Posts
- “Vividly clear and present yet entirely absent and ungraspable.
This insight into the nature of presence fills the body with space-like illusoriness." No here or there, no Inner or outer is already the case in Anatta insight, yet appearances can be perceived as hyper-real due to vividness.The difference between Anatta and two fold emptying is the perception of the realness of foreground and the insight of non-arising. When everything is seen as “chariot" and perceived as non-arisen it causes- the solidity of appearances to come undone and the notions “arising, abiding, and ceasing” to be seen for what they are— conceptual notions and reifications.
- the unraveling and cessation of the inherent tendency to grasp and hold onto phenomena.
In Anatta you understand the meaning of “spontaneous” but without the insight of non-arising and emptiness you cannot understand “liberation.”Thoroughly not separate, thoroughly never was there a separate witness. That is non-dual Anatta and is perceived on the side of the “subject.” Subject was formerly a witness (I Am) or formless background (One Mind). After Anatta there’s no background, only foreground (No Mind). Presence is nothing other than appearance. Naturally what follows is emptying of the foreground— the “object” side of the equation since that’s all there is after the fact lol.For “objects”—thoroughly nothing here, thoroughly nothing ever having been. They are unproduced. There are no actual appearances/objects to be found. That’s "liberation." In the 4 levels of understanding emptiness that John Tan described, if you’re not able to turn absence into a taste you won’t be able to empty the solidity of appearances. He describes stabilizing in anatta, specifically the experience of Maha— the grand immaculate vividness of mind/appearances and the universe doing everything itself, then to realize it’s ALL empty.The all is empty and space-like illusoriness, doesn’t arise without the taste of absence. This illustrates so clearly the difference between realizing clarity versus realizing the nature of clarity. The nature of clarity IS absence. Vividly present yet totally absent— the union of two truths. Same applies to the six sense fields and so called “objects.” In Anatta Phase 5 you can say “there’s no birth, there’s only aggregates.” In Phase 6 and beyond you can say “there are no aggregates" because you can taste absence (emptiness/non-arising) and see “chariot” in everything.Due to the taste of absence being so critical here, we can clearly see how “spontaneous liberation” in the way John Tan describes it is not possible from the Brahman and substantialist view. Why? Because the taste of absence is impossible with background solidity. It’s that simple. For years I rested in non-dual reified clarity. You can get clear light sleep, powers and all that just with this alone, but that’s not liberation.
Non-arising and D.O. is liberation and it’s perception from my experience was not possible at all prior to Anatta Phase 5 due to the perceptual knots which obscure absence. What immense freedom (captured in the picture below lol) from this understanding. Thank you Soh & John Tan! Please feel free to correct any misunderstandings here or if you have any advice.42 Comments
- Reply
- 21h
- Edited
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Edited
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Edited
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Edited
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Edited
- Reply
- 18h
- Reply
- 18h
- Edited
- Reply
- 18h
- Reply
- 18h
- Reply
- 17h
- Reply
- 17h
- Reply
- 17h
- Edited
- Reply
- 17h
- Edited
- Reply
- 17h
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 20h
- Reply
- 19h
- Reply
- 19h
- Reply
- 17h
- Reply
- 17h
- Reply
- 15h
- Reply
- 8h
- Edited
- Reply
- 7h
- Reply
- 16h
- Reply
- 15h
- Reply
- 15h
- Reply
- 15h
- Reply
- 15h
- Reply
- 14h
Jen Macdonald
Out of curiosity, do you notice that you experience your inner and outer worlds as the same.
And do anomylous phenomena seems to occur more for you than for others you know or come in contact with?
Jen Macdonald
Mr. RB
thank you. I experience these things too after periods of what you
describe in your post. Even though my experience is sustained like
yours, I still have periods of time where I do and I noticed these two
things about those periods. Just checking to see if this was common. All
the best 
Jen Macdonald
Mr. RB
ps. When you say ‘hyper real’ could this also be described as ‘realer
than real’? That’s another quality I’d give to the world as I experience
it.
Jen Macdonald
Mr. RB oh yes! That makes total sense! I have a fee more questions along these lines, is it cool if I ask them?
Mr. RB
Author
Jen Macdonald
more real than real was what characterized anatta initially but now
there same vivdness remains just without the sense of realness. Now
it's like vivd appearance with simultaneous hyper unrealness lol if that
makes sense.
Jen Macdonald
Mr. RB
I’m fascinated by this- ‘realer than real’ is used to describe a
handful of state experiences. For me it also begs the question how
limited are reductionist views anyhow? What are we cutting ourselves off
from when we adhere to consensus reality’?
What
are more accurate models of the universe? (Ie. Holographic) And when I
use the word ‘real’ does it mean what I thought it meant? (Ie. Not an
absolute fixed fact but dependant on a way of seeing and knowing that is
more of an experience).
Mr. RB
Author
Jen Macdonald Sure i'll reply back in a few hours. It'll also be interesting to see what others here think as well.
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
[1/2/17,
6:54:25 PM] John Tan: Actually I like holographic theory very much but I
do not want it to b presented like new age...lol
[1/2/17,
6:58:35 PM] John Tan: The biggest issue abt us is we hv taken the
physical world as "ultimate reality". The world of forms seem so real
and solid so we r able to accept whole universe is created in an
instant, totally exerted moment to moment. How is this possible at all?
[1/2/17,
7:04:51 PM] John Tan: Because "things" or the formation of "something"
and the sensation of "concreteness" is just like "Information". We do
not know the power of "information" as I have always tried to tell u.
If I plant a bit of info deep into ur consciousness that u r unable to
walk beyond ur doorstep, suddenly u realised u can't pass beyond it.
Therefore views have power, chants have power, designations and labels
have power.
[1/2/17, 7:05:34 PM] John Tan: We r unable to accept I mean
[2/2/17, 1:27:24 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Lol got connected to wifi now suddenly receive all ur msgs
[2/2/17, 2:04:33 AM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[2/2/17, 11:22:02 AM] John Tan: Dun put what I wrote about holographic
[2/2/17, 11:22:06 AM] John Tan: U hah
[2/2/17, 11:56:01 AM] John Tan: Then u like to cut and paste without understanding the Essence of it...faintz
[2/2/17, 2:43:32 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Lol ok
[2/2/17, 3:37:08 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ur talking about the total exertion of karmic propensities that I wrote before right
[2/2/17, 3:41:52 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Replied them
[2/2/17,
8:42:30 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Jui wrote "I get the total exertion explanation
of why we fail to see this, just wondering about the 2D part. What in
buddhism correspond to "2D"?"
[2/2/17, 8:42:32 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Lol
[2/2/17, 8:43:12 PM] John Tan: That is y u talking nonsense
[2/2/17,
8:44:53 PM] John Tan: Saying I like holographic theory of universe very
much doesn't me I m in agreement with the system. We don't even know
the principle ...just very general idea
[2/2/17, 8:45:33 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic..
[2/2/17, 8:45:38 PM] John Tan: U know abt the mathematics of the surface determining the structure of objects?
[2/2/17, 8:45:45 PM] Soh Wei Yu: No
[2/2/17,
8:46:54 PM] John Tan: Then how r u to explain that? How black holes
led these Scientists to that conclusion...u r disputing Stephen hawking
do u know that?
[2/2/17, 8:47:20 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic..
[2/2/17, 8:47:22 PM] John Tan: So don't b so naive and irresponsible
[2/2/17, 8:48:02 PM] John Tan: When I say I like holographic theory of universe do u know y?
[2/2/17, 8:51:11 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ur saying like karmic propensities manifest a solidly existing world like information?
[2/2/17, 8:51:25 PM] John Tan: No
[2/2/17,
8:53:44 PM] John Tan: Because it is a theory that can explains the
possibly total exertion and illusory nature of reality, time and space.
It is Aso able to explains why a dust can contain a universe. It is a
beautiful theory.
[2/2/17, 8:54:14 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[2/2/17,
8:55:11 PM] John Tan: Means the experience of total exertion and
illusion like reality can b integrated and explained by the theory.
[2/2/17, 8:55:45 PM] Soh Wei Yu: Ic..
[2/2/17, 8:57:06 PM] John Tan: Means the theory can account for such experiences that is y I like it...
[2/2/17, 8:58:05 PM] John Tan: U cannot just say it is this and that and say I say this and that
[2/2/17, 8:58:41 PM] John Tan: This will mislead and Mis-represent the intention
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
But
getting into the holographic theory is more intellectual although
interesting... anatta and emptiness should be an experiential insight.
Jen Macdonald
Soh Wei Yu
thanks for all of this! Yes, I totally feel that experiential insight
is paramount. I’m also curious about our use of the word ‘real’. It
doesn’t seem to have any fixed meaning. And in my experience I noticed
it was dependent on awareness, attention and belief. And also ‘real’
seems to vary amongst different culturals.
Jen Macdonald
Mr. RB and Soh Wei Yu I felt a broadening of my conceptual paradigms arose from my experiential knowing of annata and emptiness.
Non-local
awareness, changes to my beliefs around time and space,
multidimensional awareness and what I can only describe as levels to
consciousness that each have their own set of ‘reals’.
Anisor Marie
This
is a great book from a number of scientists explaining *how* the
universe could very well be a hologram if anyone is is interested.
Mr. RB
Author
Jen Macdonald
real for me is used when defining (1) solidity and (2) what we
conventionally define as ordinary. I've used it when describing the
profundity of non-local experiences when I say "it was unreal" and also
when I'm describing how solid and established things appear to be.
Mr. RB
Author
Jen Macdonald
Sure others have more to contribute on this point. I'm not too
familiar with any particular models like materialist,
holographic/quantum or otherwise.
Jen Macdonald
Mr. RB thanks. I’ll just add this one thing My fb friend Wayne B. said -pasted wout permission
“Usually "reality" is just accepted as it is. We don't question our quality of "realness." …
See more
Mr. MP
Is 'absence' here refer to when presence isn't recognized?
Mr. OR
For
those of you who have had these realisations, are they locked in
perceptions, permanently operating? Or are they lenses or 'ways of
looking' that one can choose to 'put on' at will, ala Rob Burbea?
Jen Macdonald
Mr. OR
I’m quite interested in this. I feel they they involve a shift in being
in-and-with consciousness and affect the mechanisms of knowing and
awareness.
The individual may feel like they’re seeing thru new-to-them lenses but as I understand it, the more stabilized experience Mr. RB conveyed above even the relationship to the lenses changes.
That’s my understanding atm.
Mr. RB
Author
Mr. OR
Both but usually there will be a permanent characteristic alteration of
the baseline or ordinary consciousness. For example, when you realize
"I Am" or have the realization of "I Am Everything" it permanently ends
the illusion of existing as thought and memory. The basis for
identification from "I am the body" to "I am the witness" or to "I am
everything." In Anatta "I am anything" as a belief and thought is
destroyed. For me and probably others here can say the same, we could
not experience duality even if we tried.
Mr. JW
Mr. OR My experience is very similar to Mr. RB.
It's been an ever-expanding and reality-breaking journey that
constantly builds upon itself, lol. Culadasa once said there was no
apparent end to insight, and I believe that. Probably something like an
asymptote. I don't feel we ever arrive at a final, fixed state (perhaps
paranibbana exempted, as I don't have experience with that 
), but rather continually discard larger and more intricate structures of conditioned/distorted perception.
), but rather continually discard larger and more intricate structures of conditioned/distorted perception.Jen Macdonald
Mr. JW Im very interested in your discarding of conditioned structures of perception.
I felt a broadening of my conceptual paradigms arose from my experiential knowing of annata and emptiness. I now embrace
Non-local
awareness, changes to my beliefs around time and space,
multidimensional awareness and what I can only describe as levels to
consciousness that each have their own set of ‘reals’.
Did you ever experience major shifts in your paradigm along these lines?
What other conceptual frameworks altered for you or dropped away all together?
I
read your comment about your brief period of loss of any solidity in
reality. Sorry to drudge up old times but I’ve experienced this too and
the unsettling Ishness and unsubstantiated nature of things.
I became interested in conceptual frameworks and the inaccuracies and limitations of the western ones.
Regarding
something else that you said ; The sense that everyone is a projection
of one’s mind is a common experience in what can be called
Psychospiritual Crisis.
As is the belief that ‘this is all a computer simulation’. Did that thought cross your mind?
Love that reality feels strange, mysterious and ephemeral to you now. I can relate. It’s a bizarre world after all.
X
Yin Ling
Admin
Nicely written Ryan, thank you for this.
Just gonna chime in a little, and see if others feel similarly..
The
complete identity shift in anatta js sudden , quick, like a sandstorm
yet the taste of emptiness comes on gradually and slowly.
Of
whether being able to bring back dual view or not, it is actually very
tricky for post Anatta practitioner bc this is a identity shift. When
self is drop, One shifts out of looking out of the body mind , instead,
one takes on the senses and environment and knowingness as “me” however
this me is not like the enduring body and mind “me” rather a constant
changing of appearances .
In
this new way of perception(I try to avoid the word identity lest
someone understand it as reifying awareness ), there is no chance of
dual view , like someone said to me before “I don’t know where to look
for dual”. This is true in experience. Yes one can try to go back into
behind the head and look but for myself
Anatta
is an energetic shift , and the energy becomes now boundless and wide
open and powerful, I did try to fit all these energy into a cube behind
the eyes again and it is more disorientating than anatta, painful even.
It is crazy to think I have experienced the world like that for 30’plus years. No wonder one suffers! It is like a tight fist
It
does take a radical willingness to experience this way, bc there is no
observer, one feel as though experiences are not being “seen” by the
usual “me”, all moment is just fully the moment, and once gone it’s is
let go off by the mind quickly and “letting go all the time” is another
insight too as the mind tends to hold On a little bit at initial Anatta.
Sometimes
this makes me feel as though I don’t live in a real world, my
experience are not “heavy” like it used to be, everything is floaty and
light , and it also feels like I will never be able to remember anything
lol I wonder if anyone feels the same way.
When
this anatta insight matures ,second fold emptiness is easier as the
world doesn’t seem heavy solid and real anymore. When one is intimate
with the senses how could anything be “grasped” at. How to talk about
location? Or “who/what” when it’s just colour and shapes, all of these
need a “stepping down” and the cognitive mind needs fo come on for a
moment before one can really tell who what where when.
Ryan do look into “conceptual elaborations” vs “conceptualities” if you haven’t.
The former are like “existence , non-existence,
Being, non-being
Eternal, nihilism etc
Though
I think it is implicit when one realized the latter , which is best
described by the chariot analogy , but I made a mistake of
understanding chariot as a designation , a name “chariot” imputed onto
the parts, and later on with insight I understand finally that
chandrakirti wanted to convey to us that the whole chariot is an
imputation of the mind. It is not there. Soh has a good article on this.
MMK will help with Deconstructing further finer conceptual elaborations like
Cause and effect
Movement
Characteristics
Time
Doer-action
Samsara nirvana
Some blinding veils we don’t even know we have on us 
But not for the faint of hearts 
Have good fun Ryan !
Mr. JW
Yin Ling
Very, very agreed on the loss of apparent solidity in "reality." For a
time this caused me great distress and even a mini psychotic episode,
lol. I spent three months just wandering around, semi-convinced everyone
was a projection of mind, but I managed to keep it together and remain
"normal." Nowadays reality feels equally strange, mysterious, ephemeral,
but it's seen as a beautiful and "weird" thing rather than a threat to
any conceived self.
Yin Ling
Admin
Oh dear. I hope you are well now! Well It is a mind projection in way..
But if you are a Buddhist, even if not, do look “dependent origination(DO)” rather than projection.
As imo it is a balance view to see the world at this stage.
I find holding the view of DO will keep a practitioner on the middle path rather than swaying towards both extremes
Bc
in DO, there are causes and conditions for something to arise, but that
“something” is not truly arising, just an appearance.
So, this appearances they function. They are causes, they are conditions.
All feed into all , and all function despite them being empty. It still works.
An
empty car will knock down and empty person despite all being a display.
If someone ask if a realised being dare to go in front of a racing car,
that’s a wrong understanding imo
DO
has helped me sync all my experiences and realizations nicely, so far.
Truly a wonderful view to hold, though eventually will be released but
not yet hehe
Mr. JW
Funny enough, looking at DO deeply is exactly what I did Well said!
Well said!
