflessness and whole path of practice is all about doing away with self whereas the later is abt living in the wisdom of emptiness and applying that insight and wisdom of emptiness to all phenomena.
As for emptiness there is the fine line of seeing through inherentness of Tsongkhapa and there is the emptiness free from extremes by Gorampa. Both r equally profound so do not talk nonsense and engaged in profane speech as in terms of result, ultimately they r the same (imo)."

明心非见性.  先明心, 后见性. 
Means “Apprehending the mind is not realising its nature. First apprehend Mind, later realise its nature.”
Nature as in emptiness
ChNN
 never stated that anywhere as far as I can tell from reading his 
material or from his teachings I participated in online so I think that 
is a personal interpretation.
The
 only place I found something similar to an identity like I AM is where 
he says you find out you are Vajrasattva so impurities fall away 
naturally. Everywhere ChNN emphasizes looking into 'who' is having the 
experience. This looks like self-inquiry from the outside but actually 
is different experientially because one is in clarity.
Regarding
 my take on self-inquiry I am just reporting on how it feels here, not 
saying it objectively is something to avoid. I think it is something 
specific to my system due to strong analysis capabilities of the brain. 
So the self-inquiry might trigger unconscious processing of sensory 
input. 
Soh Wei Yu
 I find the comparison of rigpa to I AM a bit confusing. For example in 
the guide you mention that abiding in the I AM is a trap and won’t lead 
to anatta, but this is exactly what is practiced in Dzogchen. I trust 
you and Malcolm on this point though as you clearly have more experience
 with these states than I do.One
 does not abide in I AM in Dzogchen. In ChNN guru yoga one abides in the
 same state as ChNN, how it works in other Dzogchen systems I don't 
know. However Lama Lena transmissions feel a bit different from what I 
can pickup on YouTube.
I
 AM is missing on the emptiness part, this is true though. I didn't see 
that until recently where it clicked that I AM practioners describing it
 as something permanent that emptiness pierces through.
Chris Pedersen
 I meant abiding in and stabilising rigpa, not I AM, though obviously 
that’s an oversimplification. But if we’re equating rigpa and I AM, then
 it would be the same thing.
I
 wasn't having ChNN particularly in mind, but really, all Dzogchen 
teachers I've seen and come across lead students to I AM. (not 
necessarily as a final stage)
But
 yes, ChNN is included. It isn't even controversial. Kyle Dixon would 
agree with me, in fact, he told me himself that Malcolm Smith points to I
 AM as initial rigpa and is the said instant presence.
There's
 an important aspect to the guru yoga taught by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu 
which brings out the aspect of I AMness or Pure Presence.
I wrote previously, quoting a text from ChNN:
"...We
 sound another A and from that moment we are no longer working with 
visualization, thinking, or judging, but are only being in that 
presence. In particular, we notice who is doing this visualization, who 
is being in this white A at the center of the gakhyil. We are not 
looking at something in a dualistic way; we are being in that state, and
 that is instant presence and our real condition."
--
 this is a self-enquiry instruction pointing to the same realization, 
exactly the same, even if you do not want to call it by those name.
ChNN pointing out the I AM (note that I am not suggesting that I AM is the limit of his insight):
5/12/2012
 6:29 AM: Soh Wei Yu: "If you are in the state of instant presence, and 
compare this sensation with the experience of emptiness, or clarity, or 
in a different way you compare one with another, you discover that 
presence is unique, that it always remains the same. But before we are 
able to be in the state of presence, experiences are all different. So 
that is the meaning of tsed la pheb:
5/12/2012
 6:30 AM: Soh Wei Yu: Maturing: you discover really that the state of 
instant presence or rigpa is unique. In our lives everything is an 
experience, and there are not only three experiences."
5/12/2012 8:54 AM: John: What does he meant by not only three experiences
5/12/2012
 9:43 AM: Soh Wei Yu: Emptiness (in the gap between thoughts that is 
emptiness but there is nonetheless someone noticing that, a presence, 
sounds like I AM), clarity (like movement, manifestation) and sensation 
(sensation of pleasure incl sexual contact)
5/12/2012 9:45 AM: Soh Wei Yu: He said
5/12/2012
 9:47 AM: Soh Wei Yu: "...when we are dissolving everything into 
emptiness, in that moment we are discovering instant presence because we
 are not only lost in emptiness, there is also someone noticing that, 
there is a presence. So this is called instant presence. And you can 
also have this instant presence with the experience of clarity and with 
the experience of sensation, even with a strong sensation like sexual 
contact. Of course, at this moment you can feel a very strong sensation 
of pleasure and maybe you are generally distracted by it, but
?5/12/2012
 9:48 AM: Soh Wei Yu: If you are a good practitioner you also notice the
 instant presence. That is, you are not only enjoying the strong 
sensation but at the same time
5/12/2012 9:48 AM: Soh Wei Yu: you are in instant presence.
5/12/2012
 9:48 AM: Soh Wei Yu: Then followed by the ""If you are in the state of 
instant presence, and compare this sensation with the experience of 
emptiness... Etc
.....
ChNN also said before,
"Ranxin
 minis means one does not simply remain in the condition of the 
experience, but uses the experience as a method to find oneself in the 
state of contemplation. In these experiences there is a presence. It is 
not as if one has fainted or lost consciousness. There is somebody who 
remains in it. There is no difference whatsoever whether this presence 
is found in the experience of the person who is smiling or in the 
experience of the person who is frightened, even though the experiences 
are completely different. Minis does not mean that two things are 
united, or that we think that they are the same. If we just say that the
 nature of those things is not real, thus they are the same, then it 
will remain as a mental construction. But if one goes through the 
diverse experiences and hence finds that the true state of presence has 
no difference, then the real state of nacog is one, and the presence is 
called rigba (rig.pa.) If we say different experiences are not equal, 
this is what we mean.
"Whether
 it is calm, movement, or any one of hundreds of experiences, the 
important thing is to know the difference between experience and 
presence. When we know what is meant by rigba, we ought to know how to 
integrate with all these aspects in our presence."
"So,
 ugly or beautiful, positive or negative conditions, heavens or hells or
 transmigration do not in any way affect the underlying nature of the 
consciousness that is the state of the mirror itself." "that which is 
noticing thoughts and that which is noticing no thoughts, that which 
notices both conditions is Rigpa"

And
 I can refer to you that Malcolm Smith post pointing to the distinction 
between initial rigpa as I AMness and subsequent emptiness realisation, 
if you guys are in the Zangthal forum.

As for some excerpts from other Dzogchen teachers besides ChNN pointing to I AMness:
Tenzin Wangyal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNK7g5xZu7w
Sogyal
 Rinpoche: “Sometimes when I meditate, I don't use any particular 
method. I just allow my mind to rest, and find, especially when I am 
inspired, that I can bring my mind home and relax very quickly. I sit 
quietly and rest in the nature of mind; I don't question or doubt 
whether I am in the "cor-rect" state or not. There is no effort, only 
rich understanding, wakefulness, and unshakable certainty. When I am in 
the nature of mind, the ordinary mind is no longer there. There is no 
need to sustain or confirm a sense of being: I simply am. A fundamental 
trust is present. There is nothing in par-ticular to do… …If meditation 
is simply to continue the flow of Rigpa after the introduction, how do 
we know when it is Rigpa and when it is not? I asked Dilgo Khyentse 
Rinpoche this ques-tion, and he replied with his characteristic 
simplicity: "If you are in an unaltered state, it is Rigpa." If we are 
not contriving or manipulating the mind in any way, but simply resting 
in an unaltered state of pure and pristine awareness, then that is 
Rigpa. If there is any contriving on our part or any kind of 
manipulating or grasping, it is not. Rigpa is a state in which there is 
no longer any doubt; there is not really a mind to doubt: You see 
directly. If you are in this state, a complete, natural certainty and 
confidence surge up with the Rigpa itself, and that is how you know.”
Lopon
 Tenzin Namdak: "To clarify the Dzogchen view: "We are just what we are,
 the Natural State which is like a mirror. It is clear and empty, and 
yet it reflects everything, all possible existences and all possible 
lifetimes. But it never changes and it does not depend on anything 
else." 
etc etc.. too many to list but you get the hang of it
....
Update: here's a description by Dzogchen teacher James Low
"I am a non-entity English 
I am a non-entity French
I am a non-entity German
I am a non-entity Spanish
The
 basic ground of my presence is undefinable, never constrained, 
restricted or contaminated. I am open, ungraspable, naked, ever fresh – 
the always already integrated empty presence.
Without
 change or effort this state is also the infinite richness of all 
possible appearances. Open and empty is not other than rich and full. 
This is the open field within which gestures arise: gestures of 
identity, of connection, of control, of limitation, of welcome, of 
conflict. All of samsara and nirvana is just the play of possibilities 
of this field of becoming.
When
 fear, attachment and self-cherishing arise, they are the empty radiance
 of the ungraspable nature. Relax and see that they go free by 
themselves. Identity, intention, hope, fear, lostness, despair, all are 
moments devoid of enduring essence. Without trying to change the 
experience be present as the experiencer, the source; presence 
inseparable from space.
I
 am open, I am everything, I am just this, I am nothing. Whatever is 
said or thought is mere play; nothing is nothing, everything is nothing,
 nothing is everything.
I
 am a non-entity. Our presence, this amazing, ungraspable facticity of 
awareness is also an illusion. Nothing, something, everything, anything,
 just this thing, nothing – these moments are not separate and other, 
they are the non-dual ungraspable richness of the open ground.
I
 am, a non-entity. I am a non-entity. I, am a non-entity. Problems are 
mere parsing and punctuation. Start with ‘I am’, awaken to ‘I am’, relax
 as ‘I am’."

YOUTUBE.COM
Being the Mirror, Not the Reflection

Also,
 the direct introduction of Dzogchen also can lead to I AM realization. 
For example, Tinh Panh realised the I AM during Malcolm Smith's direct 
introduction. He kinda thanked me for introducing him to Malcolm as I 
was kind of an influence for leading him to Malcolm Smith. 
Those who don't get it yet can do self-introduction practices like rushan and semzins.
Kyle Dixon also said, 
badge icon
"I’ve
 never met anyone who gained any insight into emptiness at direct 
introduction. Plenty who recognized rigpa kechigma though.
I
 don’t presume to know better than luminaries like Longchenpa and Khenpo
 Ngachung who state emptiness isn’t actually known until third vision 
and so on. You may presume otherwise and in that case we can agree to 
disagree."
- Kyle Dixon 

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
The Degrees of Rigpa
Soh yes then you are right. 
You could call it abiding in I AM as it is your own presence, what ChNN calls instant presence. 
Doing this without a master is different though. Like doing self-inquiry with Ramana Maharshi and without. 
I
 think I had compartmentalized I AM as something different (presence, 
but zero thoughts) because of the relationship with Hinduism. But yes 
this is your own presence, the feeling that you exist etc.

Whether
 you realize I AM with or without a master, it is exactly the same 
realization. Just that without a very realised teacher, it's hard to 
advance from there, and tendency is to get stuck. Unfortunately even 
lineage teachers are often stuck at the I AM/one mind phases. (I have 
personal experiences like that as well) John Tan also met many lineage 
masters, but they all couldn't lead him to anatta and emptiness, he had 
to figure it all out by himself by contemplating on the Buddha's 
teachings. Having known John Tan, I can tell you his wisdom faculty is 
incredibly sharp, so most of us dull ones like myself will never hope to
 figure it all out without a teacher, or someone like John Tan who 
pointed out to me. Well he is not teaching others formally but by his 
and AtR sharing many have come to progress from I AM to realise anatta 
as well (40+)
Likewise
 if you are studying under someone who is very clear, like Malcolm, it 
is safe, because you are pointed to the right view, etc.

As
 Malcolm himself said, due to the current degeneration of Buddhadharma, 
it is the case that in all traditions of Buddhism it is very rare to 
find someone who realise emptiness. 
(Although I would argue that this may be the case even back in olden days:
'Introduction to the Middle Way: Chandrakirti's Madhyamakavatara with Commentary by Jamgon Mipham',
"There
 is a story that once when Atisha was in Tibet, he received news of the 
death of the master Maitripa. He was deeply grieved, and on being 
questioned about the reasons for his sorrow, he replied that Buddhism 
was in decline in India and that everywhere there was syncretism and 
confusion. Until then, Atisha continued, there had been only two masters
 in the whole of India, Maitripa and himself, capable of discerning the 
correct teaching from the doctrines and practices of the reviving Hindu 
schools. The time is sure to come, Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche commented,
 and perhaps it is already here, when there will be an analogous 
situation in the West. Only the correct establishment of the view will 
enable one to find one's way through the religious confusion of the 
modern West and to distinguish authentic Buddhism from the New Age 
"self-help" versions that are already taking hold.”
)

John Tan also reiterated recently that all the traditions are talking about the same authentication:
William Lam: It's non conceptual. 
John
 Tan: It’s non conceptual. Yup. Okay. Presence is not conceptual 
experience, it has to be direct. And you just feel pure sense of 
existence. Means people ask you, before birth, who are you? You just 
authenticate the I, that is yourself, directly. So when you first 
authenticate that I, you are damn happy, of course. When young, that 
time, wah… I authenticate this I… so you thought that you’re 
enlightened, but then the journey continues. So this is the first time 
you taste something that is different. It is… It is before thoughts, 
there is no thoughts. Your mind is completely still. You feel still, you
 feel presence, and you know yourself. Before birth it is Me, after 
birth, it is also Me, 10,000 years it’s still this Me, 10,000 year 
before, it’s still this Me. So you authenticate that, your mind is just 
that and authenticate your own true being, so you don't doubt that. In 
later phase…
Kenneth Bok: Presence is this I AM?
John
 Tan: Presence is the same as I AM. Presence is the same as… of course, 
other people may disagree, but actually they're referring to the same 
thing. The same authentication, the same what... even in Zen is still 
the same.
But
 in later phase, I conceive that as just the thought realm. Means, in 
the six, I always call the six entries and six exits, so there is the 
sound and there’s all these… During that time, you always say I’m not 
sound, I’m not the appearance, I AM the Self that is behind all these 
appearances, alright? So, sounds, sensations, all these come and go, 
your thoughts come and go, those are not me, correct? This is the 
ultimate Me. The Self is the ultimate Me. Correct?
William Lam: So, is that nondual? The I AM stage. It’s non-conceptual, was it nondual?
John
 Tan: It’s nonconceptual. Yes, it is nondual. Why is it nondual? At that
 moment, there is no duality at all, at that moment when you experience 
the Self, you cannot have duality, because you are authenticated 
directly as IT, as this pure sense of Being. So, it’s completely I, 
there’s nothing else, just I. There’s nothing else, just the Self. I 
think, many of you have experienced this, the I AM. So, you probably 
will go and visit all the Hinduism, sing song with them, meditate with 
them, sleep with them, correct? Those are the young days. I meditate 
with them, hours after hours, meditate, sit with them, eat with them, 
sing song with them, drum with them. Because this is what they preach, 
and you find these group of people, all talking about the same language.
So
 this experience is not a normal experience, correct? I mean, within the
 probably 15 years of my life or 17 years of my life, my first...  when I
 was 17, when you first experienced that, wah, what is that? So, it is 
something different, it is non conceptual, it is non dual, and all 
these. But it is very difficult to get back the experience. Very, very 
difficult, unless you're in when you're in meditation, because you 
reject the relative, the appearances. So, it is, although they may say 
no, no, it is always with me, because it's Self, correct? But you don't 
actually get back the authentication, just pure sense of existence, just
 me, because you reject the rest of that appearances, but you do not 
know during that time. Only after anatta, then you realize that this, 
when you when you hear sound without the background, that experience is 
exactly the same, the taste is exactly the same as the presence. The I 
AM Presence. So, only after anatta, when the background is gone, then 
you realize eh, this has the exact same taste as the I AM experience. 
When you are not hearing, you are just in the vivid appearances, the 
obvious appearances now, correct. That experience is also the I AM 
experience. When you are even now feeling your sensation without the 
sense of self directly. That experience is exactly the same as I AM 
taste. It is nondual. Then you realize, I call, actually, everything is 
Mind. Correct? Everything. So, so before that, there is an ultimate 
Self, a background, and you reject all those transient appearances. 
After that, that background is gone, you know? And then you are just all
 these appearances. 
William Lam: You are the appearance? You are the sound? You are the…
John
 Tan: Yes. So, so, that is an experience. That is an experience. So 
after that, you realize something. What did you realise? You realise all
 along it is the what, that is obscuring you. So… in a person, for a 
person that is in I AM experience, the pure presence experience, they 
will always have a dream. They will say that I hope I can 24 by 7 always
 in that state, correct? So when I was young, 17. But then after 10 
years you are still thinking. Then after 20 years, you say how come I 
need to always meditate? You always find time to meditate, maybe I don't
 study also meditate, you give me a cave last time I will just meditate 
inside.
So,
 the the thing that you always dream that you can one day be pure 
consciousness, just as pure consciousness, live as pure consciousness, 
but you never get it. And even if you meditate, occasionally probably 
you can have that oceanic experience. Only when you after anatta, when 
that self behind is gone, you are not 24 by 7, maybe most of your day, 
waking state, not so much of 24 by 7, you dream that time still very 
karmic depending on what you engage, doing business, all these. (John 
mimics dreaming) How come ah, the business… 
So,
 so, in normal waking state, you are effortless. Probably that is the, 
during I AM phase, what you think you are going to achieve, you achieve 
after the insight of anatta. So you become clear, you are probably in 
the right path. But there are further insights you have to go through. 
When you try to penetrate the… one of them is, I feel that I become very
 physical. I am just narrating, going through my experience. Maybe that 
time… because you experience the relative, the appearances directly. So 
everything becomes very physical. So that is how you come to understand 
the meaning, how concepts actually affect you. Then what exactly is 
physical? How does the idea of physical come about, correct? That time I
 still do not know about emptiness, and all these kind of things, to me 
it is not so important. 
So,
 I start going into what exactly is physical, what exactly is being 
physical? Sensation. But why is sensation known as physical, and what is
 being physical? How did I get the idea of being physical? So, I began 
to enquire into this thing. That, eh, actually on top of that, there is 
still further things to deconstruct, that is the meaning… that, just 
like self, I’m attached to the meaning of self, and you create a 
construct, it becomes a reification. Same thing, physicality also. So, 
you deconstruct the concepts surrounding physicality. Correct? So, when 
you deconstruct that, then I began to realize that all along, we try to 
understand, even after the experience of let’s say, anatta and all 
these… when we analyze, and when we think and try to understand 
something, we are using existing scientific concepts, logic, common day 
to day logic and all these to understand something. And it is always 
excluding consciousness. Even if you experience, you can lead a 
spiritual path you know, but when you think and analyze something, 
somehow you always exclude consciousness from the equation of 
understanding something. Your concept is always very materialistic. We 
always exclude consciousness from the whole equation.
DOCS.GOOGLE.COM
ATR Meeting 28 October 2020
Soh Wei Yu
 Thanks for the clarification. So to summarise, in Dzogchen you are 
initially pointed to rigpa/I AM and through continued practice (with the
 right guidance) you see through the “I”ness of it similar to the AtR 
contemplations. Hence you arrive at the same point. I hadn’t thought of 
it this way.The writings, discussions help even though I already have the Dzogchen transmissions.
I
 think you need right conceptual understanding as well because otherwise
 you will difficulty communicating with others, internal 
misunderstanding etc. 
But
 I probably put less emphasis on it than you. I think the degeneration 
of Buddhism is partly caused by the obsession and cultivation of the 
intellect. ChNN's teacher had a simple mind, wasn't a big intellectual. 
But sometimes intellectual descriptions are necessary when describing Hinduism vs Buddhism. 
Chris Pedersen
 Yes, I agree that making progress on the path isn’t about conceptual 
understanding. But without it, it’s easy to follow a wrong teaching and 
get stuck for many years (I’ve experienced this personally). Even if you
 have a teacher they could have no idea what they’re talking about, so I
 don’t just blindly follow someone. That’s why I’m very grateful for 
discovering AtR which presents everything in a pragmatic way.You could take part in a Dzogchen transmission if you are interested. I am grateful for having mine as a backup.
I don't follow cults anymore, I just do my own thing. 
In
 instant presence there is no duality according to ChNN. So merely just 
feeling you exist, you know the I AM and there is still duality, then 
you are not in instant presence.
Chris Pedersen
 Yeah, I‘ll be receiving a transmission in the near future. I don’t 
currently practice Dzogchen or claim to be a Dzogchen practitioner. I 
see this as more of a discussion on an intellectual level based on my 
understanding.
It
 is important after discovering instant presence to eventually realised 
anatta. This is the key to make instant presence effortless, full-blown,
 non-dual in all sense gates.
According
 to Kyle Dixon, Dzogchen practice is resting in moment of unfabricated 
consciousness in sense gates, with mindfulness and awareness that 
directly hit thought as it arises and then is not distracted by thought.
 Then also direct perception of vidyā. The first will lead to anatta 
realization, the second two fold emptiness. It is now subject and object
 are recognized as empty. But also the semdzins can expedite insight. 
Seeing through thought is how anatta occurred for Kyle. The Rig Pa Rang 
Shar says, as thought arise (shar grol) then as one gets more familiar 
in the practice thought arise by themselves (rang grol) and finally in 
realization as if they never arose in the first place (ye grol). 
Non-arising of thought is what led to insight of no background for Kyle 
and then whole intense realization. Time is held together by thought and
 substratum delusion of background knower

Also, 
Kyle Dixon
’s description of his anatta realization: https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../advise-from...
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Advice from Kyle Dixon

Chris Pedersen
 The authentication of instant presence as pure sense of existence is 
nondual, nonconceptual, etc. But do you have the same taste in all 
senses and manifestations effortlessly? That is important and anatta 
leads to that. http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/.../thusnesss-six...
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment
Same taste almost 100%, mind very silent. Winning or losing, no difference. Everything is rolling on, nobody doing it. 
However suffering a bit from energy imbalances due to prior energy practice. So I don't do much, it is more of a letting go. 
This
 all makes sense to me. But what it leaves me wondering is, does this 
mean Dzogchen teachers are all wrong in emphasizing the critical 
importance of direct introduction given live as being vital to the 
recognition of rigpa? 
If
 the initial realization of rigpa is the same as I AM, then it's clear 
there are many ways to enter this realization, books and recordings 
could work perfectly well.
As far as I know even Malcolm emphasizes that this point is vital.

Direct
 pointing in various ways is used not only in Dzogchen, but even in Zen 
it is used - "directly pointing to the human Mind" 直指人心. As Yuan Yin Lao
 Ren said, in earliest Zen, the Zen Master mostly just pointed out 
people's Mind, it is only later that koans developed to help 
practitioners. Many people awaken through that, not only Tinh Panh. 
In
 Advaita too, direct pointing may be used. For example John Wheeler 
awakened to the I AM after meeting his teacher Sailor Bob Adamson, and 
for this reason he always encourage people to meet a live teacher to be 
directly pointed out, and said reading from book is much less potent (or
 something like that) - https://awakeningclaritynow.com/awakening-to-the-natural.../

AWAKENINGCLARITYNOW.COM
Awakening to the Natural State: Guest Teaching by John Wheeler – Awakening Clarity Now by Fred Davis
Direct introduction is not merely with words, there is non conceptual knowing when the teacher does it.
This is why Jax is not teaching correct Dzogchen but more like sutra style pointing out. 
A lot of people say the non conceptual pointing out doesn't matter and they are all wrong. In my opinion.

Zen is not exactly using sutras for its direct introduction either.
A
 key Zen story, shared by all the schools: Once, the Buddha was giving a
 talk on Vulture Peak. In the middle of the talk he paused and held up a
 flower. Everyone was silent. Only Mahakasyapa broke into a smile. 
Buddha then said, “I have the Treasury of the True Dharma Eye, the 
ineffable mind of Nirvana, the real form of No Form, the flawless gate 
of the Teaching. Not dependent on words, it is a special transmission 
outside tradition. I now entrust it to Mahakasyapa.”

LIONSROAR.COM
What Is Zen Buddhism and How Do You Practice It?
Try this Zen video https://youtu.be/APjXpUnHw20

YOUTUBE.COM
A Teaching From Zen Master Jinen

Yes “I AM” as it is understood in AtR is the first step in Dzogchen practice, and then insight is refined from there.

Chris Pedersen
 if you have any of ChNN’s Longsal texts, there are a couple instances 
where he makes it quite explicit that “instant presence” is synonymous 
with what we would understand I AM to be in this AtR model. Instant 
presence is like an unripened form of rig pa in that way, used as a 
support for all practices, but not yet refined through insight. 
"Everything is rolling on, nobody doing it. "
For many, no-self is more towards no doership rather then pellucid luminosity.
Have you read this, you went through all phases (or rather, aspects)? http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../different...

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Different Degress of No-Self: Non-Doership, Non-dual, Anatta, Total Exertion and Dealing with Pitfalls
Definitely
 number 1 + God realization happened funnily enough through Dzogchen. 
Later on it seems the God belief purged away on its own.
There is still a subtle belief of self that is seen through from time to time but I am not so concerned with it right now.
I can't predict whether I practice or not, it is more a happening on its own.
Sometimes
 shifts happen by reading something, like there was someone writing in 
this group that the sense of self was just sensations in the head 
coupled with thoughts.
That invoked some fears and cleaned some deeper beliefs.
The other day I was reading an article about British military history and the sense of self disappeared temporarily.
Then I sensed into the writer of the article and felt he had no self. 
Kyle Dixon, are the Longsal books necessary?
I only have Guru Yoga, Precious Vase, Supreme Source and Cycle of Day and Night. 
I
 never met ChNN in real life. Yesterday I was lying in bed contemplating
 how fortunate I was to meet him, since he really was unique and nobody 
has come forward with the same level of clarity and simplicity in his 
teachings. 

Oh
 I was just saying if you have those texts there are more detailed 
statements in them that pertain to this topic, but no, they are not 
necessary to possess. 

Chris Pederson
I
 see. In that case the next major breakthrough for you will be full 
blown anatta realisation. It will be your most major breakthrough yet 
when you realise it.
There are a number of ways to go about it.
Contemplating the two stanzas of anatta was how John Tan realised it and recommend:
Malcolm Smith also wrote and explained anatta here: 
Kyle Dixon also had some good advice here and an account of how he realised: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../advise-from-kyle_10...
Mr. RD wrote how he broke through to anatta here: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../robert-dominiks...
As for myself, the two nondual contemplations especially Bahiya Sutta has been crucial for my own breakthrough: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../two-types-of...
Mentioning
 Malcolm, Kyle, Robert as they are all also students of ChNN, also 
Malcolm was asked by Kunzang Dechen Lingpa to teach Dzogchen. I can also
 recommend Malcolm’s teachings.
Besides
 the impersonality and I AMness you are experiencing, it is also 
important to practice the other “four aspects of I AM” like the 
intensity of luminosity of the foreground (bring the taste of Presence 
and luminosity from the background into the five senses) which is very 
much part of trekchod practice, as I wrote above: 
“According
 to Kyle Dixon, Dzogchen practice is resting in moment of unfabricated 
consciousness in sense gates, with mindfulness and awareness that 
directly hit thought as it arises and then is not distracted by thought.
 Then also direct perception of vidyā. The first will lead to anatta 
realization, the second two fold emptiness. It is now subject and object
 are recognized as empty. But also the semdzins can expedite insight. 
Seeing through thought is how anatta occurred for Kyle. The Rig Pa Rang 
Shar says, as thought arise (shar grol) then as one gets more familiar 
in the practice thought arise by themselves (rang grol) and finally in 
realization as if they never arose in the first place (ye grol). 
Non-arising of thought is what led to insight of no background for Kyle 
and then whole intense realization. Time is held together by thought and
 substratum delusion of background knower”

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
On Anatta (No-Self), Emptiness, Maha and Ordinariness, and Spontaneous Perfection
Thanks, I will read what you have written and the links etc and contemplate. Maybe a breakthrough will come soon. 
It
 seems there is a dismissal of instant presence / I AM related to the 
belief 'I am the body' which ties into a belly knot. This knot has been 
lessened in time.
The
 burning desire you wrote about in getting to I AM realization seems for
 me not to be related to a specific desire for realization but more of a
 union / love for the guru. I will see if I can dive into that. 
Soh Wei Yu
 Really nice links on anatta. I'm not there yet, but do you have any 
thoughts on going from experiences of I AM to I AM realization for 
someone coming from a Dzogchen background. I'm
 reading your book just now, and have started practicing self enquiry as
 well, but still finding my feet with that approach, it's new for me. I 
have some more experience of Dzogchen style practices, and have had some
 very strong I AM experiences, and I think tastes of some of the other 
stages through Dzogchen practice, but no realization yet.  

Self enquiry is good. Lama surya das has teaches it in his book https://www.amazon.com/Natural-Radiance.../dp/1591796121
Beyond
 that, I cannot advice on Dzogchen practices. This is something you 
should discuss with a Dzogchen teacher. In Dzogchen reflections are 
distinguished from the mirror to realise the I AM. It is a form of self 
enquiry.

AMAZON.COM
Natural Radiance: Awakening to Your Great Perfection
Soh
 wrote above, "Other than Vineeto, so far none of the other actually free individuals made that transition."What
 is this? Are those your words? If yes, are you referring to some 
specific group of people that you call "actually free individuals", or 
what?
He
 is referring to the actual freedom followers. Just click the link in 
the OP and you can read the site to which this all refers. 

I am referring to the actual freedom followers that actually attained actual freedom.
There
 are two stages of actual freedom: 1) basically free stage (like anatta,
 free from separative identity) 2) fully free, permanent experience of 
the purity and perfection of the limpid universe along with its infinite
 space, infinite time and perpetual matter (abiding total exertion)
So
 far 5 to 10 people are at basically free, while only richard and 
vineeto made the transition from basically free to fully free stage.

A description of basically free stage: http://www.actualfreedom.com.au/actualism/peter/intheend.htm
A description of fully free stage: http://www.actualfreedom.com.au/.../actualv.../sydney.htm...

ACTUALFREEDOM.COM.AU
P  Peter's Report of Becoming Actually Free
I
 was pointing him in the general direction of AF as he didn't seem to 
know what it is. I wasn't specifying the actual ppl within that circle. 
I
 "met" Richard in the late nineties in a group called Listening List (if
 not mistaken). At that time he was fiercely repetitive ad 
nauseum.So...now... I would not be able to read anything from him 
without a "negative" bias. Won't even try.   
He
 was also Richard from Australia. And the manner of writing is very 
similar. But... now... giving it a deeper consideration... not 
absolutely sure, no. 

"As This Flesh And Blood Body" is very typical from him.
And, "third alternative" also

MAIL-ARCHIVE.COM
Richard
And
 something like, "moaning and crying and suffering". It was something he
 repeated in all messages. At least something that sounded like that...
WOW!! How did you find that? That was the first "spiritual" list I participated with my very first 1,2 GB HD PC

Sometimes I am concerned that I am becoming another Richard. I cut and paste too much.
But actual freedom has nothing to do with that list, right? It was a Berlin sited experimental mail list, about J. Krishnamurti

Yes
 nothing to do with it. J Krishnamurti was Richard’s teacher before. 
Then after he attained AF, he thinks J Krishnamurti only got as far as 
“Self Realisation” but not his Self-Immolated “Actual Freedom” state
Its funny to read some of those old posts.
OK... must do some stuff. Seeya.
Soh
,
 now that Listening List was brought back so concretely, I must say: I 
have not got a clue about Richard's ideas. Twenty years ago I was a bit 
more easily sucked into "personal interpretation" then today. So, to be 
fair, when i used to see the endless discussions between Richard and Jim
 Moore, I just would loose interest and stop following. So... actually 
...I don't know Richard.Fascinating
 discussion -- Personally, I assumed ripga meant two-fold emptiness, not
 anatta or IAM.  I resonate deeply with the dzogchen view but do find 
the way in which words have multiple meanings to be confusing at times. 
 Am heading over to Zangthal to track down that post.  
On that note, what is meant by Malcolm's phrase, "natural concentration"?

I
 cannot discuss Dzogchen details publicly (other than what is already 
available as public information). If you are interested, you may have to
 attend Malcolm's teachings.
Yes,
 I have attended all the teachings (which I found based on your post in 
the middle of last year).  Certainly not suggesting discussion of 
anything non-public.
In
 any case, I think it has just taken me time to get up to speed on the 
terminology. Fortunately, I am finding Elias Capriles (Buddhism and 
Dzogchen) extremely clear.

Natural
 concentration somehow reminds me of this (note that I am not making an 
equivalence here, and I am not a Dzogchen teacher. Discussing with 
Malcolm or Kyle will be more appropriate as Malcolm told me last year at
 a dinner at San Francisco that Kyle was the first person to fully 
understand his view/teaching)
"14/06/2006
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 it natural radiance.  In essence there is no one there, only the 
phenomenon arising and ceasing telling their stories." - John Tan, 2006
To me natural concentration is when you discover that ordinary mind is the way
non dual presence








