Important Notice: Although anatta/anatman means no-self, most of the time when someone has certain breakthrough into "no self", it does not mean the real insight into anatman that Buddha taught or the AtR's anatman. Usually it just means impersonality or substantiated nondual. For more information on the different kinds of no-self, please read Soh's article in the AtR must read panel: 5) Different Degress of No-Self: Non-Doership, Non-dual, Anatta, Total Exertion and Dealing with Pitfalls

John Tan's advise:

As for those layman practitioners that for some reasons still prefer to go on their own asking for some general guides post anatta insights, I think they can focus on the 5 following points: 

1. Extend the insight of anatta, the de-reification process to all events and phenomena.  MMK comes handy here.  It will help one investigate most of the subtle assumptions we held to be "true" in a hypnotic way.

2.  Open up our body and go deeply into body-awareness. This is critical imo. Less intellectual activities and more body-awareness.   Post anatta and along the path, due to the de-construction process, the energy released from unconscious holding of our mental constructs can be quite overwhelming.   It may also be due to other reasons, for example, attachment to non-dual experiences and as a result it will cause discomfort to both our mind and body.

3.   So opening up our body is key at this phase.  The imbalance can be released by massage, non-inflammatory diet, qi gong, tai chi movements, yoga or any other body awareness exercises. Just open up our body and bring awareness to our body to complement the anatta insight and less intellectual activities.  

4.  If after that, the practitioner can intuit directly the relationship between mind, prana and body and wish to pursue his knowledge further on how the energy system works, they can then look for experienced teachers in this space to guide them.  U r not into this, hence, do not advise ppl on what u r unsure and have no experience. 

5.  Lastly, bring the insight of anatta into our daily activities, meet conditions and engage. 


“Although the yuan yin lao ren wrote about relative nature of appearances and emptiness, radiance as appearances, the part on "named things"or reified constructs wasn't mentioned.  You go check whether are there any insights on 假名。

Also see whether are there any articles on meditation.

物非实有,只是假名。Then from "named things" one understands "non-arising".  Although it can also be understood from radiance perspective.


John Tan:

Actually after authenticating appearances are radiances, I see the next most important step is to arise insight of DO (dependent origination) and emptiness.  It is a sort of special insight that sees the "middle path" and we use this insight to re-orientate our conventional world view and understand  8 extremes do not apply.”


Also see: Self and phenomena as a learnt, reified concept


2012 Post anatta advise to Taiyaki:



Advice for Taiyaki

Also see:

+A and -A Emptiness (On the two experiential insights involved in Thusness Stage 6)

Last year, a forummer from the NewBuddhist forum (Albert Hong a.k.a. Taiyaki) penetrated within a year the realization of I AM to non dual and anatta. He is an avid reader of this blog.

Thusness wrote the following pointers for him:

"There are several points that maybe of help to Taiyaki:

1.  First there must be a deep conviction that arising does not need an essence. That view of subjective essence is simply a convenient view.

2.  First emptying of self/Self does not necessarily lead to illusion-like experience of reality. It does however allows experience to become vivid, luminous, direct and non-dual.

3.  First emptying may also lead a practitioner to be attached to an 'objective' world or turns physical. The 'dualistic' tendency will resurface after a period of few months so it is advisable to monitor one's progress for a few months.

4.  Second emptying of phenomena will turn experience illusion-like but take note of how emptying of phenomena is simply extending the same "emptiness view" of Self/self.

5. From these experiences and realizations, contemplate what is meant by "thing", what is meant by mere construct and imputation.

6.  "Mind and body drop" are simply dissolving of mind and body constructs. If one day the experience of anatta turns a practitioner to the attachment of an 'objective and actual' world, deconstruct "physical".

7.  There is a relationship between "mental constructs", energy, luminosity and weight. A practitioner will experience a release of energies, freedom, clarity and feel light and weightless deconstructing 'mental constructs'.

8. Also understand how the maha experience of interpenetration and non-obstruction is related to deconstructions of inherent view.

9. No body, no mind, no dependent origination, no nothing, no something, no birth, no death. Profoundly deconstructed and emptied! Just vivid shimmering appearances as Primordial Suchness in one whole seamless unobstructed-interpenetration."


On another occasion, Thusness wrote (not to Taiyaki):

...Like after anatta, as I have said many times the sense of externality and physicality can still be very strong. My deconstruction process of "externality" and "physicality" is actually based few questions: 1. Why is mind which is "mental" is able to "interact" with something "physical"? 2. Why does consciousness need conditions for its arising? 3. What is interaction? All these questions help stabilized my experiences when I penetrated them in my own way.

Illusion like realization (arose) when I contemplated "hereness" and "nowness" until my mind was able to intuit the logic behind all these, then experience becomes stable. However one can enter by experience to have a taste of it...

Labels: , , , |  


“Ultimately, the basis is free from all elaborations, no mind, no consciousness, no conditions therefore no DO, no line of demarcation can be drawn.

For a practitioner that has anatta insight, there is no issue on freedom from all elaborations of the ultimate, It is how the conventional is understood that is difficult.” - john tan months ago


“Yes, I think should add together as they represent the 2 different view of emptiness.

Freedom from all elaborations and freedom from self-nature.

Yeah I included the two. One is freedom from all elaboration, one is spacious dream-like nature, lack of self-nature as emptiness.” - jt 2022


Robert Dominik Tkanka since André A. Pais mentioned about fire, let's take "fire" as an example,

When we look at "fire", there is a vision of a yellow, orange color image --> vision consciousness;

When we touch the "fire", there is a hot sensation --> sensation consciousness;

From these 2 different streams of consciousness, an imputing-consciousness abstracts and reifies a "fire" entity where there is none.  Out of nowhere, an objective, independent "fire" is being created.

We then characterized this "heat sensation" by ascribing it to "fire" and made "fire" a bearer of characteristic and "heat" becomes it's essential nature where it has an inherent power to cause something to burn (essential causality).

But there is "no fire" as an entity that has the essential power to cause anything to burn; there is no self existing "heat" either; "fire" is a dependent arising; "heat" is a "dependent arising"; so:

1. What is dependent arising and

2. What is dependently originating?

Now in this example, what is involved in "ignorance" in relation to seeing self-nature:

1.  an extra reified entity is created;

2.  consciousness is being forgotten and excluded from the equation of understanding "reality" which is most crucial.

3.  dependent arising is not seen, instead it is replaced by essential causality;

Anatta insight sees through 1, authenticated 2 but 3 is not seen (imo) but we jumped straight into freedom from all elaborations.


“It is not simply about freeing from elaborations and we r left with with the world also. Nor is it simply about experiencing presence and non-dual, they aren't the main concern.

Look at the scenery, so lurid and vivid;

Is the "scenery" out there?

Feel the "hardness" of the floor;

Is this undeniable "hardness" out there?

If "hardness of the floor" aren't out there, are is "inside" the brain? There is no "hardness" in the brain u can locate in the parts that make up the experience of "hardness".

It is not even in the "mind" for u can't even find "mind" then how can "in" the mind be valid?

If "hardness" isn't external nor internal, then where is it?

So, to me, buddhism is not about helping one taste presence or into an effortless state of non-dual or into a state free of conceptualities but also points out this fundamental cognitive flaw that confuses the mind. This is more crucial. If the cognitive fault isn't uprooted and seen through, then all experiences regardless of how mystical and profound will be distorted.

It is not simply about freeing from elaborations and we r left with with "the world" also. Nor is it simply about experiencing presence and non-dual, they aren't the main concern.

Look at the scenery, so lurid and vivid;

Is the "scenery" out there?

Feel the "hardness" of the floor;

Is this undeniable "hardness" out there?

If "hardness of the floor" aren't out there, is it "inside" the brain? There is no "hardness" in the brain u can locate in the parts that make up the experience of "hardness".

Then we say "no", it is in the "mind". So now what that is believed to be "external" in the past is being "internalized" in a "mind".


How can "hardness" which is no where to be found be in "mind"?

Furthermore, we can't even find "mind" then how can "in" the mind be valid?

If "hardness" isn't external nor internal, then where is it?

So, to me, buddhism is not only about helping one taste presence or into an effortless state of non-dual or into a state free of conceptualities but more importantly points out this fundamental cognitive flaw that confuses the mind. This is more crucial. If the cognitive fault isn't uprooted and seen through, then all experiences regardless of how mystical and profound will be distorted.” - jt months ago


John Tan shared in 2022:

The weight of thoughts -- Part 1

When contemplating, do not just let our contemplation remain as a mental reasoning exercise.  For example: 

What appears is neither "internal" nor "external". For the notion of "internality" is dependent on the notion of "externality", without either, the sense of neither can arise.  Therefore both notions r merely conventional, they originates dependently.

Do not just let our contemplation remain at this level. If we do that, at most the freedom will simply remain at the mental level -- merely a pellucid, pure and clean state.  It is no different from practicing raw attention although insight on how conceptualities proliferate the mind may arise. 

But go further to relate directly to our sensations, thoughts, smells, colors, tastes, sounds and ask: 

"What do we mean by thoughts are neither inside nor outside our head?" 

Seeing through this will be much more penetrating.  It will bring a deep sense of illusoriness and mystical awe as a real-time lived-experience.


The weight of thoughts -- Part 2

How heavy are thoughts?

Where are their roots? 

It is not uncommon to hear in the spiritual circle phrases like "the 'I' is just a thought" or "thought is empty and spacious, there is no weight or root to it". 

While the rootlessness and the space-like nature of "thoughts" should be pointed out, one must not be misled into thinking they have seen through "anything" much less up-rooted the deeply seated conceptual notions of "I/mine", "body/mind", "space/time"...etc. 

So emphasis must also be placed on the other side of the coin. "Thoughts" are astonishingly heavy like a black-hole (size of a pinhole, weight of a star); the roots of conceptual notions" they carry permeate our entire being and everywhere. 

The "roots" of thoughts are no where to be found also means they can be found anywhere and everywhere, spreaded across the 3 times and 10 directions -- in modern context, over different time-lines across the multiverse.  In other words, "this arises, that arises".


In anatta, we see through self as a mental construct and one is set on a de-constructive journey to free oneself from all mental constructs, from self to all phenomena and the relationships among them.

However when we see dependent arising, nothing is eliminated.

Conceptualization remains, parts remain, cause-effect remains, self remains, others remains...Everything remains, only the mistaken view of "essence" is relinquished.

Instead of seeing them to exist essentially, it is now understood that they originates dependently and whatever originates in dependence is free from the four pairs of extremes (aka 8 negations of Nagarjuna).

Without understanding dependent arising and emptiness, spontaneous perfection free from all elaborations will be distorted.


[7:54 AM, 6/3/2021] John Tan: Not bad.  He should relook these insights and experiences and ask the following:

1.  If everything is me, then the sense of "me" must also disappear at that moment of experience.  Otherwise one must mature the experience into no-mind and then anatta as an insight.

2.  If later it is realized that there is no me/self/Self as an insight and experience (anatta), then one must refine the view and question how does the sense of me/self/Self arise in the first place?

3.  Then bring this insight from the refinement of view into all phenomena and all actions.  

4.  Therefore not only there is no seer in the seen just the seen, there is no seeing and nothing seen.  No self, no others and no aggregates.  

5.  If this is understood only as negations, then one is not free from extremes and all elaborations.

6.  Therefore conventionally, there is self, others, seer, seeing and seen. There are causes and effects.  There is arising, abiding and ceasing and the only valid mode of arising is dependent arising.

7.  Point 1, 2, 3 praxis is on samatha and vipassana. Direct experience and insights. To mature this insight of anatta, the path of analysis is needed.  

8.  Point 4-6 thorough reasoning and analysis is added to relinquish cognitive obscuration.  

9.  If he is interested, he should look into mmk (Nagarjuna's text Mūlamadhyamakakārikā), it will expose the many hidden nuances and subtleties of our cognitive obscurations.  Patience is needed to get used to the line of reasoning of Nagarjuna.  But no need to get involved in those polemics of the Tibetan schools.

[8:08 AM, 6/3/2021] John Tan: 10. Lastly one should understand the praxis of the 2 stanzas and mmk are different.  The 2 stanzas are using samatha and vipassana to directly see through mental constructs to realize one's nature (direct path) whereas mmk is via path of analysis and reasoning.  So when reading mmk, one must adhere strictly to the conventional 3 fold structure of seer-seeing-seen.  See through the structures and deconstruct step by step.  The ultimate purpose and result are the same except mmk exposes all the very subtle and hidden cognitives obscurations that we are unable even post anatta insight.  So if one is interested in bringing anatta insight to maturity and perfection, mmk is needed.


Yin ling:

What works for me to deepen realisation after the initial insight of Anatta (no-self) 

1) Don’t chase the luminance and brightness. 

Let go of the self slowly more and more by sensing deeply the senses non dually. Keep showing the mind in the seen only the seen, and keep showing the no self structure to the mind. It needs to learn. 

It will naturally stabilise at a brilliant radiance without effort. 

It is the self that blocks the radiance, not by intensely experiencing the radiance - this can cause energy imbalance. 

2) sleep hours will drop but take it easy. 

Have some sort of exercise to tire yourself out abit, go easy on caffeine, 

if not insomnia can happen due to the brightness,  luminosity, and the energy that breaks through from the dropping of self construct. 

3) practice by sensing deeply the senses. 

Let the intensity of senses become clear. 

Be there with the sound. (You will know what I mean, when you hear the sound non dually, at first there will be some sort of vague background due to imprint, let go of that background more and more)

4) Sense deeply the body sensation one by one, sharpen the mind up like a satipathanna practice, this will drop the sense of body outline

5) open up. Let go of the Center in the body. 

Let consciousness Spread out slowly,  as much as you can, a little each day. Meditate that way, sense the senses in separate little fireflies like figure. See how confusion occurs by our mind collating and separating these dependently originated sensations. 

6) shamatha is crucial. It will sharpen the insight and calm the mind. It helps with the letting go of self and calm the afflictions. Have a few good hours of pure shamatha a week will help greatly. 

7) when emptiness of personal self stabilise, move this insight to the chair, table, bird, .. investigate how no-self happen to your body and now investigate if you can extend to  phenomenas. 

Take the time to stabilise personal self emptiness first, however if you have bad energy imbalance like me, you probably will need to extend this insight fast to empty phenomena for the energy to move. Or else it’s agony. 

8. Talk to ppl with this insight to strengthen the confidence. It takes time to build that confidence and faith. Read the teachings again and again. Analyse why is it no-self. 

Don’t participate with those who says “there is no self, so no worries and nothing to do”- they are clearly not in no-self lol it’s not like that. 

9. Remember there’s still a long way and a huge amount of practice to do. Not to call yourself Arahant, not to think you are enlightened 🤣Hurry and practice hard. Try not to be a “teacher”  too soon, take too many clients, and write too many books, before you are really clear and safely on the other shore 🤣

Will write if there’s more I can remember.! Wish to hear from others too!


Yin Ling

Yasmin El-Hakim it can be abit hard to understand dependent arising and emptiness via Nagarjuna and jay Garfield to be completely honest..

Just because the way they use “consequences” statements to bring out the lack of inherent existence suits a very high caliber person trained in this kind of logic. Usually we don’t speak like that. So we might not get it not bec we don’t understand Nagarjuna but we don’t understand what they are trying to point

I think better to study some modern book.

Guy newland emptiness is quite good.

Also how to see yourself as you truly are from his holiness is quite good and clear language for modern ppl.

(Soh: the books she mentioned are here: 




Some useful articles for post anatta contemplations:

First make sure insight into two stanzas of anatta is thoroughly clear, authenticated and stable from moment to moment.

After you stabilize anatta, you can look into these links:  - Freedom From Elaborations, Non-Inherentness, Dependent Origination, Etc

Equation between Emptiness and Dependent Origination -



Have quality time and hours to sit and meditate everyday post anatta (although meditation is 24/7 and should go beyond sitting, discipline to sit is still important). John Tan and Yin Ling sits at least 2 to 3 hours a day, sometimes they sit much longer.

“When you are luminous and transparent, don't think of dependent origination or emptiness, that is [the contemplative practice for] post-equipoise. When hearing sound, like the sound of flowing water and chirping bird, it is as if you are there. It should be non-conceptual, no sense of body or me, transparent, as if the sensations stand out. You must always have some quality time into this state of anatta. Means you cannot keep losing yourself in verbal thoughts, you got to have quality hours dedicated to relaxation and experience fully without self, without reservation." - John Tan, 2018

“The only truth is to see the emptiness of the conventional.  Equipoise strictly speaking is free from all elaborations.  That is exactly the experiential insight and taste of anatta, in the seen just the seen, therefore no seer, no seeing, nothing seen.” – John Tan, 2020

Find a qualified teacher with deep realisation and yogic/meditative experience for guidance.


Do read these three books recommended by Yin Ling and Kyle:


Book Recommendations for Post-Anatta



Although I shared a lot on DO and emptiness, have some time exploring anatta first until thoroughly clear and stable.





When being asked on meditation, Soh replied:


I see. The intensity of luminosity is also important. Also see , ,



It's the purpose of vipassana practice accompanied with anatta insight



When sitting, good to do anapanasati. That can also be vipassana and good way to actualize anatta and calm abiding.

What do you mean by insight is not sharp when sitting calmly? The sense of a center returns?

In 2013, Thusness said, "Anapanasati is good. After your insight [into anatta], master a form of technique that can bring you to that the state of anatta without going through a thought process." and on choiceless awareness Thusness further commented, "Nothing wrong with choice. Only problem is choice + awareness. It is that subtle thought, the thought that misapprehend (Soh: falsely imputes/fabricates) the additional "agent"."

“A state of freedom is always a natural state, that is a state of mind free from self/Self. You should familiarize yourself with the taste first. Like doing breathing meditation until there is no-self and left with the inhaling and exhaling... then understand what is meant by releasing.”

“When we practice zazen our mind always follows our breathing. When we inhale, the air comes into the inner world. When we exhale, the air goes out to the outer world. The inner world is limitless, and the outer world is also limitless. We say “inner world” or “outer world,” but actually there is just one whole world. In this limitless world, our throat is like a swinging door. The air comes in and goes out like someone passing through a swinging door. If you think, “I breathe,” the “I” is extra. There is no you to say “I.” What we call “I” is just a swinging door which moves when we inhale and when we exhale. It just moves; that is all. When your mind is pure and calm enough to follow this movement, there is nothing: no “I,” no world, no mind nor body; just a swinging door.” - Shunryu Suzuki


(10:31 PM) AEN: clarity is like breathing meditation but extending to everything isnt it
(10:32 PM) Thusness: clarity is not like a form of awareness that is crystal clear.
(10:32 PM) AEN: hmm ya i mean awareness of breathing
(10:33 PM) Thusness: if it is crystal clear, then there is only breathing but it is not object and subject fusing into one.
(10:33 PM) Thusness: It is breathing itself alone exist. There is no other and this is perfectly clear. 🙂
(10:34 PM) AEN: icic..
(10:34 PM) Thusness: then this is awareness.
(10:34 PM) AEN: when i am doing meditation i just feel the breathing lor.. i didnt tink of subject or object
(10:34 PM) Thusness: when u have the slightest sense of self, then the kung fu isn't there yet.
(10:34 PM) AEN: icic
(10:35 PM) Thusness: it must be in the form of realisation that there is really no such thing at all. Even a non-dual experience will find it difficult to to make it unless there are few years of diligent practice. This is then true progress.


[22:34] <^john^> samadhi is not experience pure awareness. 🙂
[22:34] <^john^> experiencing.
[22:34] <ZeN`n1th> icic then wats the difference
[22:35] <^john^> the only difference is the 'I'.
[22:35] <^john^> Buddha is so serious and has spoken so much, we have taken it too lightly.
[22:35] <^john^> 🙂
[22:36] <ZeN`n1th> oic..
[22:37] <^john^> so far what do u understand about awareness?
[22:38] <ZeN`n1th> hmm like u say lor... awareness is never lost
[22:39] <^john^> what is awareness right now?
[22:39] <^john^> when u say thought arises, is thought awareness?
[22:41] <ZeN`n1th> thought is not awareness, but there is awareness of thought
[22:41] <ZeN`n1th> lol
[22:41] <^john^> so what is thought?
[22:42] <^john^> and where is awareness?
[22:42] <^john^> same like taste, is the taste awareness?
[22:45] <ZeN`n1th> i think u cant define awareness to a 'thing' 😛
[22:45] <^john^> so is taste or thought a thing? 🙂
[22:47] <^john^> u practice meditation now right?
[22:47] <^john^> 🙂
[22:47] <ZeN`n1th> never practise for quite some time 😛
[22:47] <ZeN`n1th> taste or thought is not a thing
[22:47] <ZeN`n1th> lol
[22:49] <^john^> so do u think awareness is a party behind thinking thought or experiencing taste?
[22:49] <^john^> 🙂
[22:49] <^john^> lol
[22:49] <ZeN`n1th> no
[22:49] <^john^> taste is not a thing, then what is it?
[22:50] <ZeN`n1th> just the awareness
[22:50] <ZeN`n1th> lol
[22:50] <^john^> experience this awareness with totality. 🙂
[22:50] <ZeN`n1th> ok
[22:53] <^john^> what meditation is peculiar to buddhism?
[22:54] <ZeN`n1th> hmm... dunnu leh
[22:54] <ZeN`n1th> i dunnu much about other religion s meditation
[22:55] <^john^> insight meditation. Mindfulness
[22:55] <ZeN`n1th> oic
[22:55] <ZeN`n1th> they dont practise mindfulness?
[22:56] <^john^> nope...most is concentration. 🙂
[22:56] <^john^> not so much on awareness.
[22:56] <ZeN`n1th> then how come they can have a glimpse on buddha nature/pure awareness
[22:57] <^john^> why not, every moment we can have glimpse of awareness.
[22:58] <^john^> if u do not get trapped in concepts and label and start to feel ur breath now
[22:58] <^john^> what is breath actually without concepts
[22:58] <^john^> feel it
[22:58] <^john^> 🙂
[22:59] <^john^> experience the movements, the details and tell me like a layman.
[23:02] <ZeN`n1th> movement like slow or fast ??
[23:02] <ZeN`n1th> lol
[23:03] <^john^> anything. 🙂 The only thing that buddha doesn't even know is ur very awareness that is pure and not contaminated by thoughts. It can be as simple as breathing. 🙂
[23:04] <^john^> What IS has no intention.
[23:04] <^john^> there is no past nor future.
[23:04] <^john^> there is no anticipation.
[23:04] <^john^> how could anyone know. 🙂
[23:06] <^john^> actual texture, shape, and form of sensations.
[23:06] <^john^> u must be able to touch the actual texture, shape and form of awareness.
[23:07] <ZeN`n1th> icic
[23:07] <^john^> luminosity is in these forms, colors, texture, shape. 🙂
[23:08] <^john^> when we say Awareness is formless.
[23:08] <^john^> it doesn't mean is something somewhere but is formless.
[23:08] <^john^> means completely nothing at all. 🙂
[23:08] <^john^> lol
[23:08] <ZeN`n1th> hahaha
[23:08] <ZeN`n1th> icic
[23:09] <^john^> do not even create an image.
[23:09] <^john^> NOTHING. 😛
[23:09] <^john^> but in all it arises. 🙂
[23:09] <^john^> and instantaneously gone.
[23:09] <^john^> and rises.


[21:08] <ZeN`out> hi.. is it conducive to practise anapanasati in an environment with some smell or i should go to a place without any smell?
[21:09] <^john^> at first without, later when u r clear, it doesn't matter.
[21:09] <^john^> u will experience that the smell is You. From a relative truth perspective.
[21:11] <ZeN`out> icic...
[21:11] <^john^> from absolute truth, smell is Thus.
[21:11] <ZeN`out> oic..
[21:11] <^john^> the practice should be first someone is aware of the breath
[21:12] <^john^> then focused
[21:12] <^john^> but be extremely clear of the breath
[21:12] <^john^> means no thoughts of the breath
[21:12] <ZeN`out> icic..
[21:12] <^john^> then know that only the breath.
[21:12] <ZeN`out> can thoughts and focus co-exist? or isit that when we are focused no thoughts can exist?
[21:13] <^john^> if one gets into absorption, then it becomes samatha
[21:13] <^john^> yes
[21:13] <^john^> but it is subtle.
[21:13] <ZeN`out> yes to ?
[21:13] <^john^> only when a person reaches certain stage then he understands.
[21:13] <^john^> it seems to be mutually exclusive but it isn't
[21:14] <^john^> but if one enters into absorption, then different thing.
[21:14] <ZeN`out> oic... so what happens when one enters absorption
[21:15] <^john^> that is self-forgetting, it is not pure awareness.
[21:15] <^john^> in pure awareness, there is merely the process, there is no subject nor object
[21:16] <ZeN`out> so what i am practising is leads to absorption?
[21:17] <^john^> not exactly depending on u. 🙂
[21:17] <^john^> but first build the strength of focus first.
[21:17] <^john^> concentration
[21:17] <ZeN`out> icic..
[21:17] <^john^> but feel the breath, the realness, the presence, the clarity
[21:18] <^john^> without thought
[21:18] <^john^> just the breath
[21:18] <^john^> if u can do that, then tell me
[21:18] <ZeN`out> icic
[21:18] <^john^> don't worry about whether the speed of ur breath
[21:18] <^john^> whether it is thick or thin
[21:18] <^john^> not about that
[21:18] <^john^> don't worry about that at all.
[21:18] <ZeN`out> hmm ya i know 😃
[21:18] <^john^> show no concern
[21:19] <^john^> u can breath as hard as u can, it doesn't matter
[21:19] <ZeN`out> my dharma teacher told us not to be concerned even if a person completely stops breathing ... thats y i was curious and i check on my breathe 😛 lol
[21:19] <^john^> as long as u can feel the vividness, the clarity
[21:19] <^john^> when the breath stops it is different
[21:19] <^john^> 🙂
[21:20] <^john^> if u r able to do it, then it is different.
[21:20] <ZeN`out> icic
[21:20] <^john^> or if it is so subtle that u can't really feel it, it is different
[21:20] <ZeN`out> icic
[21:21] <^john^> when happened when u r so concentrated on ur breath, then there is no breath?
[21:22] <ZeN`out> huh me?
[21:22] <^john^> yeah
[21:23] <^john^> i mean what if there is no breath and u r concentrating on the breath.
[21:23] <^john^> what will happen?
[21:23] <ZeN`out> then just continue to focus? lol
[21:24] <^john^> if the seed is there, then u will know. 🙂
[21:25] <ZeN`out> oic
[21:25] <ZeN`out> when there is no object to focus on, just remain mindful?
[21:26] <^john^> don't think of how.. just do it. There should be no anticipation. 






Yes that sounds good. After some time, anatta will be very clear and stable throughout without needing much thought or contemplation, be it sitting or even in daily life. It will just be naturally anatta. Get to that stability first, through consistent daily practice, anapanasati, etc.
Then the next challenge is what Yin Ling said:
Shared with Your friends
Yin Ling
To me, the most difficult part of meditation is not non-dual, not anatta, not luminosity, those are straight forward, once the understanding and view is there the experience arises quickly and stabilises with practice.
Experience is always hyper HD and vivid for me like nothing I have ever seen before insight. So I don’t get v excited over ppl describing the non dual states; psychedelic hyper sensory states; it’s like a given for myself, and I believe others who are stable here in non dual. No big deal.
Personally , The aspect that I spent most of my time and effort (and still working on) is..
Fusing the “arising” , the vivid luminosity of each senses with its emptiness, its release.
Cultivating the ability of mind to see presence at the same time seeing absence.
fusing the two extremes into the Middle Way.
The actualise Tsongkhapa last verse in 3 principle aspects.
Actualising luminosity of “in the seen only the seen” and its empty taste - ”in the seen nothing is seen” together at once.
When I first taste the fusing of both after a lot (a lot) of practice, it tasted like a huge release, like many lifetimes of karmic build up now release, feels like liberation, feels like the sticks of fire burning off. Immense relief. One actually can feel it especially if you have a lot of energy.
I believe this is the fusion of dependent origination and emptiness into Middle Way experientially.
So when someone speaks about it experientially, it makes me sit up ! 🤪😁
What is mind?
Rub your hand together,
feel that?
That is mind!
Mind is luminous, bright, and knowing.
Mind is empty of stains, stains of inherent existence.
Every arising is the mind,
Each touch,
Each sound,
Each taste,
My hands rubbing each other,
All my mind.
So clear, so vivid, so luminous.
Each arising is empty of stains,
Each arising is a dependent arising,
Each arising is a release all conditions into a display of emptiness,
Nothing there, yet so vivid.
Each arising is my true nature. Vivid and empty. Intimate as ever, I express myself as no-thing.
The trees, cars, babies, mothers, ward,
Speaks the dharma again and again,
But they are not separate from me,
We are not separate,
Yet we are not apart.
Yet there’s no we, as there’s no them?
There’s no others!
How else to describe with words?
I do not know.
My body and mind understands it intimately,
The dharma, it speaks a language
Of love and magic🥹





Yin Ling:


 Yin LingAdmin
Top contributor
Mark Lopez just saw this, have been busy.. , thought of chiming in.
You are generally doings right imo and slowly the two practices will converge and there is something call a spacious samadhi or samadhi borne of insight which abit like jhana but not exactly because in jhana the mind freeze and cannot analyse at all (for me) whilst in samadhi borne of insight the mind is very clear sharp and aware.
It can last in this state for a long time, hours even. mind is v still with the right view in place.
You don’t necessarily need to use breath unless you want to, you can meditate on the mind itself for samadhi. Just the knowing. Post anatta you will know what I’m saying.
I prefer this as mind is spacious and more suitable for my energy .. I have energy imbalance when I do any focusing on small area like breath because my energy follows my mind.
So I meditate on mind for awhile, analyse the insights of anatta, emptiness, dependent arising, luminosity , interrelation etc .. to clear the mind up, then rest in this view for as long as samadhi allows.
If it starts getting chaotic.. with mundane thoughts coming up, I push up the intensity of concentration again, turn towards settling the mind, catching thoughts carefully .. meditate on the knowing mind… abit like tighten the string of my violin. thoughts hardly can arise if I do that .Once it’s stable, I let it go very slowly and check in often to see how’s the mind like.
Then you will find yourself going into samadhi very rapidly .. a few breaths and you are in samadhi and insight conjoined. It is powerful.. the view of emptienss and dependent arising can carry into the day powerfully for up to half the day or even more until ur next sit depending on how high quality the meditstion is.
That’s from my personal experience






On the subject of meditation after anatta, see Meditation after Anatta






    I would like to thank everyone in this group, the admins, the people who worked on the many different versions of the AtR guide, the Buddhas and Sages of the past, present, future, the teachers who are patient enough to point the way.
    3 years ago, I learned about this business of waking up. At first I didn’t know where to begin. I had this deep desire to escape from my suffering and from myself and I can’t seem to find a way out. But late last year Soh reached out to me, perhaps out of pity, in one of the reddit forums. I was probably so lost and SO OFF THE MARK back then!
    But now I see it clearly. The only way is here. There is no fancy way. It’s simple, direct, honest. This process of elimination is the greatest endeavor I will be doing in this lifetime.


  • Soh Wei Yu
    Top contributor
    “The only way is here”
    I know you are saying this as a general statement to the effect of “the only way is insight into our true nature” etc.. but just like to add:
    I often refer people to qualified teachers outside AtR. If AtR resonates, then great, and you can focus on the inquiries and contemplations and practices. Many have indeed awakened through AtR resources. But if you can find an awakened mentor or teacher near you, then that is perhaps even better.
    What AtR presents is one way to insight but there are many approaches.. and even after attaining insight, it is still important to continue practicing, studying the dharma, learning from qualified dharma teachers, etc. I started to attend Acarya Malcolm Smith’s Dzogchen teachings online since 2021 and still do. I also watch youtube videos of dharma teachers by venerable masters, etc

    • Reply
    • Edited

    Kokay Maramot
    Soh Wei Yu oh definitely that's what I meant! I also like that there are references to different teachers and techniques to insight in the AtR. As for teachers, I am not actively looking at the moment! But I am casually looking haha. I checked Acarya Malcolm Smith and am waiting if there will be an opening soon. Would definitely want to attend! 🙂 Thanks so much Soh!

  • Reply








This is damn good... cutting straight at the root.



  • Soh Wei Yu
    Top contributor
    Malcolm's teachings are very clear. So I recommend those who wish to learn and practice Dzogchen to sign up and attend his teachings.

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview

    Sim Pern Chong
    Top contributor
    Soh Wei Yu Thanks for the link... I just bought the ebook version.

  • Soh Wei Yu
    Top contributor
    His entire talk series in videos commenting on each chapter of the book are also available online, but have to sign up to join the forum first before you can purchase it. I think need to receive direct introduction from him first also

    • Reply
    • Edited

  • Sim Pern Chong
    Top contributor
    Ah I see... thanks.

  • William Lim
    So why when phenomenon is empty (has no inherent existence) = phenomenon doesn't arise
    * Note to Soh Wei Yu aka Anatta Bot, kindly summarize (instead of cut and paste) like the way your rival Chat GPT does 😂

    Soh Wei Yu
    Top contributor
    William Lim as Kyle Dixon wrote two weeks ago:
    Nāgārjuna states the following:
    That which comes into being from a cause, and does not endure without conditions, it disappears as well when conditions are absent - how can this be understood to exist?
    Going on to say:
    Since it comes to and end when ignorance ceases; why does it not become clear then that it was conjured by ignorance?
    This is the actual meaning, and the heart of dependent origination, which is nonarising [anutpāda]. For an object to inherently exist it must exist outright, independent of causes and conditions, independent of attributes, characteristics and constituent parts. However, we cannot find an inherent object independent of these factors, and the implications of this fact is that we likewise cannot find an inherent object within those factors either.
    The object itself, as the core entity which possesses characteristics, is ultimately unfindable. We instead only find a designated collection of pieces, which do not in fact create any discrete object. In the absence of an object the pieces are likewise rendered as incapable of being "pieces" or "parts" and therefore they are also nothing more than arbitrary designations that amount to nothing more than inferences.
    This means that all entities, selves, and so on are merely useful conventional designations, their provisional validity is only measured by their efficacy, and apart from that conventional imputation, there is no underlying object that can be ascertained or found.
    Dependent origination is the apparent origination of entities that seem to manifest in dependence on causes and conditions. But as Nāgārjuna states above, those causes and conditions are actually the ignorance which afflicts the mindstream, and the conditions of grasping, mine-making and I-making which are the drivers of karmic activity that serve to reify the delusion of a self, or a self in objects, and so on.
    This is why many adepts are explicitly clear that dependent origination is synonymous with a lack of origination [anutpāda], because phenomena that originate in dependence on ignorance as a cause, never actually originate at all, for example, Candrakīrti states:
    The perfectly awakened buddhas proclaimed, "What is dependently originated is non-arisen.”
    Or Mañjuśrī:
    Whatever is dependently originated does not truly arise.
    Nāgārjuna once again:
    What originates dependently is non-arisen!
    Thus dependent origination is incapable of producing existence of any sort, because dependent origination is incapable of producing entities. Entities and existence only appear because of the ignorance which afflicts your mind. When that ignorance is removed, all perceptions of existence are removed, all perceptions of selves are removed and all perceptions of origination are removed.

  • My Favourite Sutra, Non-Arising and Dependent Origination of Sound
    My Favourite Sutra, Non-Arising and Dependent Origination of Sound
    My Favourite Sutra, Non-Arising and Dependent Origination of Sound

    • Reply
    • Remove Preview

  • Sim Pern Chong
    Top contributor
    Just my opinion only. This is how i understand it... and its very simple and direct.
    I use an analogy.
    If there is just 'space' -originally-.. can any 'thing' be produced out of space? If for anything to be produced out of space, there will need to be a secondary medium. But can 'voidness' have a secondary medium? It cannot.
    Hence, there can be no arising at all. To imply arising is to have some 'thing' distinct that is separated from another thing. But it is not possible.
    Hence, even at this very experience now.. it is non dual.
    Since it is non-dual, any kind of grasping, implies that there is duality hence needing the correction. So, we just leave it as it is.. 'Perfection' is the approximation of this..

    • Reply
    • Edited

    Soh Wei Yu
    Top contributor
    Yes indeed everything is nondual and equal to space.. although it is also good to stress that non-arising is to be understood from dependent origination, for luminous appearances continue to manifest in nondual and not in a haphazard nor random manner, and dependent origination and non arising is understood as the nature of this empty clarity. Nondual unbounded spontaneous presence ultimately and dependently originating when expressed relatively, the two truths are a union.
    John tan expresses nicely:
    The Only Way to the Ultimate Truth
    [10:10 PM, 4/12/2021] John Tan: The DO part is really good.
    [10:11 PM, 4/12/2021] John Tan: When did malcom say that?  Recently or in the past?
    [10:11 PM, 4/12/2021] Soh Wei Yu: oic..
    [10:11 PM, 4/12/2021] Soh Wei Yu:
    [10:11 PM, 4/12/2021] Soh Wei Yu: from above
    [10:12 PM, 4/12/2021] Soh Wei Yu: the others from here

    [10:30 PM, 4/12/2021] John Tan: Many misunderstand that oh ultimately it is empty and DO is conventional therefore conceptual so ultimately empty non-existence.  

    We must understand what is meant by empty ultimately but conventionally valid.  Nominal constructs are of two types, those that are valid and those that r invalid like "rabbit horns".  Even mere appearances free from all elaborations and conceptualities, they inadvertently manifest therefore the term "appearances".  They do not manifest randomly or haphazardly, they are valid mode of arising and that is dependent arising.  When it is "valid" means it is the acceptable way of explanation and not "rabbit horn" which is non-existence.  This part I mentioned in my reply to Andre.