Posts
Geovani Geo there is the way of de-construction from analysis where one analyses and understands that "named things" are empty and "non-arisen" but still, one may not directly taste that empty clarity even after clearly understanding it conceptually. We must ask y is it so.
So, my question is:
1. How can the understanding that conceptual notions are empty "SUDDENLY" lead to direct authentication of one's empty "clarity/awareness"? Or it does or does not affect one's "clarity/awareness"?
2. If it does not, then what is the purpose of such contemplations?
3. If we want to authenticate "clarity" directly, don't you find the neti neti way to self enquiry of "who am I" a much more direct and intuitive approach?
4. How do 1 and 3 differ from ATR anatta enquiry of:
In hearing, there is just sound, no hearer;
In seeing, there is just colors and shapes, no seer;
All the above r ways of deconstructing conceptual constructs, but they lead to different results. Clearly understanding which de-constructing technique lead to what "result" is crucial.
*** It has to do with whether we r deconstructing the "SYNTAX/STRUCURE" or the "SEMANTICS/MEANING" that is associated to conceptual notion but will not go into it.
61 Comments
Yin Ling
Can u give answers John? Ahaha
- Reply
- 1d
John Tan
Yin Ling I think good to contemplate and look into one's experience.
As
long as we don't go in with any pre-conceived ideas about what results
will the various ways of de-constructing techniques yield, the
relationship between experiences and the techniques of deconstruction
become quite Intuitive and predictable.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
Yin Ling
John Tan ya.
I
find 1) bring myself to “emptiness” insight when suddenly I intuit the
whole sofa is itself a designation and the designation doesn’t lie
elsewhere . The understanding comes suddenly .
2) I don’t know 
3) who am I bring one face to face with the mind, not its nature like 1) .. it’s a differnt insight imo
4)
this inquiry is to realize anatta. At 3) someone might see the mind and
phenomena as one but not understanding “no-self”- that there was no
split from the start, but it was ignorance that create an artificial
split- hence “just the sound”..
4) Might or might not intuit 1) but things starts to get really trippy haha.
I am not sure! I’m just guessing hence need some answers
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
Soh Wei Yu
My take
1)
In greg goode direct path, the conceptual notions and constructs of
physicality and objectivity is deconstructed even at the I AM phase
prior to collapse of witness
In
this path, objects and physicality become deconstructed into arisings
within witnessing awareness, even before witness collapses.
This leaves the subjective pole undeconstructed until much later.
(Their
path: coarse Witnessing with personality undeconstructed > subtle
Witness or opaque witness with personality and objectivity deconstructed
> collapse of witness into pure consciousness (aka one mind) >
finally even consciousness dissolve (no mind?))
3) will lead to dissociation and I AM. But neti neti is needed for self enquiry and I AM realization.
4) deconstructs subjective pole, leading to direct realization and taste of radiance as all manifestations. Aka anatta
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
John Tan
Soh Wei Yu how does insight of "I Am" got triggered via such method of seeing through "named things"?
- Reply
- 1d
Soh Wei Yu
To me I AM is triggered from self enquiry, not deconstruction. Seeing through named things is more on deconstruction
- Reply
- 1d
John Tan
Soh Wei Yu so u r saying 1 will not lead to realization of "clarity" but just mere release of mental suffering?
- Reply
- 1d
Soh Wei Yu
If
the deconstruction of all conceptual notions goes along with meditation
into a state of cessation of concepts, there is also a possibility of
discovering pure awareness / I AM. Doesn’t have to be self enquiry. Like
sim pern chong got there by breathing meditation, some people through
psychedelics, some people through yoga, kundalini etc
- Reply
- 1d
John Tan
Soh Wei Yu
yes but not necessarily until total cessation of concepts, however at a
much later phase of de-construction. The insight by then will be much
clearer and stable imo though it comes at a later phase of
de-constructing. I m more interested in how and why.
- Reply
- 1d
Soh Wei Yu
As
for 2) i think 1) can be a kind of release on mental level even if
anatta isn’t realised. Greg goode said that by the time he reached
transparent witness he was free of mental suffering.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
John Tan
Soh Wei Yu what is opaque witness? Free of mental suffering is true.
- Reply
- 1d
Soh Wei Yu
Sorry
wrote wrong. Opaque witness first followed by transparent witness. He
became free from mental suffering at transparent witness:
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
AMAZON.SG
After Awareness: The End of the Path
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 1d
James Bird Demik
Soh Wei Yu which are free to read if you have azon unlimited
- Reply
- 23h
Geovani Geo
Thanks
for the detailed question that lead me to a deeper line of inquiry. I
must start with #4. What I am going to say is NOT some kind of a
criticism towards AtR at all. I am pretty sure there are several types
of mind that resonate fully with the AtR 7 stages. As for me, I have a
few problems. For example, regarding Anatta and Maha, I am unable to see
them as stages. How could someone say that has realized Anatta but
feels as if action or volition are still issuing from an entity or a
centre? As I see it, if that is the case, then very simply Anatta was
not fully realized.
Another
'issue' is at the initial stages. The problem there is quite
'personal'. The thing is that what is called 'I am stage' conflicts with
an experience I had as a young kid, that I have no other way to call it
but 'I am' also. But these 2 'I am', the AtR and my experiencing, are
different. In my case, at an age that was certainly less then 7, for I
was not in school yet by the time we lived at that town, was as follows:
"I
suddenly realized that something was looking out from behind these eyes
that was from 'inside out', unlike all other beings in the whole
universe that where seen form 'outside'. And I knew that this could be
realized by anyone who would care to look at it".
And
I felt it deeply as an 'I am'. But, of course, it was a split 'I am',
for such seeing was looking at an outside world. Nonetheless, something
absolutely genuine, undeniable, was at play there that ignited my
'quest' for truth - way of speaking.
Having
said that, as a beginning of my answer to your question, I would say
that de-construction can start from the objective or subjective side.
Later more...
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
John Tan
Geovani Geo thks for the answers but don't quite get what u r trying to convey...haha
- Reply
- 1d
Geovani Geo
John Tan.
Well, for the time being I am just saying that I am unable to answer
your #4 question: "How do 1 and 3 differ from ATR anatta enquiry. But I
will look closely at,
"In hearing, there is just sound, no hearer;
In seeing, there is just colors and shapes, no seer",
and try to understand the proper context of your question.
- Reply
- 1d
Geovani Geo
John Tan.
"there is the way of de-construction from analysis where one analyses
and understands that "named things" are empty and "non-arisen" but
still, one may not directly taste that empty clarity even after clearly
understanding it conceptually. We must ask y is it so."
Because
the de-construction is not complete. There may still remain a sense of
inner versus outer or this versus that. One may see that named things
are empty "out there", as objects, but fail to see that the "inner" has
not been de-constructed and is being taken as an subjective side.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
John Tan
Geovani Geo
I still don't get the linkage. If I deconstruct "chair", "car", "cause
and effect"...etc, how does it eventually lead to direct authentication
of one's radiance clarity? I m not saying it won't, but where and what
that "linkage"?
- Reply
- 1d
Geovani Geo
John Tan, yes, I understand, you are trying to follow my train of logic and thought.
The
"linkage" is there because you don't just deconstruct "chair", "car",
the so-called outside things. You also deconstruct any and all
fabrications involving a separate centre, like sensations, feelings,
thoughts, etc. So, if nothing is left as some kind of an observer, you
are left AS the whole enchilada that is self-shining.
- Reply
- 1d
Geovani Geo
And such "shining light" is also linked with "emptiness".
- Reply
- 1d
John Tan
Geovani Geo yes. In addition to self-luminous presence from thorough de-construction of "named things", any other insights?
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
Geovani Geo
John Tan,
yes. The most subtle and 'powerful' perhaps: emptiness. One of the
connotations or corollary of the realization of 'emptiness' is that
appearances are spontaneous, that it all could not happen in any other
way... naturally. Just like gravity, or the flow of a river downwards.
- Reply
- 1d
Geovani Geo
John, when you say,
"clearly understanding which de-constructing technique lead to what "result" is crucial",
are you implying that there is not an ultimate realization that may be arrived at through several different approaches?
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
John Tan
Geovani Geo
If u ask r we our thoughts? No coz thoughts come and go, but obviously
we do not come and go. Likewise we r not our heart, our body, our
thoughts, our sensations..we kept disassociating from all these
appearances until we come to a point where the mind becomes completely
still and is simply aware of ITSELF. Such negation technique result in
the direct face to face authenication of one's clarity but do not
recognize the nature of appearances.
In
contrast to the above negation technique, u can also contemplate along
the line of 4, i.e, negating self and realised there is zero distant,
zero gap between appearances (thoughts, sensations, sounds, smells,
colors....etc) and trigger the insight of all appearances as one's empty
clarity.
The
former leads to disassociation from appearances while the latter is
full embracement. Different technique, different realization, different
result.
- Reply
- 1d
Geovani Geo
John Tan, got it. But, ultimately, can not both approaches can lead to the same thing?
If
neti-neti is taken to its ultimate consequences any distance from
seeming objects is zero-ed. If all and anything perceived is not "I",
then "I" am nothing and suchness is what is appearing. Nothing is
everything. Fragmentation ended.
If,
OTOH, one goes through "perceptions only perceiving", such perceiving
is source-less. You are left with appearances likewise. Fragmentation
ended.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
John Tan
Geovani Geo
possibly but u must explain what do u mean by "taken to its ultimate
consequences" like how u start from thorough disassociation of neti
neti, what makes the u-turned into total embracement using the same
technique.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
Geovani Geo
By
"ultimate consequences" I mean that with the neti-neti approach often
he "perceiver" is quite difficult to completely be seen through,
although one understands that any residue "inside" is also neti-neti.
Failure
to go all the way through "ultimate consequences" may leave the residue
as some self standing eternal entity, namely, as in neo-advaita is
called Awareness.
- Reply
- 1d
Geovani Geo
John Tan asks, "what makes the U-turned into total embracement"?
Because
taken to its ultimate consequences, the source-less perceiving imply in
nothingness, like the analogy of "space". And by being nothing I am
everything.
- Reply
- 1d
John Tan
Geovani Geo
yes that is one point, but how and y the total embracement of
appearances? Do take note that even when witness is deconstructed, it
may not be a u-turned into embracement of appearances but into a state
of total oblivion or a state of impersonality or no-doership. There is
no effortless and insubstantial non-dual insight.
- Reply
- 1d
Geovani Geo
John Tan, what is the difference between "u-turn into embracement of appearances" and "state of impersonality or no-doership"?
- Reply
- 1d
John Tan
Geovani Geo
impersonality is a total surrender where u let go even of the witness
and being lived by life. Non-doership is state of effortless flowing as
there is no-self. Both does not lead to insight that appearances are
one's radiance clarity so simply negating witness does not necessarily
lead to embracement of appearances. Coalescence of emptiness and
appearances require more than that.
- Reply
- 1d
Geovani Geo
John Tan, ...or perhaps less. 
I don't think that the coalescence of emptiness and appearances can be
arrived at through some method. The very 'notion' of emptiness is
crucial end tricky. I say it is tricky because one can make 'something'
out of it, a kind of subtle substantiation. And its crucial because it
is emptiness that gives coalescence, equalizes all.
I don't think that the coalescence of emptiness and appearances can be
arrived at through some method. The very 'notion' of emptiness is
crucial end tricky. I say it is tricky because one can make 'something'
out of it, a kind of subtle substantiation. And its crucial because it
is emptiness that gives coalescence, equalizes all.- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
Geovani Geo
John Tan,
and more than that, one realizes that what is, is self-perfecting. I
really dont see such realization possible as a consequence of anything
'else' - like a system or method of contemplation. Just my opinion.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
John Tan
Geovani Geo
I don't buy into that. Lol. I think that is a misconception of
self-perfection. Awakening does not happen through confused views. Also
just my opinion.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
Geovani Geo
John Tan,
if its not self-perfecting, who or what is able to perfect it? Some
"other"? "God"? The meditator? Then perfection would be a consequence, a
result of some cause. Makes no sense.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
John Tan
Geovani Geo
I m not denying self and natural perfection. I m saying
self-perfection does not means any path, anything goes and anyhow will
still lead to same result. That is complete mis-interpretation.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
Geovani Geo
John Tan,
but now you are regarding a time-bound "self-perfecting" as a means to
go from here to there. From one state to another better state. I am not
looking at it in such manner.
- Reply
- 1d
John Tan
Geovani Geo
u have completely mistaken the natural state from the conventional.
What de-constructed is the conventional, no attempt is made to make
suchness more suchness.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
Geovani Geo
John Tan,
but that is what I said above! In the conventional "perfecting" is from
one state to another, from not-so-perfect towards a more perfect. That
is the conventional. It is looking at the other shore as if there where
different shores, right? We are so used to methods and systems that we
think that the Path is to move from here to there. Its a conditioned
view. Actually, the Path is never other then the one under our feet. No?
- Reply
- 1d
Geovani Geo
At
one point there is no other shore to get at, there are no two shores.
Is this not the quantum leap, the immediate no-otherness?
- Reply
- 1d
John Tan
Geovani Geo
if u feel totally ok with such understanding, there is no point in
discussing further and it is about time for me to sleep also..haha.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
Geovani Geo
John Tan,
there is absolutely no claim here of attainment of some 'state' of
being OK. I am what I am at the moment I am writing stuff. As I wrote
that, above, yes... It felt just like that, really OK: no other shore to
be attained is arriving at the other shore.
Circumstances change and the scenario changes.
It was our - as you called it - discussion that led me to that specific "place".
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
John Tan
Geovani Geo In self-arising wisdom, there only spontaneous presence and natural perfection; but,
If
there is mind even in the most minuest sense, there will be knowing,
there will be apprehension, there will be grasping and there will be
division. Hence everything orginates in dependence, everything is
empty;
And as long as there is mind,
"Self" and "otherness" orginate in dependence -- that is self-perfecting;
View, path and result originate in dependence -- that is self-perfecting;
Cause and effect orginate in dependence -- that is self-perfecting;
If
we r still in a state of mind (relative) even in the minuest sense and
sprouting glamorously "no practice, no path and and no result" that is
just deluding oneself into self-perfection.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
Chris Wilson
1.I don't like my answer to this.. I can't articulate it. Edit: looking more at the question... I don't know
3.
yes because it gives things to look at and investigate and to see that
it can't be that and eventually lead to a complete frustration of all
thought the mind can present for an answer to the point of surrender of
control to actually experience the clarity.
4.
The investigation is deconstructing the internal.. the point of
reference.. rather than looking for the internal that the external is
found in. It feels like the point of reference getting thrown out to
everywhere and nowhere for I to land or everywhere for it to land.
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
Chris Wilson
4 is not very clear for me... just what I think coming from brief experiences
- Reply
- 1d
John Tan
Chris Wilson my conversations with Geovani Geo may answer some of ur questions.
- Reply
- 1d
Chris Wilson
Thank you... my bad this isn't AtR... just saw some of the usual suspects 
- Reply
- 1d
John Tan
Chris Wilson haha yeah. I m not in ATR group.
Reply
John Tan, lets continue with this new thread, please. Its just that my PC does not follow long sub-threads, so it becomes hard to find your comments. Also, sorry for deviating the main subject. My mind goes crazy sometimes.
so, you where saying:
"In self-arising wisdom, there only spontaneous presence and natural perfection; but,
If there is mind even in the most minuest sense, there will be knowing, there will be apprehension, there will be grasping and there will be division. Hence everything orginates in dependence, everything is empty;
And as long as there is mind, "Self" and "otherness" orginate in dependence -- that is self-perfecting;
View, path and result originate in dependence -- that is self-perfecting;
Cause and effect orginate in dependence -- that is self-perfecting;
If we r still in a state of mind (relative) even in the minuest sense and sprouting glamorously "no practice, no path and and no result" that is just deluding oneself into self-perfection."
' xlink:href='%23b'/%3e%3cuse fill='black' filter='url(%23c)' xlink:href='%23b'/%3e%3cpath fill='url(%23d)' d='M5.333 12.765c0 .137.094.235.25.235.351 0 .836-.625 2.417-.625s2.067.625 2.417.625c.156 0 .25-.098.25-.235C10.667 12.368 9.828 11 8 11c-1.828 0-2.667 1.368-2.667 1.765'/%3e%3cuse fill='url(%23e)' xlink:href='%23f'/%3e%3cuse fill='black' filter='url(%23g)' xlink:href='%23f'/%3e%3cpath fill='%234E506A' d='M4.616 7.986c.128.125.136.372.017.551-.12.178-.32.222-.448.096-.128-.125-.135-.372-.017-.55.12-.179.32-.222.448-.097zm6.489 0c.128.125.136.372.018.551-.12.178-.32.222-.45.096-.127-.125-.134-.372-.015-.55.119-.179.319-.222.447-.097z'/%3e%3cpath fill='url(%23h)' d='M4.157 5.153c.332-.153.596-.219.801-.219.277 0 .451.119.55.306.175.329.096.401-.198.459-1.106.224-2.217.942-2.699 1.39-.301.28-.589-.03-.436-.274.154-.244.774-1.105 1.982-1.662zm6.335.087c.099-.187.273-.306.55-.306.206 0 .469.066.801.219 1.208.557 1.828 1.418 1.981 1.662.153.244-.134.554-.435.274-.483-.448-1.593-1.166-2.7-1.39-.294-.058-.371-.13-.197-.459z'/%3e%3cpath fill='url(%23i)' d='M13.5 16c-.828 0-1.5-.748-1.5-1.671 0-.922.356-1.545.643-2.147.598-1.258.716-1.432.857-1.432.141 0 .259.174.857 1.432.287.602.643 1.225.643 2.147 0 .923-.672 1.671-1.5 1.671'/%3e%3cpath fill='url(%23j)' d='M13.5 13.606c-.328 0-.594-.296-.594-.66 0-.366.141-.613.255-.852.236-.498.283-.566.339-.566.056 0 .103.068.339.566.114.24.255.486.255.851s-.266.661-.594.661'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e){kind=small}
' xlink:href='%23b'/%3e%3cuse fill='black' filter='url(%23c)' xlink:href='%23b'/%3e%3cpath fill='url(%23d)' d='M3 8.008C3 10.023 4.006 14 8 14c3.993 0 5-3.977 5-5.992C13 7.849 11.39 7 8 7c-3.39 0-5 .849-5 1.008'/%3e%3cpath fill='url(%23e)' d='M4.541 12.5c.804.995 1.907 1.5 3.469 1.5 1.563 0 2.655-.505 3.459-1.5-.551-.588-1.599-1.5-3.459-1.5s-2.917.912-3.469 1.5'/%3e%3cpath fill='%232A3755' d='M6.213 4.144c.263.188.502.455.41.788-.071.254-.194.369-.422.371-.78.011-1.708.255-2.506.612-.065.029-.197.088-.332.085-.124-.003-.251-.058-.327-.237-.067-.157-.073-.388.276-.598.545-.33 1.257-.48 1.909-.604a7.077 7.077 0 00-1.315-.768c-.427-.194-.38-.457-.323-.6.127-.317.609-.196 1.078.026a9 9 0 011.552.925zm3.577 0a8.953 8.953 0 011.55-.925c.47-.222.95-.343 1.078-.026.057.143.104.406-.323.6a7.029 7.029 0 00-1.313.768c.65.123 1.363.274 1.907.604.349.21.342.44.276.598-.077.18-.203.234-.327.237-.135.003-.267-.056-.332-.085-.797-.357-1.725-.6-2.504-.612-.228-.002-.351-.117-.422-.37-.091-.333.147-.6.41-.788z'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e){kind=small}
' xlink:href='%23b'/%3e%3cuse fill='black' filter='url(%23c)' xlink:href='%23b'/%3e%3cpath fill='white' d='M12.162 7.338c.176.123.338.245.338.674 0 .43-.229.604-.474.725a.73.73 0 01.089.546c-.077.344-.392.611-.672.69.121.194.159.385.015.62-.185.295-.346.407-1.058.407H7.5c-.988 0-1.5-.546-1.5-1V7.665c0-1.23 1.467-2.275 1.467-3.13L7.361 3.47c-.005-.065.008-.224.058-.27.08-.079.301-.2.635-.2.218 0 .363.041.534.123.581.277.732.978.732 1.542 0 .271-.414 1.083-.47 1.364 0 0 .867-.192 1.879-.199 1.061-.006 1.749.19 1.749.842 0 .261-.219.523-.316.666zM3.6 7h.8a.6.6 0 01.6.6v3.8a.6.6 0 01-.6.6h-.8a.6.6 0 01-.6-.6V7.6a.6.6 0 01.6-.6z'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e){kind=small}
