Posts
Neony Karby
What if suffering is a case of identity at all, being the mistake?
Reply
1w
Edited
Yin LingAdmin
Top contributor
Neony Karby don’t understand?
Reply
1w
Neony Karby
What if identification ( with anything at all ) is the problem ?
Reply
1w
Edited
Soh Wei YuAuthor
Admin
Neony Karby
Not wrong. As John Tan said before years ago,
“Just send. When she explains "I M" as real, just without hesitation and say that is 妄 (delusion) and 苦的根源 (the root of suffering)。
That is all.”
Reply
1w
Soh Wei YuAuthor
Admin
Neony Karby
Also
“
As John Tan said,
"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”
Reply
1w
Soh Wei YuAuthor
Admin
Neony Karby nevertheless I AM is an important realization of one’s luminous essence
Reply
1w
Nicolas BenauTop contributor
The relaxation bit is actually a very good pointer.
Not sure what’s going on with this fellow’s other videos, though.
Reply
1w
Soh Wei YuAuthor
Admin
Nicolas Benau i have no ideas too, never watched his other videos
Reply
1w
Soh Wei YuAuthor
Admin
Neony Karby
The witness is the preliminary rigpa beginners start with even in dzogchen teachings
Reply
12m
Soh Wei YuAuthor
Admin
(See krodha/kyle dixon posts)
User avatar
level 1
mr-curiouser
Op ·
4 mo. ago
Rigpa is not the “witness” according to Dzogchen.
3
User avatar
level 2
krodha
·
4 mo. ago
Rigpa is not the “witness” according to Dzogchen.
It is when you start out.
8
User avatar
level 3
mr-curiouser
Op ·
4 mo. ago
Fair point. But if one stays attached to THINKING “ah there it is! I am aware and of my awareness. There you are Rigpa!” Then the practitioner stops further progress until this way of thinking and believing is transcended and released.
1
User avatar
level 3
optimistically_eyed
·
4 mo. ago
It is when you start out.
Would you mind fleshing that out for me? I’m not sure I follow.
1
User avatar
level 4
krodha
·
4 mo. ago
Rigpa in normal sentient beings is just the dualistic mind as the vijñāna skandha. Meaning it is an inner subjective observer. The “subject” in the subject-object duality that in fact is vijñāna, dualistic consciousness.
As you progress on the path you begin to realize the emptiness of that subjective aspect, but it is very concrete and well established in normal sentient beings.
9
User avatar
level 5
optimistically_eyed
·
4 mo. ago
That’s helpful. Thank you.
3
User avatar
level 6
krodha
·
4 mo. ago
Rigpa not being an observer pertains to the domain of āryas and tathāgatas. The rest of us certainly have dualistic vision with subject and object.
The rhetoric being thrown around in this thread about rigpa not being an observer or witness is true in certain contexts, but it is big talk. It really is something that accomplished yogis realize.
10
User avatar
level 7
optimistically_eyed
·
4 mo. ago
This clarifies and demystifies things significantly. Thank you again.
5
Reply
11m
Soh Wei YuAuthor
Admin
“
Kyle Dixon wrote before,
“I don’t see why not. Stream entry involves recognition of the true nature of the clear, bright, knowing, cognizance of your mind.
As your practice progresses you should begin to familiarize with that knowing capacity. Even with bipolar, in the height of happiness, the depths of depression, in the intensity of anger, that knowing capacity is always the same, stable, bright, clear. Like the surface of a mirror.
Anger, sadness, happiness and everything else are like reflections that appear in the surface of the mirror but don’t affect it.
Be the mirror and don’t get caught up in the reflections.
This is not yet stream entry. But it can be a basis for practice that will help you get there.
…
In initial practice, if you treat your knowing conscious clarity of mind as something like the surface of a mirror, and the sensory stimuli as reflections that appear on the mirror, anchor your view as being the mirror and the view will always be stable no matter what appears.”
“
Reply
10m
Edited
Soh Wei YuAuthor
Admin
Aditya Prasad
Soh Wei Yu I don't understand this quote. "Stream entry is X. This is not yet stream entry." I think I am misunderstanding which parts describe stream entry and which do not. Is the distinction here the same as initial rigpa vs mature rigpa ( = stream entry)? Kyle Dixon · 49m
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Aditya Prasad
Kyle Dixon is saying that recognising the clarity aspect of rigpa is not stream entry but is an important preliminary realisation. Realising the empty nature (i.e. anatman) of that clarity of mind is stream entry.
Reply
7m
Soh Wei YuAuthor
Admin
As for the matured rigpa post emptiness realization, Kyle also expressed:
"'Self luminous' and 'self knowing' are concepts which are used to convey the absence of a subjective reference point which is mediating the manifestation of appearance. Instead of a subjective cognition or knower which is 'illuminating' objective appearances, it is realized that the sheer exertion of our cognition has always and only been the sheer exertion of appearance itself. Or rather that cognition and appearance are not valid as anything in themselves. Since both are merely fabricated qualities neither can be validated or found when sought. This is not a union of subject and object, but is the recognition that the subject and object never arose in the first place [advaya]. ", "The cognition is empty. That is what it means to recognize the nature of mind [sems nyid]. The clarity [cognition] of mind is recognized to be empty, which is sometimes parsed as the inseparability of clarity and emptiness, or nondual clarity and emptiness." - Kyle Dixon, 2014
Reply
3m
