- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
41 Comments
Adam Holt
How does this fit into the awakening to reality rhetoric/schema?
Soh Wei Yu
Shared by Jayson MPaul
It is more like I AMness sort of understanding.
Soh Wei Yu
Comments
by Soh: This is also the First Stage of the Five Ranks of Tozan Ryokai
(a Zen Buddhism map of awakening), called "The Apparent within the
Real". This phase can also be described as an oceanic Ground of Being or
Source devoid of the sense of individuality/personal self, described
here by Thusness in 2006:
"Like
a river flowing into the ocean, the self dissolves into nothingness.
When a practitioner becomes thoroughly clear about the illusionary
nature of the individuality, subject-object division does not take
place. A person experiencing “AMness” will find “AMness in everything”.
What is it like?
Being
freed from individuality -- coming and going, life and death, all
phenomenon merely pop in and out from the background of the AMness. The
AMness is not experienced as an ‘entity’ residing anywhere, neither
within nor without; rather it is experienced as the ground reality for
all phenomenon to take place. Even in the moment of subsiding (death),
the yogi is thoroughly authenticated with that reality; experiencing the
‘Real’ as clear as it can be. We cannot lose that AMness; rather all
things can only dissolve and re-emerges from it. The AMness has not
moved, there is no coming and going. This "AMness" is God.
Practitioners
should never mistake this as the true Buddha Mind! "I AMness" is the
pristine awareness. That is why it is so overwhelming. Just that there
is no 'insight' into its emptiness nature." (Excerpt from Buddha Nature
is NOT "I Am")

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment
Adam Holt
Soh Wei Yu is this different than brahman or the mother/child luminosities mixing?
In
terms of awakening to reality rhetoric, is it said that this level of
insight is foundational for deeper insight in that it is necessary to
have this insight prior to deeper insight?
Soh Wei Yu
Many
people will realise I AMness during death. Many also come back from
near death experience having that life changing awakening, I've spoken
to one such person. I've also read many such accounts, such as those by
Anita Moorjani (I recommend her book Dying To Be Me as it is quite
fascinating). Although, it is not the end of the path. Also I've never
seen anyone realised anatta or emptiness through such a near death
experience, although theoretically possible especially for dharma
practitioners who received pointing out instructions in their lifetime.
John Tan wrote in 2008:
Hi Longchen,
Must
be having a challenging time sustaining the vivid presence of non-dual
experience. Just to share with you some of my thoughts:
When
we die, the thoughts and emotions that are karmically linked to the
body are temporarily suspended. The contrast in experience that resulted
from the dissolution of the ‘bond of a body’ gives rise to a more vivid
experience of Presence; although the experience of Presence is there,
the insight into its non-dual essence and emptiness nature isn’t there.
This is similar to the experience of “I AM”. Thoughts and emotions will
continue to arise and subside with the bond of ‘I’ and ‘Mine’ after
death.
Awareness is
always non-dual and all pervading; obscured but not lost. In essence all
manifestation, transient (emotions, thoughts or feelings) is really the
manifold of Presence. They have the same non-dual essence and empty
nature. All problems lie not at the manifestation level but at the
fundamental level. Deep in us we see things inherently and
dualistically. How the experience of Presence can be distorted with the
‘bond’ of dualistic and inherent seeing maybe loosely categorized as:
1. There is a mirror reflecting dust. (“I AM”)
Mirror bright is experienced but distorted. Dualistic and Inherent seeing.
2. Dust is required for the mirror to see itself.
Non-Dualistic but Inherent seeing. (Beginning of non-dual insight)
3. Dust has always been the mirror ( The mirror here is seen as a whole)
Non-Dualistic and non- inherent insight.
In
3, whatever comes and goes is the Rigpa itself. There is no Rigpa other
than that. All along there is no dust really, only when a particular
speck of dust claims that it is the purest and truest state then
immediately all other arising which from beginning are self- mirroring
become dust.
Soh Wei Yu
"Soh Wei Yu is this different than brahman or the mother/child luminosities mixing?"
Beginning yes. Stage 1 to 4 is the Brahman sort of understanding.
"In
terms of awakening to reality rhetoric, is it said that this level of
insight is foundational for deeper insight in that it is necessary to
have this insight prior to deeper insight?"
Yes. It is also foundational in many Zen teachings, Dzogchen, etc. http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../the-degrees-of...

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
The Degrees of Rigpa
Soh Wei Yu
Not everyone goes through I AMness first, but most people do and I do recommend that one starts with self enquiry.
Adam Holt
Soh Wei Yu do you think it is common these days that many think that they have deeper insight without having this foundational insight?
Soh Wei Yu
Not
so many. A few people like Daniel Ingram didn't go through I AMness
first. But in the AtR group, where 40+ realized anatta, statistically,
most people have gone through I AMness first. I've spoken to them and
ascertained their progression.
Adam Holt
Soh Wei Yu
I was asking about those who basically think they are practicing
advanced methods but do not have this type of insight. Anyway, no
matter.
Soh Wei Yu
You can read some of their accounts on the blog, but for example,

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
A Zen Exploration of the Bahiya Sutta
Soh Wei Yu
"who basically think they are practicing advanced methods but do not have this type of insight"
Most people do not have any type of realisation yet, yes.
Soh Wei Yu
But in AtR group we generally advocate self-enquiry for a start.
Adam Holt
Soh Wei Yu so to be clear would you say that what is said in the above video is an appropriate starting point for AtR?
I’m
asking because frankly I’m somewhat disillusioned by a lot of basically
intellectuals out there who do not have what I might call a sort of
foundational mystical insight. If this is considered to be basically
foundational and not rejected out of hand as being ‘Hindu’ or whatever,
and then it is understood that there are progressive levels of insight
from that foundation, basically, that makes me feel better about AtR.
Put loosely.
Adam Holt
Put
briefly another way, it seems to me that a lot of modern Buddhists take
great pains to distinguish buddhism from Hinduism and in doing so they
reject much of what Hinduism might say that has merit but maybe is not
complete. And then they end up with wrong understandings that are
essentially intellectual and apart from a sort of mystical experiential
basis.
Soh Wei Yu
You
are absolutely right. Personally I do think it is important to read
texts from other religions, I have done that myself. For many reasons.
1)
wisdom is wisdom, and there are always things that even buddhists can
learn from the mystics of hindus, christians, muslims, taoists, judaist,
new age, and so on. Tao te ching is on my to-study list as advised by
john tan.
2)
i am personally drawn to hindu teachings early on and any awareness
teachings. They can have good pointers. Even I AMness is a precious and
important realisation, also some non buddhists have gone even further
than that.
3)
although there are many similarities, certain buddhist insights are
indeed unique and therefore i am not a perennialist. In understanding
other religions, it also helps us to understand the unique points and
differences between buddhism and other religions.
It
is done, as acarya shridhar rana rinpoche said, not for the purpose of
criticising other systems but to understand each system better.
Achaya
Mahayogi Shidhar Rana Rinpoche: “"I must reiterate that this difference
in both the system is very important to fully understand both the
systems properly and is not meant to demean either system."
Christian
mystic Bernadette Roberts: “"That everyone has different experiences
and perspectives is not a problem; rather, the problem is that when we
interpret an experience outside its own paradigm, context, and stated
definitions, that experience becomes lost altogether. It becomes lost
because we have redefined the terms according to a totally different
paradigm or perspective and thereby made it over into an experience it
never was in the first place. When we force an experience into an alien
paradigm, that experience becomes subsumed, interpreted away,
unrecognizable, confused, or made totally indistinguishable. Thus when
we impose alien definitions on the original terms of an experience, that
experience becomes lost to the journey, and eventually it becomes lost
to the literature as well. To keep this from happening it is necessary
to draw clear lines and to make sharp, exacting distinctions. The
purpose of doing so is not to criticize other paradigms, but to allow a
different paradigm or perspective to stand in its own right, to have its
own space in order to contribute what it can to our knowledge of man
and his journey to the divine.
Distinguishing
what is true or false, essential or superficial in our experience is
not a matter to be taken lightly. We cannot simply define our terms and
then sit back and expect perfect agreement across the board. Our
spiritual-psychological journey does not work this way. We are not
uniform robots with the same experiences, same definitions, same
perspectives, or same anything."
Soh Wei Yu
On the similarities part, i have shared this before:

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
What All Religions Have in Common: Light
Adam Holt
Soh Wei Yu what do you think of the following:
““Everything comes down to how you hold phenomena.” Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Light
pours down from the sky. Tumbles down like a waterfall of tender
hearted affection. More simply, lets just call it Love. It is like the
sun in the sky, but that is not the sky I am talking about.
I
am talking about an uborn light, uncaused, atemporal. It tumbles down
from NowhereEverywhere of Divine Mysterium. Tumbles down and enters the
crown of my head making everything into deathlessness.
One day that light is made of Love.
One day it is made of brilliance.
One day it is made of a mother’s caring.
One day it is made of Love’s fury.
One day it is made of unflinching compassion.
One
day it is made of gratitude. (Yes, the divine is ever more grateful,
filled with gratitude, overflowing with gratitude than we have ever
imagined being - even in our most thankful moment.)
Really
it is all one flavor. In the Heart’s prism it splays into infinite
colors. Our lives are made from this light. Our lives, trees, cars,
every being, every appearance, every phenomena.
If
you set aside preoccupation then mind, body, feeling all are the manner
in which this beauty and wonder is held. And in turn they are how
phenomena are held.
It
is what is held, what holds, where it is held. It is giver, receiver
and the gift given. These words are, perhaps, easy enough when phenomena
seem to agree with us. The test is their knowing when it does not”
Soh Wei Yu
Yes
good. It is important to realize and actualize this non-dual
luminosity, and then realise and actualize its empty nature so that the
non-dual luminosity is effortless, uncontrived, non-referential and
self-liberating.
Was reminded of something John Tan wrote in 2010 to me during my nondual phase (one month before anatta realisation):
o 12 Sep `10, 12:44PM
Hi Simpo and AEN,
Yet
we cannot get carried away by all these blissful experiences.
Blissfulness is the result of luminosity whereas liberation is due to
prajna wisdom. 

To AEN,
For
intense luminosity in the foreground, you will not only have vivid
experience of ‘brilliant aliveness’, ‘you’ must also completely
disappear. It is an experience of being totally ‘transparent’ and
without boundaries. These experiences are quite obvious, u will not
miss it. However the body-mind will not rest in great content due to an
experience of intense luminosity. Contrary it can make a practitioner
more attach to a non-dual ultimate luminous state.
For
the mind to rest, it must have an experience of ‘great dissolve’ that
whatever arises perpetually self liberates. It is not about phenomena
dissolving into some great void but it is the empty nature of whatever
arises that self-liberates. It is the direct experience of
groundlessness and non –abiding due to direct insight of the empty
nature of phenomena and that includes the non-dual luminous essence.
Therefore
In addition to bringing this ‘taste’ to the foreground, u must also
‘realize’ the difference between wrong and right view. There is also a
difference in saying “Different forms of Aliveness” and “There is just
breath, sound, scenery...magical display that is utterly unfindable,
ungraspable and without essence- empty.”
In
the former case, realize how the mind is manifesting a subtle tendency
of attempting to ‘pin’ and locate something that inherently exists. The
mind feels uneasy and needs to seek for something due to its existing
paradigm. It is not simply a matter of expression for communication
sake but a habit that runs deep because it lacks a ‘view’ that is able
to cater for reality that is dynamic, ungraspable, non-local ,
center-less and interdependent.
After
direct realization of the non-dual essence and empty nature, the mind
can then have a direct glimpse of what is meant by being ‘natural’,
otherwise there will always be a ‘sense of contrivance’.
My 2 cents and have fun with ur army life. 

Edited by Thusness 12 Sep `10, 12:56PM
Soh Wei Yu
The key insight is the anatta insight as elucidated in the two stanzas https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../on-anatta...
The
emptiness of awareness makes non-dual presence-awareness 'full blown'
and all appearances are pellucid, radiant, pure, perfect and divine
“Geovani
Geo to me, to be without dual is not to subsume into one and although
awareness is negated, it is not to say there is nothing.
Negating
the Awareness/Presence (Absolute) is not to let Awareness remain at the
abstract level. When such transpersonal Awareness that exists only in
wonderland is negated, the vivid radiance of presence are fully tasted
in the transient appearances; zero gap and zero distance between
presence and moment to moment of ordinary experiences and we realize
separation has always only been conventional.
Then
mundane activities -- hearing, sitting, standing, seeing and sensing,
become pristine and vibrant, natural and free.” – John Tan, 2020

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
On Anatta (No-Self), Emptiness, Maha and Ordinariness, and Spontaneous Perfection
Adam Holt
Soh Wei Yu have you read the doctrinal section of The Nyingma School by Dudjom Rinpoche? If so, what do you think of his presentation?
Soh Wei Yu
Adam Holt
I haven't read that. But as I was just saying yesterday, Rongzom (on
Establishing Appearances as Divine) is very resonating for those who go
through anatta, and John Tan completely agreed with me.
Malcolm also said this year, "Rongzom’s view is the real Nyingma View. It is followed by both Longchenpa and Mipham."
Adam Holt
Soh Wei Yu yes I like that text a lot, it’s quite excellent I think.
I personally think Nyingma School is quite excellent.
Soh Wei Yu
Are you a Nyingma practitioner? Do you follow a teacher?
Adam Holt
Soh Wei Yu my main connections have been Kagyu/Nyingma, more recently Nyingma.
- Reply
- 1d
William Lim
If
u watch the series, which admittedly is very slow paced, this scene
appears twice. Once in Ep 4 and once in the last Ep - each giving a very
different perspective to the question. Great writing.
- Reply
- 1d
Michael Hernandez
That part of Midnight Mass blew me away!
Reply