请先看：

Please read this first (English): 

Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment

English can be found below.

參我是誰？

元音老人：

從前有一位師父參“如何是父母未生前本來面目？”參了多年，未能開悟。后來碰到一位大德，請他慈悲指示個方便。大德問：“你參什么話頭？”他答道：“我參如何是我父母未生前的本來面目？”大德道：“你參得太遠了，應向近處看。”他問：“怎么向近處看？”大德道：“不要看父母未生前，須看一念未生以前是什么？”禪者言下大悟。

大家坐在這里，請看這一念未生前是什么？它在各人面門放光，朗照一切而毫無粘著，無知無見而又非同木石，這是什么？就在這里猛著精彩，就是悟道。所以說“至道無難，言端語端”啊！

Soh's translation:

Yuan Yin Lao Ren:

In the past there was a Master who contemplated, "what is the original face before my parents were born?" He contemplated for many years, but did not awaken. Later on he encountered a great noble person and requested for his compassionate guidance. The noble one asked: "What koan did you contemplate?" He replied: "I contemplated what is the original face before my parents were born?" Noble one replied: "You contemplated too far away, should look nearby." He asked: "How should I look nearby?" Noble one replied: "Don't look into what is before your parents were born, need to look at: before a thought arise, what is it?" The Zen practitioner immediately attained great awakening.

Everyone that is sitting here, please look at what is this before a moment of thought's arising? IT is radiating light in front of everybody's [sense] doors, the brightness radiates everything yet is without the slightest clinging, nothing is known and nothing is seen yet it is not similar to wood and stones, what is This? IT is right here shining in its brilliancy, this is awakening to the Way. Therefore it is said, "the great way is not difficult, just cease speech and words"!

Soh： 

“參禪是要參究本來面目是什么，自性是什么，不是要達到一種境界。

是要發現，體悟，什么是自性、覺性。要達到完全沒有疑惑才是”悟”

要一切念頭斷后還要回光返照，我是誰？在覺知的是什么？如果有念頭回答是這個那個就錯，因為答案不在語言文字，所以把念頭舍掉再繼續參、回光返照。這是明心最直接的法。

要每天打坐，元音老人叫弟子每天打坐兩小時。

如果不能把心靜下來到無念，很難開悟。你要想想你最容易把心靜下的方法是什么？是打坐嗎？還是念佛持咒？什么方法如果能安心都可以，可是要每天修，不能斷斷續續。

可是無念還不是開悟，達到無念時還要回光返照，找出了了分明的是誰，是什么，才能悟到自性，不然你的打坐只是一種靜態，還沒悟到自性。

悟到自性后只是明心，還不算是悟性（人法二空之理、登地菩薩），還要繼續。所以”明心見性”其實是兩個：先明心（真心），后見性。

所以要努力修到明心見性。

六祖慧能說過：不識本心學法無益。”

 English translation:

Contemplating Zen [Koan] is about inquiring what exactly is our original face, what is our Self-Nature, it is not about achieving a meditative state.

It is rather to discover, to realize, what exactly is our Self-Nature/Awareness. One must reach a state of utter doubtlessness/certainty to be considered '[Self-]Realization'.

After the utter cessation of all thoughts, one must turn one's light around to find out, What am I? What is it that is Aware? If there is a thought which answers 'it is this or that' then that's wrong, because the real answer lies not in words and letters. Therefore cast aside those thoughts and continue inquiring, turning the light around. This is the most direct method to apprehend one's Mind.

You should meditate everyday. Master Yuan Yin asks his student to meditate two hours a day.

If you are unable to quiet your mind to a state of no-thought, it will be difficult to realise. You should think carefully what is the best method for you to still your mind? Is it meditation? Or is it chanting the Buddha's name and reciting mantras? Whatever methods which calms the mind will do, but you have to practice everyday, not only practice intermittently or occasionally.

However, reaching a state of no-thought is not awakening. Upon reaching a state of no-thought, continue turning the light around to find out Who is that which is the Clear Knowingness? What is it? Then you will realise your Self-Nature. Otherwise your meditation is merely a state of stillness, not yet realising Self-Nature.

Realizing Self-Nature is only Apprehending one's Mind, it is not yet realizing Nature [the nature of mind and phenomena] (the principle of the twofold emptiness of persons and phenomena as realized by a first bhumi Bodhisattva), therefore one must continue. Hence, "Apprehending Mind and Realising Nature" consists of two parts: first apprehend one's Mind (True Mind), later realize [Empty] Nature.

Therefore practice hard to Apprehend Mind and Realize Nature.

The Sixth Ch'an Patriarch said: It is useless to learn the dharma without recognising original Mind.

還有：

有人問我一個問題，所以我給他發送了以下文本。你應當這樣修習，并且每天都有質量的時間來冥想（觀照）和修習，這將引領你到達實現的第一階段。

文本的一部分：

'5. Nāṉ Ār? 第6段：如果或者一旦我們的意識中出現了除了我們自己之外的任何事物，我們應該簡單地將我們的注意力轉回到我們自己身上，即所有其他事物（所有思想、形式或現象）出現的那個( the one to whom all other things (all thoughts, forms or phenomena) appear)

關于您的陳述，“我一直在做‘這些思想是對誰而起？’，‘對我而起’，‘我是誰？’的探詢，但我不知道我還應該做什么”，這些話，“這是對誰而顯現的？”、“對我而顯現”、“我是誰？”是由巴格萬給出的一個非常有用的指引，但我們應該清楚地理解他對這個指引的意思。他的意思不是說我們應該在任何事物出現時就重復這些話給自己聽，而是說我們應該簡單地將我們的注意力轉回到我們自己身上，即所有其他事物（所有思想、形式或現象）出現的那個。也就是說，他并沒有說‘問對誰而言’或‘問我是誰’，而是‘探究對誰而言’和‘探究我是誰’，正如他在Nāṉ Ār?的第六段以下部分中所寫：

如果其他思想升起，不嘗試去完成它們，就有必要探究它們發生于誰。無論多少思想升起，又有何妨？警覺地，每當一個思想出現時，如果有人探究它發生于誰，就會清楚：發生于我。如果有人探究‘我是誰’（通過警覺地關注自己，即所有其他事物出現的‘我’），心將返回到它的出生地（即自己，它起源的源頭）；（因為這樣一來就避免了關注它）起來的思想也會停止。當一個人這樣練習并練習時，心在其出生地堅定不移地立足的能力就會增加。

他在這里使用的動詞我翻譯為‘探究’是விசாரி（vicāri），在某些情境中可能意味著以詢問的方式探詢，但在這個情境中只意味著以探究的方式探詢。提問是一種心理活動，因為它涉及將我們的注意力從自己身上轉向一個問題，即一種思想，因此屬于除了我們自己之外的事物，所以只要我們在提問，我們仍然只是在心靈表面上漂浮，關注于除了我們自己之外的事物，而探究自己意味著深切地自我關注，這會導致心沉入深處，從而返回到它的‘出生地’，即它起源的源頭，也就是我們的本質本我（ātma-svarūpa），這是我們對自己存在的基本且永恒閃耀的覺性，‘本我’。

因此，巴格萬在這段話中指出的是我們應該將注意力發送的方向。而不是讓我們的注意力隨著可能升起的任何思想而外出，我們應該將它轉回到我們自己身上，即所有思想出現的那個。‘對誰而言？’并不是我們應該問自己的一個問題，而是一個非常強大的指引，指示我們應該將注意力導向哪里。有時候，如果提問‘對誰而言？’能幫助我們想起將注意力轉回到我們自己身上，那么它或許可以作為一種輔助，但自我探究（ātma-vicāra）不僅僅是提出這樣的問題，而只是將我們的注意力單純地固定在我們自己身上。

這里值得注意的另一個點是，巴格萬所指的‘思想’是指除了我們的基本覺性‘本我’之外的任何事物，因此它包括所有感知、記憶、情感、想法以及任何其他類型的心理印象。正如他在Nāṉ Ār?的第四段中所說，‘除了思想之外，并沒有單獨的世界這樣的事物’，以及在第十四段中，‘所謂的世界僅僅是思想’，所以當他在這里說‘如果其他思想升起’（piṟa v-eṇṇaṅgaḷ eṙundāl），‘每當一個思想出現時’（ovvōr eṇṇamum kiḷambum-pōdē），他的意思是，如果或者一旦我們的意識中出現了除了我們自己之外的任何事物，我們應該將我們的注意力轉回到我們自己身上，即所有這些事物出現的那個。

如果我們警覺地自我關注，正如我們應該嘗試的那樣，我們將因此避免思想和睡眠，但當我們疲倦時我們自然不那么警覺，所以我們可能會因為嘗試自我關注而睡著

您問，‘我應該整天坐著持續做自我探詢幾個小時嗎？我應該在睡前床上也繼續探詢嗎？或者我應該不時停止探詢以讓身體休息？’首先，自我探究與身體無關，所以無論身體是躺著、坐著、站著、行走還是做任何其他事情，我們都可以練習它。出于同樣的原因，我們不必為了給身體休息而停止自我關注，因為自我關注以任何方式都不會使身體感到緊張。事實上，當身體和心靈正在休息時，對我們來說是非常有利的條件來自我關注。

關于您在睡前床上繼續練習的問題，這也是好的，但由于我們通常在那個時候非常疲倦，我們通常在嘗試自我關注后不久就沉入睡眠。這沒有害處，因為當我們需要睡眠時我們應該睡覺。沒有時間和情況不適合我們自我關注，所以無論時間或情況如何，我們都應該盡可能地嘗試自我關注，但我們不應該試圖剝奪自己所需的睡眠量。

如果我們警覺地自我關注，正如我們應該嘗試的那樣，我們將因此避免思想和睡眠，但當我們疲倦時我們自然不那么警覺，所以我們可能會因為嘗試自我關注而睡著。正如Sadhu Om經常說的，當我們困倦時我們應該睡覺，因為當我們再次醒來時我們會感到清新，我們應該利用那種清新嘗試警覺地自我關注。

我不知道我在這里寫的任何東西是否對您有用，但我希望其中的一些至少可以幫助指引您正確的方向。

‘我’這個詞本質上指的只是那個覺性，所以如果我們只是在覺知那在覺知的，我們就在冥想（觀照）‘我’作為對我的第一個回復（我將其改編為前六節）的回復，我的朋友再次寫信講述他嘗試自我探詢的做法和他面臨的問題，我回復道：

當您說‘自我探詢的實踐，特別是坐姿（只是覺知那覺知/覺性，不在任何對象或形式上冥想等，僅僅是存在，甚至沒有“我”在“我是”中）提升了我的昆達里尼能量’時，我不清楚您實際上在實踐什么，因為您說您‘只是覺知那覺知/覺性’，但似乎又說您甚至沒有在‘我’上冥想（觀照）。冥想（觀照）‘我’意味著只關注自己，換句話說，就是自我關注，所以如果您沒有在‘我’上冥想（觀照），您所說的‘只是覺知那覺知/覺性’是什么意思？

在這個語境中‘覺性’意味著那個覺性，而那個覺性總是以‘我’自覺于自身，所以‘我’這個詞本質上指的只是那個覺性。因此，如果您沒有在‘我’上冥想（觀照），您所覺性的‘覺性’是什么？不幸的是‘覺性’是一個可能引起歧義的術語，因為它可以被理解為對象或現象的覺知，所以當您‘只是覺知那覺知/覺性’時，您只是在覺知那覺知/覺性，即您自己，還是在覺知您對對象或現象的覺知？

如果您只是在覺知那覺知/覺性，即您自己，那么您就在冥想（觀照）‘我’。也就是說，您冥想（觀照）的不是‘我’這個詞，而是‘我’這個詞所指的，即您自己，那個覺性。如果您沒有在冥想（觀照）‘我’這個詞所指的，那么無論您所覺照的‘覺性’是什么，都是除了那個能覺知的覺性之外的東西。

這就是為什么巴格萬給了我們強大的指引‘對誰而言’，我在我前一個回復中寫過。如果我們正確理解這個指引，它是在指導我們的注意力回到我們自己身上，即所有其他事物出現的那個。換句話說，它是在指引我們的注意力回到那個覺性，遠離我們此前所覺知到的任何事物。

如果您覺知到任何現象，例如您的昆達里尼能量的提升，您的注意力就已經從您自己那里轉移開了，所以您需要將它轉回到您自己身上，即所有現象出現的那個。如果您將注意力轉回到自己身上并堅定地持有自己（也就是，如果您只是堅定地保持自我關注），無論出現了什么現象都將因此消失，因為沒有任何現象能在您的覺性中出現或保持，除非您至少在一定程度上關注它。

無論什么可能分散我們的注意力或看起來對我們構成問題，讓我們不要關心它們，只是耐心地和持續地嘗試自我關注，不理會一切其他事物關于您的昆達里尼能量的提升，您說，‘提升的意思是我感覺到脊柱中有一股能量通過脈輪流動’，但能量、脊柱、脈輪以及能量的運動都是對象或現象，所以您應該通過嘗試熱切地自我關注來忽略所有這些事物。無論這些事物如何出現，它們都不應該是您關心的對象。它們對誰而顯現？只對您，所以您應該只是堅持嘗試只關注自己。

無論什么出現或消失都是除了我們自己之外的，所以它們不應該引起我們的興趣或關心。這些事物只有在我們對它們感興趣或關心它們的程度上才會分散我們的注意力并成為我們的問題。我們為什么要關心它們？我們唯一的關心應該是探究和了解我們自己是什么。如果我們對任何其他事物都不感興趣或不關心，我們就不會關注它們，因此它們就不會成為問題。

如果我們發現自己因關心這些事物而分心，那是因為我們的viṣaya-vāsanās（外向的欲望）的力量，而減弱我們的viṣaya-vāsanās并從而使我們的心擺脫對所有其他事物的興趣的最有效手段就是堅持這個簡單的實踐，即自我關注。因此，無論什么可能分散我們的注意力或看起來對我們構成問題，讓我們不要關心它們，只是耐心地和持續地嘗試自我關注，不理會一切其他事物。

 quote from

https://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2021/05/can-self-investigation-boost-mind-or.html

5. Nāṉ Ār? paragraph 6: if or as soon as anything other than ourself appears in our awareness, we should simply turn our attention back towards ourself, the one to whom all other things (all thoughts, forms or phenomena) appear

Regarding your statement, ‘I keep doing the enquiry “to whom these thoughts arise?”, “to me”, “who am I?” but I don’t know what I should do more’, these words, ‘to whom does this appear?’, ‘to me’, ‘who am I?’, are a very useful pointer given by Bhagavan, but we should understand clearly what he meant by this pointer. He did not mean that we should repeat these words to ourself whenever anything appears, but that we should simply turn our attention back to ourself, the one to whom all other things (all thoughts, forms or phenomena) appear. That is, he did not say ‘ask to whom’ or ‘ask who am I’ but ‘investigate to whom’ and ‘investigate who am I’, as he wrote in the following portion of the sixth paragraph of Nāṉ Ār?:

பிற வெண்ணங்க ளெழுந்தா லவற்றைப் பூர்த்தி பண்ணுவதற்கு எத்தனியாமல் அவை யாருக் குண்டாயின என்று விசாரிக்க வேண்டும். எத்தனை எண்ணங்க ளெழினு மென்ன? ஜாக்கிரதையாய் ஒவ்வோ ரெண்ணமும் கிளம்பும்போதே இது யாருக்குண்டாயிற்று என்று விசாரித்தால் எனக்கென்று தோன்றும். நானார் என்று விசாரித்தால் மனம் தன் பிறப்பிடத்திற்குத் திரும்பிவிடும்; எழுந்த வெண்ணமு மடங்கிவிடும். இப்படிப் பழகப் பழக மனத்திற்குத் தன் பிறப்பிடத்திற் றங்கி நிற்கும் சக்தி யதிகரிக்கின்றது.

piṟa v-eṇṇaṅgaḷ eṙundāl avaṯṟai-p pūrtti paṇṇuvadaṟku ettaṉiyāmal avai yārukku uṇḍāyiṉa eṉḏṟu vicārikka vēṇḍum. ettaṉai eṇṇaṅgaḷ eṙiṉum eṉṉa? jāggirataiyāy ovvōr eṇṇamum kiḷambum-pōdē idu yārukku uṇḍāyiṯṟu eṉḏṟu vicārittāl eṉakkeṉḏṟu tōṉḏṟum. nāṉ-ār eṉḏṟu vicārittāl maṉam taṉ piṟappiḍattiṟku-t tirumbi-viḍum; eṙunda v-eṇṇamum aḍaṅgi-viḍum. ippaḍi-p paṙaga-p paṙaga maṉattiṟku-t taṉ piṟappiḍattil taṅgi niṟgum śakti y-adhikarikkiṉḏṟadu.

If other thoughts rise, without trying to complete them it is necessary to investigate to whom they have occurred. However many thoughts rise, what [does it matter]? Vigilantly, as soon as each thought appears, if one investigates to whom it has occurred, it will be clear: to me. If one investigates who am I [by vigilantly attending to oneself, the ‘me’ to whom everything else appears], the mind will return to its birthplace [namely oneself, the source from which it arose]; [and since one thereby refrains from attending to it] the thought that had risen will also cease. When one practises and practises in this manner, for the mind the power to stand firmly established in its birthplace increases.

The verb he used here that I have translated as ‘investigate’ is விசாரி (vicāri), which in some contexts can mean enquire in the sense of ask, but in this context means enquire only in the sense of investigate. Asking questions is a mental activity, because it entails directing our attention away from ourself towards a question, which is a thought and hence other than ourself, so as long as we are asking questions we are still floating on the surface of the mind by attending to things other than ourself, whereas investigating ourself means being keenly self-attentive, which causes the mind to sink deep within and thereby return to its ‘birthplace’, the source from which it had risen, namely our real nature (ātma-svarūpa), which is our fundamental and ever-shining awareness of our own existence, ‘I am’.

Therefore what Bhagavan is pointing out in this passage is the direction in which we should send our attention. Instead of allowing our attention to go out following whatever thoughts may arise, we should turn it back towards ourself, the one to whom all thoughts appear. ‘To whom?’ is not intended to be a question that we should ask ourself but is a very powerful pointer indicating where we should direct our attention. Asking the question ‘to whom?’ may sometimes be an aid if it helps to remind us to turn our attention back towards ourself, but self-investigation (ātma-vicāra) is not merely asking such questions but only fixing our attention on ourself alone.

Another point worth noting here is that what Bhagavan means by ‘thought’ is anything other than our fundamental awareness ‘I am’, so it includes all perceptions, memories, feelings, ideas and other mental impressions of any kind whatsoever. As he says in the fourth paragraph of Nāṉ Ār?, ‘நினைவுகளைத் தவிர்த்து ஜகமென்றோர் பொருள் அன்னியமா யில்லை’ (niṉaivugaḷai-t tavirttu jagam eṉḏṟu ōr poruḷ aṉṉiyam-āy illai), ‘Excluding thoughts, there is not separately any such thing as world’, and in the fourteenth paragraph, ‘ஜக மென்பது நினைவே’ (jagam eṉbadu niṉaivē), ‘What is called the world is only thought’, so when he says here ‘பிற வெண்ணங்க ளெழுந்தால்’ (piṟa v-eṇṇaṅgaḷ eṙundāl), ‘If other thoughts rise’, or ‘ஒவ்வோ ரெண்ணமும் கிளம்பும்போதே’ (ovvōr eṇṇamum kiḷambum-pōdē), ‘As soon as each thought appears’, he means that if or as soon as anything other than ourself appears in our awareness, we should turn our attention back towards ourself, the one to whom all such things appear.

6. If we are vigilantly self-attentive, as we should try to be, we will thereby ward off both thoughts and sleep, but when we are tired we are naturally less vigilant, so we may then fall asleep as a result of our trying to be self-attentive

You ask, ‘Should I keep doing Self-Enquiry all day for hours in seated position? Should I continue the enquiry in bed as well before sleep? Or should I stop the enquiry from time to time to give some rest to the body?’ Firstly, self-investigation has nothing to do with the body, so we can practise it whether the body is lying, sitting, standing, walking or doing anything else. For the same reason, we do not have to stop being self-attentive in order to give some rest to the body, because being self-attentive cannot strain the body in any way. In fact, when the body and mind are resting is a very favourable condition for us to be self-attentive.

Regarding your question about continuing the practice in bed before sleep, that is also good, but since we are generally very tired at that time, we usually subside into sleep soon after trying to be self-attentive. There is no harm in that, because when we need to sleep we should sleep. There is no time and no circumstance that is not suitable for us to be self-attentive, so we should try to be self-attentive as much as possible whatever the time or circumstances may be, but we should not try to deprive ourself of however much sleep we may need.

If we are vigilantly self-attentive, as we should try to be, we will thereby ward off both thoughts and sleep, but when we are tired we are naturally less vigilant, so we may then fall asleep as a result of our trying to be self-attentive. As Sadhu Om often used to say, when we are sleepy we should sleep, because when we wake up again we will be fresh, and we should then make use of that freshness by trying to be vigilantly self-attentive.

I do not know whether anything I have written here is of any use to you, but I hope some of it at least may help to point you in the right direction.

7. What the word ‘I’ essentially refers to is only what is aware, so if we are just being aware of what is aware, we are thereby meditating on ‘I’

In reply to my first reply (which I adapted as the previous six sections) my friend wrote again about how he was trying to practise self-enquiry and the problems he was facing, in reply to which I wrote:

When you say ‘The practice of Self-Enquiry, especially in seated position (just being aware of awareness itself, not meditating in any object or form etc, simply just being, not even “I” in the “I am”) boosted my kundalini’, it is not clear to me what you are actually practising, because you say you are ‘just being aware of awareness itself’ but then seem to say that you are not meditating even on ‘I’. Meditating on ‘I’ means attending only to yourself, or in other words, just being self-attentive, so if you are not meditating on ‘I’, what do you mean by saying that you are ‘just being aware of awareness itself’?

In this context ‘awareness’ means what is aware, and what is aware is always aware of itself as ‘I’, so what the word ‘I’ essentially refers to is only what is aware. Therefore if you are not meditating on ‘I’, what is the ‘awareness’ that you are being aware of? Unfortunately ‘awareness’ is a potentially ambiguous term, because it could be taken to mean awareness in the sense of awareness of objects or phenomena, so when you are ‘just being aware of awareness itself’, are you just being aware of what is aware, namely yourself, or are you being aware of your awareness of objects or phenomena?

If you are being aware only of what is aware, namely yourself, then you are meditating on ‘I’. That is, what you are meditating on is not the word ‘I’, but what the word ‘I’ refers to, namely yourself, who are what is aware. If you are not meditating on what the word ‘I’ refers to, then whatever ‘awareness’ you are being aware of is something other than what is aware.

This is why Bhagavan gave us the powerful pointer ‘to whom’, about which I wrote in my previous reply. If we understand this pointer correctly, it is directing our attention back towards ourself, the one to whom all other things appear. In other words, it is pointing our attention back to what is aware, away from whatever we were hitherto aware of.

If you are aware of any phenomenon, such as the boosting of your kuṇḍalinī, your attention has been diverted away from yourself, so you need to turn it back to yourself, the one to whom all phenomena appear. If you turn your attention back to yourself and hold firmly to yourself (that is, if you just remain firmly self-attentive), whatever phenomena may have appeared will thereby disappear, because no phenomenon can appear or remain in your awareness unless you attend to it at least to a certain extent.

8. No matter what may distract us or seem a problem to us, let us not be concerned about them but just patiently and persistently continue trying to be self-attentive, unmindful of everything else

Regarding the boosting of your kuṇḍalinī you say, ‘By boosting I mean that I feel an energy in the spine passing through the chakras’, but the energy, the spine, the cakras and the energy’s movement are all objects or phenomena, so you should ignore all such things by trying to be keenly self-attentive. However much such things appear, they need not concern you. To whom do they appear? Only to you, so you should just persevere in trying to attend only to yourself.

Whatever may appear or disappear is other than ourself, so it should not interest or concern us. Such things distract us and become a problem for us only to the extent that we take interest in them or are concerned about them. Why should we be concerned about them? Our only concern should be to investigate and know what we ourself are. If we are not interested in or concerned about anything else, we will not attend to them, and hence they will not be a problem.

If we find ourself being concerned about such things and therefore distracted by them, that is due to the strength of our viṣaya-vāsanās, and the most effective means to weaken our viṣaya-vāsanās and thereby wean our mind off its interest in all other things is just to persevere in this simple practice of being self-attentive. Therefore, no matter what may distract us or seem a problem to us, let us not be concerned about them but just patiently and persistently continue trying to be self-attentive, unmindful of everything else.

https://happinessofbeing.blogspot.com/2021/05/can-self-investigation-boost-mind-or.html

Angelo Dillulo：

用于第一次覺醒的探究

引導第一次覺醒的探究是一件有趣的事情。我們想知道“如何”精確地進行這種探究，這是完全可以理解的。問題是，通過描述某種技術，它并不能被完全傳達。實際上，這是找到放下和意圖相遇的甜蜜點。我將在這里描述一種方法，但重要的是要記住，最終，你（作為你認為的自己）沒有能力讓自己覺醒。只有生命本身有這種力量。所以，當我們將自己投入某種探究或修行時，必須保持開放。我們必須保持對神秘和可能性的門戶開放。我們必須認識到，不斷地斷定“這不是，這也不是……”只是心智的活動。這些都是思維。如果我們相信任何一個思維，那么我們就會相信下一個，如此下去。然而，如果我們認識到，“哦，那種懷疑只是現在升起的一個思維”，那么我們就有機會認識到那個思維會自行消退……然而，“我”作為那個覺知到那個思維的，仍然在這里！我們現在可以對思維之間的這個間隙感到好奇：當沒有思維存在時，這種純粹的“我”的感覺是什么，這種純粹的覺知的感覺，純粹的存在的感覺？這種能夠照耀并照亮一個思維（就像它每天成千上萬次所做的），而當沒有思維時仍然照耀的光是什么？它是自我照耀的。是什么注意到思維的存在，在思維之前、期間和之后都處于清醒和覺知狀態，并且不被任何思維以任何方式改變？請理解，當你問這些問題時，你并不是在尋找一個思維的答案，答案就是體驗本身。

當我們開始允許注意力放松到這種更廣闊的視角中時，我們開始將自己從思維中解放出來。我們開始憑感覺、本能來認識無拘無束的意識的本質。這就是進入的方式。

起初，我們可能斷定這個間隙、這個無思維的意識是無趣的、不重要的。它感覺相當中性，而繁忙的心智對中性沒有辦法，所以我們可能傾向于再次故意引發思維。如果我們認識到“無趣、不重要、沒有價值”都是思維，并簡單地回到這種流動的意識中，它將開始擴展。但我們不需要去思考擴展或等待它。只要我們與之同在，它會自然而然地這樣做。如果你愿意識別每一個思維和心中的圖像，并將其視為這樣，并讓你的注意力警覺但放松地融入與“我”的感覺連續的思維的“物質”中，一切都會自行解決。只要愿意暫停評判。愿意放棄結論。愿意放下所有對自己進展的監控，因為這些都是思維。對純粹的體驗保持開放。只需一次又一次地回到這個沒有對象的意識之處，或純粹的“我是”之感。如果你愿意這樣做，它將以我見過的任何人都無法解釋的方式向你展示自己，但它比真實更真實。

旅途愉快。”

Inquiry for First Awakening

Inquiry for First Awakening

Taken from Awakening, Realization and Liberation https://www.facebook.com/groups/546474355949572/

Written by Angelo Gerangelo

Inquiry for First Awakening

The inquiry that leads to first awakening is a funny thing. We want to know “how” precisely to do that inquiry, which is completely understandable. The thing is that it’s not wholly conveyable by describing a certain technique. Really it’s a matter of finding that sweet spot where surrender and intention meet. I will describe an approach here, but it’s important to keep in mind that in the end, you don’t have the power (as what you take yourself to be) to wake yourself up. Only Life has that power. So as we give ourselves to a certain inquiry or practice it’s imperative that we remain open. We have to keep the portals open to mystery, and possibility. We have to recognize that the constant concluding that “no this isn’t it, no this isn’t it either...” is simply the activity of the mind. Those are thoughts. If we believe a single thought then we will believe the next one and on and on. If however we recognize that, “oh that doubt is simply a thought arising now,” then we have the opportunity to recognize that that thought will subside on its own... and yet “I” as the knower of that thought am still here! We can now become fascinated with what is here once that thought (or any thought) subsides. What is in this gap between thoughts? What is this pure sense of I, pure sense of knowing, pure sense of Being? What is this light that can shine on and illuminate a thought (as it does thousands of times per day), and yet still shines when no thought is present. It is self illuminating. What is the nature of the one that notices thoughts, is awake and aware before, during, and after a thought, and is not altered in any way by any thought? Please understand that when you ask these questions you are not looking for a thought answer, the answer is the experience itself.

When we start to allow our attention to relax into this wider perspective we start to unbind ourselves from thought. We begin to recognize the nature of unbound consciousness by feel, by instinct. This is the way in.

At first we may conclude that this gap, this thoughtless consciousness is uninteresting, unimportant. It feels quite neutral, and the busy mind can’t do anything with neutral so we might be inclined to purposely engage thoughts again. If we recognize that “not interesting, not important, not valuable” are all thoughts and simply return to this fluid consciousness, it will start to expand. But there is no need to think about expansion or watch for it. It will do this naturally if we stay with it. If you are willing to recognize every thought and image in the mind as such, and keep your attention alert but relaxed into the “stuff” of thought that is continuous with the sense of I, it will all take care of itself. Just be willing to suspend judgement. Be willing to forego conclusions. Be willing to let go of all monitoring of your progress, because these are all thoughts. Be open to the pure experience. Just return again and again to this place of consciousness with no object or pure sense of I Am. If you are willing to do this it will teach itself to you in a way that neither I nor anyone I’ve ever seen can explain, but it is more real than real.

Happy Travels.

请先看：

Please read this first (English): 

Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment