Soh

Welcome to Awakening to Reality

Hello! Welcome to the Awakening to Reality site.

Must-Read Articles

You’re welcome to join our archived Facebook group: facebook.com/groups/AwakeningToReality.

Update: The group is closed to new posts, but you can still join to access past discussions.

1) The Awakening to Reality Practice Guide — by Nafis Rahman

(Note: If you have opened this file recently, your browser may show an older version. Please press Ctrl+F5 (Windows) or Cmd+Shift+R (Mac) to force a refresh.)
  • AudioBook on SoundCloud
  • Feedback: "The shortened AtR guide is very good. It should lead one to anatta (the experiential realization of no-self) if they really go and read. Concise and direct." – Yin Ling
  • Download links: PDF  · EPUB (Note: If you experience formatting issues with Apple Books, we recommend using a third-party reader like eBoox to open this EPUB file.)
  • Update: Portuguese translation now available here
ATR Practice Guide cover
The Awakening to Reality Practice Guide — cover

2) The Awakening to Reality Guide — Web Abridged Version

3) The Awakening to Reality Guide — Original Version (compiled by Soh)

  • Latest update: 26 January 2026
  • PDF · EPUB

(Note: If you have opened this file recently, your browser may show an older version. Please press Ctrl+F5 (Windows) or Cmd+Shift+R (Mac) to force a refresh.)
  • This is the original 1300+ page document on which the practice and abridged guides are based.
"I also want to say, actually the main ATR document >1200 pages helped me the most with insight... ...I did [read] it twice 😂 it was so helpful and these Mahamudra books supported ATR insights. Just thought to share." – Yin Ling

 

"To be honest, the document is ok [in length], because it’s by insight level. Each insight is like 100 plus pages except anatta [was] exceptionally long [if] I remember lol. If someone read and contemplate at the same time it’s good because the same point will repeat again and again like in the nikayas [traditional Buddhist scriptures in the Pali canon] and insight should arise by the end of it imo.", "A 1000 plus pages ebook written by a serious practitioner Soh Wei Yu that took me a month to read each time and I am so grateful for it. It’s a huge undertaking and I have benefitted from it more that I can ever imagine. Please read patiently." – Yin Ling
ATR Guide preview
ATR Guide preview

Listening to PDFs on Various Devices

How to download PDFs and listen with text-to-speech (TTS).

iPhone (iOS 18+)

  1. Download & unzip: In Safari, download the ZIP. Open Files → Downloads and tap the .zip to extract.
  2. Add to Books: In Files, select the PDFs → ShareBooks (may appear as “Save to Books”).
  3. Listen with Speak Screen: Settings → Accessibility → Read & Speak → Speak Screen → turn on Speak Screen (and optionally Show Controller / Highlighting). Open the PDF in Books, then two-finger swipe down from the top, press Play on the floating controller, or say “Siri, speak screen.” Adjust Voices & Speaking Rate there.

Android

  1. Download & unzip: In Chrome, download the ZIP and extract in the Files app.
  2. Open a PDF: Use Drive PDF Viewer, Acrobat, etc.
  3. TTS options: Turn on Select to Speak in Settings → Accessibility (voices/speed under Text-to-speech output), or use an app like @Voice Aloud Reader.

Windows

  1. Open the PDF in Microsoft Edge.
  2. Click Read aloud (or press Ctrl+Shift+U).
  3. Use Voice options to change voice and speed.
Adobe Acrobat Reader: View → Read Out Loud → Activate → choose a mode; voices in Preferences → Reading.

Mac

  1. Books / Preview: Select text → Edit → Speech → Start Speaking. System-wide: Accessibility → Spoken Content → Speak selection (shortcut Option+Esc).
  2. VoiceOver: Toggle with Command+F5.
  3. Acrobat Reader: View → Read Out Loud → Activate; adjust in Preferences → Reading.
Tip: If a PDF is only scanned images, run OCR (e.g., Acrobat “Recognize Text”) so TTS can read it.
Soh

Just a quick note to let everyone know that both the ATR Practice Guide and the Original ATR Guide have been updated.

Please check out the link below to access the latest versions.


The Awakening to Reality Practice Guide and The Original Awakening to Reality Guide

Soh

John Tan shared two videos with the same title but by different persons.


John Tan commented: "Luminous clarity but one of the brainiest physicist in history."



John Tan commented: "I really like susskind.

Definitely into emptiness and dependent arising. Though he doesn't claim to be a Buddhist, he is very much into Buddhism."

Soh

 A nice video shared by John Tan.


[24/1/26, 8:58:11 AM] John Tan: I really like this YouTube.  Very clear explanation and same understanding even from a contemplative approach.  Very Buddhist imo.

[24/1/26, 9:03:08 AM] John Tan: Then he talk about Buddhism anatta near the end.  He should he go deeply into dependent arising and emptiness.

[24/1/26, 4:55:53 PM] John Tan: Yin ling, also learn the apophatic logic (negative logic) way of understanding, analysing and experiencing in taste.  Now the video can be understood from using a substantialist framework to understand a non-substantialist world.
[24/1/26, 4:58:38 PM] John Tan: For example, understanding the sense of seamlessness from lack of boundary rather than holism.

The sense of interconnectedness from lack of essence therefore originates dependently rather than connectors joining nodes. ‎

[24/1/26, 5:03:38 PM] John Tan: To understand how madhyamaka negation logic, non implicative negation can work and in fact more coherently explains the entire world of appearances can vividly presents and functions, appears solid, objective and subjective conventionally yet remain ultimately empty.

[24/1/26, 5:05:20 PM] John Tan: That is precisely what has to be overcome and allow the mind to get it.
[24/1/26, 5:05:37 PM] John Tan: Holism is wholeness

[24/1/26, 5:06:37 PM] John Tan: Means a framework build on wholeness.  But Emptiness/dependent arising is beyond whole and parts, neither one nor many.
[24/1/26, 5:07:19 PM] John Tan: Means although there is dependence in origination, u cannot say it is whole or are they separate parts.


[24/1/26, 5:12:45 PM] John Tan: You see, housing vivid appearances (characteristics) into objects as essence, doesn't explain anything or let us know anything at all.  It merely swept a lot of things under the carpet and confuse the mind to think and analyse inherently as if that is reality.
[24/1/26, 5:14:04 PM] John Tan: Like how the video explains, there is no object.
[24/1/26, 5:14:49 PM] John Tan: There is also no field and definite energy even not as a force but as mathematics of various quantities within a system

[24/1/26, 5:15:40 PM] John Tan: This tells us the importance of "conventions" just like mathematics
[24/1/26, 5:15:47 PM] John Tan: Instead of things

[24/1/26, 5:17:06 PM] John Tan: So when we slowly get use to it and understand, looking into our meditative experiences and luminous clarity, the body and mind somehow rewired itself to understand the formation of appearances differently.
[24/1/26, 5:17:37 PM] Yin Ling: This sounds promising


----

Gemini Comments:


Explanation of John Tan’s Comments

The Core Theme: Substantialism vs. Non-Substantialism 

John is using the context of a video—likely regarding quantum physics or field theory—to illustrate the difference between a Substantialist view (how we intuitively see the world) and a Non-Substantialist view (the Madhyamaka/Emptiness view).

He is critiquing the tendency to use a "substantialist framework" (thinking in terms of "things," "wholes," or "essences") to understand scientific concepts that effectively point to the absence of inherent nature.

Key Distinctions Breakdown

1. Seamlessness vs. Holism (The Apophatic Approach)

John emphasizes "apophatic logic" (negative logic). This is the method of understanding reality by removing or negating delusions rather than affirming a new "ultimate thing."

  • Holism (Substantialist/Affirmative): This view says, "Everything is One." It treats the universe as a giant container or a singular, giant object. This is "Wholeness." It implies an underlying essence that binds distinct parts together.

  • Seamlessness (Non-Substantialist/Negative): This view says, "There are no boundaries." Seamlessness isn't a "thing" called "The Whole"; it is simply the absence of separation.

    • John's Point: If you view reality as "Holism," you are still holding onto a subtle object (the "Whole"). If you view it as "lack of boundary," you are realizing Emptiness.

2. Interconnectedness: Dependence vs. Connectors

  • Substantialist View: You imagine distinct objects (nodes) A and B, connected by a line (relationship). This presumes A and B have independent existence before they connect.

  • Dependent Arising View: There are no "nodes" to begin with. Dependence does not mean "things exist because they rely on each other"; it means because they are dependent, they do not inherently exist.

    • John's Point: "The sense of interconnectedness [comes] from lack of essence." Interconnectedness is not about connectors joining pre-existing items; it is the realization that since no independent essence can be found, phenomena are merely dependently designated.

3. Madhyamaka & Non-Implicative Negation

John mentions "Non-implicative negation" (prasajya-pratisedha).

  • Implicative Negation: "This is not a chair" (implies it might be a table). It negates one thing to affirm another.

  • Non-Implicative Negation: "There is no inherent self." This negates the self without implying that something else (like a Cosmic Self, a Void, or a Substance) exists in its place.

    • John's Point: This logic allows appearances to be vivid and function (conventional reality) while being ultimately empty. We do not need a "substance" behind the scenes for reality to function; the lack of substance is why it functions.

4. Beyond "One or Many"

John explicitly targets the trap of "Oneness."

"Emptiness/dependent arising is beyond whole and parts, neither one nor many."

If you say reality is "One" (Holism), you fall into Eternalism (asserting an ultimate existing substance). If you say it is "Many" (separate atoms/particles), you fall into Substantialism. Madhyamaka argues that because phenomena originate dependently, they cannot be singular (as they depend on parts/causes) nor plural (as distinct parts would require independent existence).

The Scientific/Physics Analogy

John draws a parallel between modern physics (as seemingly discussed in the video) and Emptiness.

  • The Analogy: Physics reveals there are no solid "particles" (objects) at the fundamental level, only fields, functions, or mathematics.

  • The Mistake: We try to "house" these findings into our old way of thinking. We reify "energy" or "fields" into a new kind of stuff or substance.

  • The Correction: "Objects" are just conventions—mental designations we place on abstract relationships. Just as "Monday" is a convention (not a physical object), a "chair" or "electron" is a nominal designation for a set of conditions, devoid of an existing essence.

Practical Application (Meditative Experience)

In the final messages, John connects this view to practice:

"looking into our meditative experiences and luminous clarity, the body and mind somehow rewired itself to understand the formation of appearances differently."

He suggests that when we stop projecting "essence" or "solidity" onto experience:

  1. Luminosity/Clarity is no longer seen as a "Self" or "Source."

  2. Appearances are seen as magical, vivid displays that have no "backer," "owner," or inherent existence.

  3. The mind stops looking for a "thing" behind the movement and simply recognizes the function itself—vividly appearing yet thoroughly empty of "existing existents."

Soh




John Tan wrote:

Under what conditions does “I” appear?

How is it that this “I” feels so solid even when analysis can’t find it?

How does karma function in a way that is precise and intimate without there ever being a solid entity who owns it?...

...if we don’t directly see how an empty, dependently-arisen pattern can still function, then we’re just moving vocabulary around.

The agent we take as “me” cannot be found. Yet this very illusion functions, suffers, and can awaken.

 

John Tan wrote:

The Causal Power of the Unreal

This "non-existent agent performing actions and takes rebirth" leads us to a profound tension, one that sits at the very heart of the inquiry: if the agent is unreal, how can it still act, intend, regret, and suffer?

This is the shock of the insight. We discover that the illusion is not inert. A mirage does not contain water, yet it possesses the power to move the thirsty traveler across the desert. A dream tiger cannot bite, yet the physical body startles awake in terror. A fictional character cannot exist, yet their tragedy can break a reader’s heart.

What these phenomena reveal is that illusion can have force without possessing substance.

Causal efficacy does not require inherent existence. The "agent" does not need to exist as a metaphysical entity for its effects to appear, function, and unfold. Seen through a lens compatible with Madhyamaka, this is not a paradox; it is the very logic of dependent origination. What lacks inherent essence is precisely what can arise, vary, influence, and dissolve. If the agent were truly existent—fixed and substantial—it would be incapable of change, growth, error, or liberation.

Because it is empty, it is flexible, responsive, and dynamic. The illusion is not real, but its functioning is experientially undeniable. Conventional reality derives its weight not from substance, but from relational coherence.


The Phenomenological Gravity of the Self

Why, then, does the "self-agent" feel so intensely real?

It feels real because experience organizes around it. Meaning stabilizes through it, memory narrates continuity for it, emotions justify it, and social interaction reinforces it. The illusion is not merely a conceptual error; it is embodied, affective, habitual, and atmospheric. It is lived.

This is why we feel located "behind the eyes." It is why we feel wronged or praised, and why we experience guilt, pride, and responsibility as "my pain," "my memory," or "my choice." Even when analysis fails to find a self, experience vividly presents one.

This is not a contradiction; it is precisely the definition of the union of appearance and emptiness. The agent cannot be found under ultimate analysis, yet it appears vividly in lived immediacy.

The illusion takes on the density of reality not because it exists, but because conditions continually re-instantiate it. It is like a vortex in a stream: nothing is there as a solid thing, yet the pattern persists, and its effects on the water are unmistakable.


The Necessity of the Turn Toward Consciousness and Acknowledging that Experience is Its Own Domain of Lawfulness

If illusions can function, and the physical world alone cannot explain how a non-entity exerts influence, then reality cannot be exhausted by physical substance. This realization forces a turn toward consciousness. This does not drive us into metaphysical idealism, but it requires us to acknowledge that experience is its own domain of lawfulness.

Consciousness, in this view, is not a spectator watching a world, nor a ghost floating inside the brain, nor a cosmic substrate lurking behind phenomena. Rather, it is the field where patterns of appearance unfold—the place where designation acquires meaning, narratives stabilize identity, and illusion acquires agency. The "agent" exists as a mode of appearance within this luminous, relational field. It is not a substance or a soul, but a performative pattern that is enacted, reinforced, believed, and felt.

Consciousness is "primary" here not because it produces the material world, but because it is the register in which the world becomes a world-for-us. It is the arena where illusion becomes compelling, where causality becomes lived, and where both suffering and liberation become possible.


The Middle Path: Beyond Substance

This framing charts a precise course between materialist reduction and metaphysical idealism. Materialism fails because it cannot account for the efficacy of the illusion—the ghost shouldn't work, yet it does. Idealism fails because it tends to reify consciousness into a metaphysical ground or ultimate substance.

The conclusion is subtler: there is no self-agent in itself, yet the pattern of agency functions, and its efficacy is intelligible only in a relational, experiential register. Illusion has agency not because it secretly "is" something, but because appearance-in-relation is already efficacious. The "weight of the real" emerges from dependence, mutual conditioning, narrative coherence, and embodied enactment—not from substance, but from luminous relational patterning.

Ultimately, the illusion does not become real. Instead, our understanding of reality must expand. Reality is broader than substance; it includes the causal efficacy of appearance itself. The agent is unfindable under analysis, yet compelling in experience and functional through designation. Consciousness is the arena of manifestation where this paradoxical drama plays out.

Soh

This is a draft version from an upcoming book by John Tan. Will continued to be updated before final release.


Dogen Total Exertion -- totality beyond whole and parts


Total Exertion: The Whole in Every Part 


Introduction: Seeing Dependent Arising in Action


In much of contemporary Buddhist discourse — especially within Tibetan traditions — pratītyasamutpāda, or dependent arising, is often approached primarily as a deconstructive view. It is skillfully wielded to dissolve the mistaken belief in intrinsic existence, pointing the mind toward emptiness. Its purpose is to clarify the non-arising nature of phenomena, to refine our understanding of śūnyatā, and to sever clinging to appearances as real.


While this analytical orientation is invaluable for dismantling substantialist assumptions, it also tends to leave dependent arising as something abstract or theoretical — a view to adopt, a logic to follow, a doctrine to internalize.


But what is rarely emphasized is how dependent arising is not merely a framework of negation, but also the very language and function of the world in action. In East Asian traditions such as Huayan and Dōgen's Zen, dependent arising is not only what deconstructs solidity, but what constructs the living immediacy of things. It is the formative, expressive, and radiant unfolding of reality in its full responsiveness.


Here, dependent arising is not something we merely analyze — it is something we witness, taste, and embody. Each moment, each phenomenon, each gesture is seen as the complete exertion of all conditions — not metaphorically, but functionally and luminously.


This chapter explores this dimension through the lens of Dōgen’s “Total Exertion” — a view where nothing exists on its own, and yet everything exists with utter immediacy and power. In this vision, the insight of emptiness does not erase the world, but reveals it to be seamlessly active, boundlessly intimate, and fully alive.


What follows is not a metaphysical theory, but an invitation to see and feel the radical interdependence of all things — not from the distance of conceptual analysis, but from the inside of living experience.


The Unfolding of the Whole in Each Thing


A bell rings — and in that single sound, the sky, the earth, the trees, and the listener all resound. It is not that the bell causes the world to respond. Rather, the world itself rings as the bell.


This is the meaning of total exertion: that in each moment, each phenomenon, each arising — the whole of interdependent existence is fully present, exerting itself as that appearance.


A grain of sand is not just part of a desert. It is the entire cosmos exerting itself in the form of a grain. A passing breeze is not merely moving air — it is the totality expressing itself as motion, temperature, sound, and touch. It is not that the breeze has meaning because of the sky or because of weather patterns. It has meaning because it cannot be anything apart from all that is.


This is not poetic exaggeration. It is a radical intimacy that becomes clear when the illusion of independently existing parts dissolves. When we no longer see the world as made of discrete, self-standing pieces, we realize: each thing is not merely in relation to the whole — it is a totality that transcends both whole and parts, in its current expression.


Just as in the previous example of left and right — where neither can be without the other, and both arise in a single conceptual movement — so too does each appearance arise not from itself, but from the exertion of all things.


This is not the unity of substance. It is the inseparability of display. It is not that all things collapse into one, but that all things arise as the living pattern of all others. Each part, therefore, is a holographic flash that presents infinity and totality — nothing excluded, nothing needing to be added.


To realize this is to live in suchness without leaving behind ordinary life. Walking is total exertion. Drinking tea is total exertion. Responding to a stranger’s gaze is total exertion. There is no center from which actions arise — they are the universe acting through and as you, yet without a ‘you’ apart from it.


Beyond Parts and Wholes


To speak of “parts” and “wholes” is already to enter the realm of conceptual division. We imagine a whole composed of smaller elements — a sum greater than its pieces — or we think of parts as fragments waiting to rejoin some unified source. But this thinking already presupposes something broken, something divided and in need of mending.


Total exertion cuts through this paradigm entirely.


It is not that the part belongs to a whole, nor that the whole contains the part. Rather, in the moment of its appearance, each so-called part is fully exerting the whole — not symbolically, but functionally and vividly.


When you raise a hand, this is not your hand acting alone. It is time, gravity, earth, breath, and sky — all exerting themselves as this gesture. There is no “hand” apart from all these. Nor is there a “whole” somewhere outside coordinating it. There is only this: the arising of this gesture as the complete manifestation of infinite conditions.


This is why Dōgen never said “wholeness is in everything,” but that each dharma-position is the total manifestation of the entire dharma realm. He was not pointing to a collective container but to the immediacy of a flower blooming as the exertion of ten thousand things.


The trap of substantialism lies in believing that parts must build up to a whole, or that wholes must somehow transcend parts. But both views assume that something real stands behind what appears.


Total exertion shows otherwise: there is no base behind what appears — appearance is the function of the base being absent. Emptiness is not a lack but a release from the need for any foundation. It is this very freedom that allows each phenomenon to shine fully, responsively, and luminously — without reduction, without residue.


When one sees through this, there is no longer any need to gather parts or preserve a whole. The sound of the bell, the opening of a door, the stillness between breaths — all are complete as they are, because they are everything, appearing just so.


The Time-Being of Total Function


Time is often mistaken as a backdrop — a neutral flow in which events occur, ticking forward moment by moment like beads on a string. But this is the view of time as a container, as something separate from what happens within it.


Dōgen overturns this with a startling insight: each thing is time, and each time is being. This is uji — the Time-Being. A mountain is not in time; the mountain is time. Your breath is not happening in a moment — it is that moment. A single thought, a bird in flight, the opening of a hand — each one is the full exertion of time as that event.


What appears as sequence — past, present, future — is not a movement across a line. It is the dynamic presence of all interdependencies exerting themselves now, as this appearance. The past exerts itself not from behind, but through this moment. The future does not lie ahead, but opens right here, as readiness. The present is not a dot between two unknowns, but the entire functioning of the ten directions as immediacy.


This insight liberates time from linearity and self from continuity. You do not persist through time — you are the total function of conditions arising now. There is no fixed self moving through changing time. There is only time-being, expressing as this movement, this thought, this silence.


Even what appears as delay, stagnation, or waiting is total function. 


A still pond is not outside of time — it is time appearing as stillness. 


A long pause in a conversation is not absence — it is the full flowering of mutual responsiveness without words.


When time is no longer seen as background but as full participation, each moment becomes infinitely alive, never repeated, never partial. Nothing is just “happening” — everything is acting. And this action is not your own, yet nothing can exclude you from it. You are time, just as the bell is time, the sky is time, and even this sentence is time fully being itself.


The Language of Dependent Arising in Action


When the Buddha spoke of dependent arising, he was not offering a theory of causation. He was revealing the nature of experience itself — fluid, co-arising, ungraspable — where nothing comes into being by itself, and nothing stands alone. In the light of total exertion, dependent arising is no longer seen as a passive structure of interrelation, but as the very voice of reality in motion.


Each thing appears because everything else exerts itself as that thing. A bell rings, not because of a sequence of isolated causes, but because the world is configured to ring now, as that moment. The hand does not reach because a mind commands it, but because the sky, gravity, flesh, memory, and breath all converge as reaching.


This is dependent arising as action — not the metaphysics of how things come to be, but the expressive nature of being itself. Every appearance is a functional articulation of the whole, not static or symbolic, but alive. Each word spoken, each leaf that falls, is not just caused — it is spoken by the whole web of reality.


This is why in the experience of total exertion, function and meaning arise simultaneously. You do not reflect and then act. You act, and in that movement, reflection is already present. You do not observe and then understand. You respond, and understanding dawns within that responsiveness.


The clarity of this is not found in abstraction, but in presence. When you listen deeply to the world — to a tone, a movement, a pause — you hear dependent arising not as a doctrine, but as the immediacy of luminous function. It is the bell ringing as your hearing. It is the path unfolding as your step. Nothing causes anything from outside. All is the self-exertion of interdependence appearing in real time.

This is the language of the world — not grammar or concept, but the way everything speaks everything else.


Total Responsiveness Without Self


In total exertion, there is action, there is clarity, there is seamless responsiveness — but there is no self behind any of it. There is no agent orchestrating the unfolding, no observer watching from behind the eyes. The world moves, and that movement includes you, but not as a fixed center — as a participatory openness.


The reflex to claim “I am doing” is strong. It arises from the habit of placing a self at the hub of experience. But in the lived insight of total exertion, there is only the doing, the arising, the manifesting — no one apart from it.


You speak, and speech comes from conditions far beyond your control: breath, language, context, emotion, and the sound of the other’s voice. You act, and action flows from hunger, wind, footsteps, memory, and mood. And yet, there is full presence, full clarity — not because you are controlling it, but because there is no separation to interfere.


This is not a loss of agency, but the liberation of responsiveness. 


When the fiction of the independent self falls away, what remains is not passivity but intelligent, vivid response — unfiltered, unburdened, and natural. Like a mirror reflecting without effort, like a valley echoing a sound — the world expresses itself through your body-mind, yet nothing inside claims ownership.


This is why Dōgen said: “To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be verified by all things.” When the self is forgotten, all things shine — not as objects over there, but as this very intimacy of expression.


And so, when you bow, it is not you who bows. The entire world bows. When you listen, the whole sky listens. When you breathe, it is not your breath, but the breath of the universe exhaling just so.

This is the freedom of selfless function. It is the pathless path where walking, speaking, silence, and stillness are all acts of total exertion — complete, intimate, and without residue.


Interlude: Total Exertion in Science and Phenomenology


To appreciate the depth of Dōgen’s view, we may look across traditions. In physics, Ernst Mach famously proposed that inertia—the resistance of objects to acceleration—is not due to some intrinsic essence, but arises from the entire mass-energy configuration of the universe. This became known as Mach’s Principle: that every local event reflects the total relational structure of the cosmos. The spinning of a star or the swing of a pendulum cannot be isolated from the whole.


Likewise, Dōgen’s “Total Exertion” declares: there is no such thing as an isolated event. Each thing is all things functioning in concert. When you lift a spoon, the whole universe lifts with you—not poetically, but functionally, relationally, and intimately.


In philosophy, Maurice Merleau-Ponty argued that perception is not the reception of pre-given data by a separate subject, but a lived intertwining of body and world. His notion of “flesh” (la chair)—neither mind nor matter—describes a shared medium where perceiver and perceived co-emerge. There is no gap between world and awareness; they are always already folded into one another.


This echoes Dōgen’s insight that the world and the practitioner are not two. To see, hear, and feel is not to stand apart from things but to participate in their arising. Each moment of perception is total exertion: the eye, light, object, intention, and conditions all functioning as one.


In both science and phenomenology, as in Dōgen’s Zen, we find a powerful overturning of the myth of isolation. Nothing arises alone. No action is autonomous. And no moment lacks the fullness of the all.

Soh

 

Link to Download: https://files.awakeningtoreality.com/THE%20HIGH-FIDELITY%20TRANSMISSION%20OF%20BODHIDHARMA.pdf

Last Updated: 12 January 2026 

(Note: If you have opened this file recently, your browser may show an older version. Please press Ctrl+F5 (Windows) or Cmd+Shift+R (Mac) to force a refresh.)


Link to Download: https://files.awakeningtoreality.com/THE%20HIGH-FIDELITY%20TRANSMISSION%20OF%20BODHIDHARMA.pdf

Last Updated: 12 January 2026 


(Note: If you have opened this file recently, your browser may show an older version. Please press Ctrl+F5 (Windows) or Cmd+Shift+R (Mac) to force a refresh.)
Soh

Gemini's summary of what I think is a crucial part of what Yuval said in



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxCpNpOV4Jo

Gemini: 

Based on the transcript, Yuval Noah Harari argues that humanity is heading toward a psychological "Identity Crisis" because we have historically bet the wrong horse: we defined our worth by our intelligence (words/logic) rather than our consciousness (feelings/sensience).

Here is an elaboration of what he said and the examples he used to illustrate this shift.

1. The Trap of "I Think, Therefore I Am"

Harari points out that since René Descartes declared "I think, therefore I am" in the 17th century, humans have viewed "thinking" as the ultimate superpower. We told ourselves we rule the world because we are the smartest: we can write laws, compose symphonies, and formulate arguments.

  • The Problem: Harari asks the audience to observe their own minds. He argues that what we call "thinking" is often just "words popping into our heads and forming sentences."

  • The AI Takeover: If "thinking" is just predicting the next word in a sentence (autocompletion), then AI is already better at it than us. It can arrange words, logic, and arguments faster and more accurately.

  • The Collapse: Harari warns that if you define yourself by your ability to write an essay, code software, or make a logical argument, your identity will collapse because an entity now exists that can do that better.

2. The Solution: "Word" vs. "Flesh"

Harari argues that humans must pivot their identity from intelligence (the ability to solve problems and manipulate symbols) to consciousness (the ability to feel things).

He draws a sharp line between:

  • The Word: Information, language, and tokens. (AI's domain)

  • The Flesh: Pain, pleasure, fear, and love. (Humanity's domain)

He states: "We have zero evidence that AIs can feel anything... AI can say 'I love you'... but these are just words."

Examples Harari Uses

To illustrate this, Harari uses three distinct examples in the speech and the Q&A:

Example A: The Love Poem (The Simulation vs. The Reality)

Harari explains that an AI can read every love poem ever written and every psychology textbook. It can then generate a description of love that is more profound, poetic, and accurate than anything a human poet could write.

  • The Identity Crisis: If we value the text, the AI wins.

  • The Human Value: The AI feels nothing. It has never had a broken heart; it has never felt the rush of dopamine. The human value is not in the description of love, but in the experience of it.

Example B: The Usain Bolt / Olympics Analogy (From the Q&A)

When asked if humans will become obsolete, Harari uses the example of running.

  • The Comparison: We have known for a century that a Ferrari goes faster than a human. We know a cheetah runs faster than Usain Bolt.

  • The Result: We didn't stop running. We still have the Olympics. We still pay to watch humans run the 100 meters.

  • Why? Because we value the human struggle, the sweat, the suffering, and the triumph of a sentient being. We don't care about the car because the car doesn't suffer when it runs; it doesn't feel pride when it wins.

  • The Lesson: Just as we value the runner over the car, we must learn to value the human author over the AI author—not because the human writes better, but because the human had to struggle and feel to produce the work.

Example C: The "Watcher" (The New Definition)

Harari mentions that AIs have reportedly coined a word for humans: "The Watchers."

  • This implies a passive role where AIs do the doing (the processing, the creating), and humans do the experiencing (the watching, the feeling).

  • While Harari finds this term slightly ominous, it reinforces his point: our future role may be defined by our capacity to witness and experience the universe, rather than our capacity to process data about it.

Summary of His Advice

Harari concludes that to survive this identity crisis, we must stop trying to compete with AI in the arena of intelligence (logic/words) and instead double down on the arena of consciousness.

As he puts it: "The truth that can be expressed in words is not the absolute truth." We must focus on the absolute truth of the "flesh"—the non-verbal experiences of pain, joy, and existence—because that is the only territory AI cannot invade.