4 Comments

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

The maha sort of absorption is important. Not only a state of no mind but when it matures it is like maha. Every activity is the universe-activity.

2009:

(7:41 PM) Thusness: the oceanic feeling is important

(7:41 PM) Thusness: it is the 'maha', great, magnificent experience.

(7:42 PM) Thusness: It is the experience of oneness.

(7:42 PM) Thusness: In fact, stage 6 when stabilized give u that experience always...from moment to moment.

(7:42 PM) Thusness: crystal clarity as Oneness.

(7:43 PM) Thusness: As what i have told Star...

(7:43 PM) Thusness: the universe eats an apple.

(7:43 PM) AEN: oic..

(7:43 PM) Thusness: Every sensation becomes sacred. Maha! Great and Magnificent!

(7:45 PM) AEN: icic..

(7:46 PM) AEN: oceanic as an expansive and spacious feeling?

(7:47 PM) Thusness: nope

(7:47 PM) Thusness: as an Oneness feeling.

(7:47 PM) AEN: oic..

(7:47 PM) Thusness: as just that moment of action.

(7:47 PM) Thusness: as a dissolving into just that action.

(7:48 PM) Thusness: normally it is thought to be an absorption stage.

(7:48 PM) Thusness: That resulted due to concentration.

(7:48 PM) AEN: icic..

(7:49 PM) AEN: last time when i meditate i got a sense of expansive and spaciousness... and felt like thoughts, feelings and perceptions are just like ripples on an ocean

(7:49 PM) Thusness: But it is an every moment matter from the perfection of insight point of view.

(7:49 PM) AEN: oic..

(7:49 PM) Thusness: that is no good.

(7:50 PM) Thusness: when there is an 'I AM', u will have that feeling.

(7:50 PM) AEN: icic..

(7:50 PM) Thusness: when u know ur nature is empty-luminosity, u will see all is as 'ME'

(7:51 PM) Thusness: the "I AM" is not more 'ME' than a passing thought.

(7:51 PM) Thusness: than a passing sound.

(7:51 PM) Thusness: than a moment of vibration caused by the MRT.

(7:51 PM) AEN: oic..

(7:52 PM) Thusness: than a moment of sensation when the feet touches the ground.

(7:52 PM) Thusness: This comes from stability of knowing our DO and non-dual nature.

(7:52 PM) AEN: icic..

(7:54 PM) Thusness: Phroggy is quite good.

(7:55 PM) Thusness: unfortunately he involves in too much speculations.

(7:55 PM) AEN: icic..

(7:55 PM) Thusness: sometimes we must know when to stop.

(7:55 PM) Thusness: and let direct experience take over.

(7:56 PM) Thusness: and when to arise and let conceptuality takes over.

(7:56 PM) Thusness: lol

...

(4:40 PM) Thusness: It is a form of samadhi, the experience of maha.

(4:40 PM) AEN: isit nonduality?

(4:41 PM) Thusness: When division and impersonality are dissolved, it is non-dual.

(4:41 PM) Thusness: Oneness is always experienced.

(4:42 PM) Thusness: and this oneness when experienced and understood correct will provide insight into our anatta nature.

(4:42 PM) Thusness: when wrongly understood, it mislead us into the belief of a common ground and source.

(4:43 PM) Thusness: Which leads to the difference between the idea of 'wave and ocean' and indra-net.

(4:43 PM) Thusness: difference

(4:44 PM) AEN: oic..

(4:44 PM) AEN: but u said one can experience non personality and yet not non dual?

(4:44 PM) Thusness: not anatta

(4:44 PM) Thusness: impersonality but not anatta or non-dual insight.

(4:44 PM) AEN: icic..

(4:46 PM) Thusness: even when the experience of impersonality matures, it does not necessarily lead to the insight of anatta. That Awareness is a verb or a process.

(4:46 PM) Thusness: There is just One Chanting.

(4:46 PM) Thusness: There is just One breathing, one breath.

(4:46 PM) Thusness: into one action...

(4:47 PM) AEN: oic..

(4:48 PM) Thusness: This maha or samadhi like experience appears to be a stage and when wrongly understood mislead one to conclude that we have a common ground. Because of the 'Oneness' experience.

(4:49 PM) Thusness: Being non-dual and impersonal and with the strength of the dualistic tendency, it is almost natural to draw such a conclusion.

(4:49 PM) AEN: icic..

(4:51 PM) Thusness: But when insight arises, it is seen that non-dual experiences are found in the most common and mundane activities.

(4:51 PM) Thusness: Like carry water and chop wood.

(4:51 PM) Thusness: Yet in chop wood and carry water, there is the experience of Oneness.

(4:51 PM) AEN: oic..

(4:51 PM) Thusness: And this is expressed in Zen.

(4:52 PM) Thusness: That in our most ordinary activities, non-dual is experienced.

(4:52 PM) AEN: ?????:

?????????,

????????,

????,

??:?????

(4:52 PM) AEN: the ???? is like u said one action?

(4:52 PM) Thusness: yes

(4:52 PM) Thusness: This is an important aspect of self-liberation too.

(4:53 PM) Thusness: or at least my third phase of spontaneous arising.

(4:53 PM) Thusness: I think i wrote in ur awakeningtoreality blog i did mentioned about it last time.

(4:53 PM) AEN: oic.. when

(4:54 PM) Thusness: It is the experience as if the universe is doing the work.

(4:54 PM) Thusness: This experience must be clear and obvious in what i call the phase of spontaneous arising.

(4:55 PM) Thusness: one must first have the insight of anatta and emptiness first.

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

Being-Time by Shinshu Roberts

Being-Time by Shinshu Roberts

• • Reply
  • Remove Preview
  • 12m

Aditya Prasad

0Fetbfigru0ary 525 aumtsa 5go:g48 dAM5  ·
Since there has been recent talk about cessation / fruition, I wanted to share this section from Culadasa's The Mind Illuminated. I can't speak to its veracity personally, but others may find it interesting.
“The Mind-System model and unification process help us understand one of the most profound Insight experiences, the cessation event. A cessation event is where unconscious sub-minds remain tuned in and receptive to the contents of consciousness, while at the same time, none of them project any content into consciousness. Then, consciousness ceases—completely. During that period, at the level of consciousness there is a complete cessation of mental fabrications of any kind—of the illusory, mind-generated world that otherwise dominates every conscious moment. This, of course, also entails a complete cessation of craving, intention, and suffering. The only information that tuned in sub-minds receive during this event is the fact of a total absence.
What makes this the most powerful of all Insight experiences is what happens in the last few moments of consciousness leading up to the cessation. First, an object arises in consciousness that would normally produce craving. It can be almost anything. However, what happens next is quite unusual: the mind doesn’t respond with the habitual craving and clinging. Rather, it fully understands the object from the perspective of Insight: as a mental construct, completely “empty” of any real substance, impermanent, and a cause of suffering. This profound realization leads to the next and final moment of complete equanimity, in which the shared intention of all the unified sub-minds is to not respond.5 Because nothing is projected into consciousness, the cessation event arises.6 With cessation, the tuned-in sub-minds simultaneously realize that everything appearing in consciousness is simply the product of their own activity. In other words, they realize that the input they’re accustomed to receiving is simply a result of their own “fabricating activities. This has a dramatic effect. The sub-minds of the discriminating mind have the Insight that everything ever known, including the Self, was nothing but a fabrication of the mind itself. The sub-minds of the sensory mind have a slightly different Insight: the only kind of information that ever appears in the mind that isn’t purely mind-generated is the input coming to them directly from the sense organs.
If the sub-minds are receptive but there’s nothing to receive, can a cessation event be consciously recalled afterward? It all depends on the nature of the shared intention before the cessation occurred. If the intention of all the tuned in sub-minds was to observe objects of consciousness, as with popular “noting” practices, all that’s subsequently recalled is an absence, a gap. After all, if every object of consciousness ceases, and there’s no intention for the sub-minds to observe anything else, then nothing gets imprinted in memory. However, if the intention was to be metacognitively aware of the state and activities of the mind, we would remember having been fully conscious, but not conscious of anything. We would recall having a pure consciousness experience (PCE), or an experience of consciousness without an object (CWO).7
To be clear, there is no actual “experience” of “consciousness without an object” during the cessation event, nor could there possibly be. That experience, like any other, is a construct of the mind, and in this case is generated after the cessation event has already ended.8 How the memory of a cessation event is interpreted retrospectively takes many forms, depending on the views and beliefs held by the person whose mind is doing the interpreting. Thus, the cessation event itself is not a mental construct, but the subsequent interpretations are entirely constructed.
Regardless of what does or doesn’t imprint in memory, every sub-mind tuned in to consciousness during cessation must assimilate the event into its own representation of reality. As with any Insight experience, the new information forces a reprogramming of how all future experiences are interpreted and responded to. Realizing that all phenomenal experience, including the Self, are mere mental constructs, and therefore “empty” of any real substance, radically transforms how the mind functions. We understand, more clearly than ever before, craving and suffering as the grasping after mere mental constructs—and the more sub-minds are tuned in during the event, the stronger that understanding will be. Of course, it’s not that hard to acquire a conceptual grasp of these truths. Many have done so. But only Insight can establish this understanding at a deep, intuitive level.
The transformative power of a cessation event depends on how unified the mind was. Unification determines the overall size of the “audience” of sub-minds receptive to events in consciousness. Only the parts of the mind-system that were tuned in during the cessation are affected. If the mind were completely unified, then every sub-mind within the mind system would be affected simultaneously, and there would be a complete Awakening of the entire mind-system.9
However, if the mind was only partially unified, there are two possibilities: no transformation, or incomplete transformation. This is because a certain degree of unification is needed during the “certain degree of unification is needed during the event to reach enough sub-minds to make any tangible, lasting difference to the whole mind-system. With too little unification, a person may have a very memorable peak experience, but with little or no lasting effect. However, if the critical threshold is reached, the second possibility is an incomplete transformation of the mind-system, limited to those sub-minds that happened to be tuned in at the time. Complete transformation must await subsequent cessations or other Insight experiences that have a similar impact on the remaining parts of the mind-system. This incremental process of transformation explains why Awakening is traditionally described as occurring in a series of stages.10"
Interesting footnotes:
[7] Consciousness is the process of information exchange between unconscious sub-minds, so some might question how there can possibly be “consciousness without an object.” How can there be an information exchange without any information? Strictly speaking, this is true, and consciousness must always be “consciousness of” something. However, there are two components to the process of consciousness: the object of consciousness, or information to be exchanged; and that which is conscious, or the recipient of the information. With cessation, the first is completely lacking, but the second is still present. Yes, it does fall outside our definition of consciousness, but the event itself falls completely outside ordinary experience as well, so to talk about it at all, we must be flexible in our use of language.It is worth noting that the ex post facto interpretation of a cessation event as “consciousness without an object” or a “pure consciousness experience” can easily lead to the mistaken attribution of some substantive, self-existent nature to consciousness. Since this accords so well with common intuition, and to the desire to locate something that can be identified with a soul, ātman, or True Self, it is a particularly insidious tendency. Always remember that consciousness is a dynamic process, arising and passing away moment-by-moment, and totally dependent on its component parts. That which is conscious, the recipient of the information being exchanged via consciousness, is nothing other than different sub-minds of the very same mind-system that is the information’s source.
[9] This particular scenario, requiring a fully unified mind, corresponds to the unique form of saññā-vedayita-nirodha known as nirodha-samāpatti. This exceedingly rare cessation event is traditionally said to be only possible for non-returners (anāgāmi) and Buddhas (arahants) who achieve cessation through jhāna. It is sometimes regarded as a 9th jhana, following the four form and four formless jhānas. This nirodha-samāpatti, in which every part of the completely unified mind participates, is also known as anupādisesa nibbāna, meaning “extinction without remainder.” All other saññā-vedayita-nirodha, in which unification of mind is incomplete, are referred to as sa-upādisesa nibbāna, or “with remainder.”

28 Comments

• 
  
Jachym Jerie
I found the tmi stuff really useful.
• 
  
• • Reply
  • 4d
• 
  
Sumudu Wijenayake
Thank you. This clarified some questions I had.
• 
  
• • Reply
  • 3d
• 
  
Sudden Awakenings
How does cessation fit into the AtR stages? … the latter don’t seem to depend on cessation at all, or do they?
• 
  
• Reply
• 3d
• Edited
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Sudden Awakenings
Those so called cessations are not sutta nirvana/cessation nor sutta stream entry.
If anything they can be related to stage 3 but as John Tan said before in 2005 “
The blankness is a form of absorption where the knowing faculty of consciousness is temporarily suspended. Complete clarity and Presence without a 'Self' is more crucial.” - http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../early-forum-posts...
Also see https://www.reddit.com/r/streamentry/comments/igored/insight_buddhism_a_reconsideration_of_the_meaning/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf%20
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../insight-buddhism...

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Early Forum Posts by Thusness
Early Forum Posts by Thusness
• 
  
• • • Reply
    • Remove Preview
    • 1d
• 
  
David Brown
The A2R stages do not include cessation. They are incomplete.
• 
  
• Reply
• 1d
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
David Brown
More than 50+ people have attained the equivalent of MCTB 4th path which is the anatta realization through AtR and put an end to subject-object duality and agency-action perception forever.
Most do not go through the Mahasi type cessations, therefore it is not strictly necessary.
Also see https://www.reddit.com/r/streamentry/comments/igored/insight_buddhism_a_reconsideration_of_the_meaning/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf%20

REDDIT.COM
[insight] [buddhism] A reconsideration of the meaning of "Stream-Entry" considering the data points of both pragmatic Dharma and traditional Buddhism
[insight] [buddhism] A reconsideration of the meaning of "Stream-Entry" considering the data points of both pragmatic Dharma and traditional Buddhism
• 
  
• • Reply
  • Remove Preview
  • 1d
  • Edited
• 
  
Yin Ling
David Brown I thinn most of them probably had it and didn’t notice it. If you ever had a “cessation”, the underwhelmingness of it is the most profound
But some ppl like Jenny above can have earthshaking ones.
• 
  
• Reply
• 1d
• 
  
Jayson MPaul
Yin Ling If you aren't doing a practice that is focusing your attention on everything that is happening moment to moment, they are easy to miss. I've had a variety of them, but I haven't gotten a "good" one in a long time now. They went from speed bumps that really slow your car down to mild potholes that you don't even feel.
• 
  
• • • Reply
    • 16h
• 
  
David Brown
The section above from Culadasa's The Mind Illuminated could easily be interpreted in different ways by different people. The problem is with the word 'consciousness'. I prefer to use Awareness Without Content in place of Consciousness Without Content to emphasise the complete difference from sense consciousness. For most people, I think it's difficult to know Awareness Without Content (cessation) clearly when sense consciousness remains, and very often it's confused with the mind merely going very quiet. Cessation leads to deeper understanding than any of the stages listed in the A2R system. as in all of them there does remain a subtle arisingness generated by remnants of what we call 'self'. Cessation implies nothing arising at all, no activation of Dependent Origination. With total cessation the nature of that subtle generation of self/consciousness/ mind/ world becomes clear. Cessation can happen while sense consciousness is operating, and that reveals clearly the nature of generation of what we call 'me'. But if it happens while conscious, I think it is easy to miss the deeper aspect of the Buddha's teaching on Dependent Origination. Therefore there is enormous benefit if cessation/ Awareness Without Content happens during deep sleep. I doubt it is possible to fully understand the Buddha's teaching on Dependent origination without cessation during deep sleep.
• 
  
• • Reply
  • 5h
  • Edited
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
David Brown
What you are describing is just nirvikalpa samadhi in the I AM. It is not particularly special and is not unknown to us in AtR. John Tan, I and many others have experienced tremendously blissful samadhi absorption in Self. As I wrote recently, John Tan sat for hours each time in nirvikalpa samadhi with his Ch'an master in Thailand during his I AM stage. He could sit all day and actually almost became a monk and renunciant like Ramana Maharshi to focus entirely his time in absorption in the Self without the distractions of other sensory phenomena back when he was 17 but was stopped by his family.
Ramana Maharshi said,
"Abiding permanently in any of these samadhis, either Savikalpa or Nirvikalpa, is Sahaja. What is body-consciousness? It is the insentient body plus consciousness. Both these must lie in another consciousness which is absolute and unaffected, and ever-abiding, with or without the body-consciousness. What does it the matter whether the body-consciousness is lost or retained, provided one is holding on to that Pure Consciousness? Total absence of body-consciousness has the advantage of making the Samadhi more intense, although it makes no difference in the knowledge of the Supreme. (Ramana Maharshi, GR, 88.) "
Here he is saying the type of nirvikalpa samadhi where all senses are shut and one is merely absorbed in Self simply makes the samadhi or absorption in Self more intense, but it makes no difference to Self-Knowledge.
I will paste more excerpts in the following posts.
• 
  
• • Reply
  • 35m
  • Edited
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
And yes I have experienced total cessation [of sensory and mental phenomena] and pure formless nondual clear light in deep sleep. It can also be intensely blissful, just the bliss of pure presence. I actually wrote some of those experiences in the sleep chapter towards the end of the AtR Guide.
• 
  
• • Reply
  • 30m
  • Edited
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Sim Pern Chong (who was at the I AM phase when he first encountered John Tan back in 2004 and was the first to break through to anatta and emptiness back in 2006 to 2008) wrote more than ten years ago:
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../a-compilation-of...
realization: Oh yes Simpo, can I just ask how you realised the I AM years ago?
Simpo: There are actually 2 significant events:
1. In the 1980s when i was a teenager, i sat down to meditate for the first time. I experienced great bliss. In this meditation, i experienced 'no ultimate right or wrong' aka non-judgemental and is soaked in a vast ocean of bliss for a few days. Haha... i thought i was enlightened. On hindsight now, i know that i was not. That is why now when people write about non-dual to meant 'no right/wrong' I know which stage they are at.
2. In the 1990s, i join a meditation class that held sessions every Sunday at a Buddhist temple. I was learning one-point meditation. One afternoon when i was meditating at home, all the sensory impressions stopped including thoughts. I was in a state of 'No-thoughts'. One may think that when there are no thoughts, one must be unconscious. No there is no unconsciousness. Instead what was being experienced was pure Presence/awareness. However due to not understanding the nature of consciousness and reality, this awareness was experienced as an Eternal Witness/Observer. This is the pure experience of I AM presence.
...
In my case, the initial experience happened during a meditation which led me to the misassumption of 'I AM'. The experience is pure, but the latter interpretation of it was wrong.
In 'No-I' experience, one simply realised that there is no self in any experience even when consciousness is rolling own. There can be thinking, but there is no thinker.
On the other hand, in complete consciousness blank-out, yet awareness persists, there is not a single thought or any form of mental formation. Basically, there is no thinking, no mental image or any form of consciousness that we normally have. It will be distinctive because it is this experience that will allow one to see for the first time the difference between mental-mixed consciousness and pure presence.
Complete mental formation shut down and yet awareness still exist, it is not the same as sleep.
Personally, I don't see a point in maintaining witnessing even into sleep. It is really a desire to have that expereince of Presence.
...
I think Eckhart Tolle may have been suffering alot and suddenly he 'let go' of trying to work out his problems. This results in a dissociation from thoughts which give rise to the experience of Presence.
To me, 'I AM' is an experience of Presence, it is just that only one aspect of Presence is experienced which is the 'all-pervading' aspect. The non-dual and emptiness aspect are not experienced.. Because non-dual is not realised (at I AM stage), a person may still use effort in an attempt to 'enter' the Presence. This is because, at the I AM stage, there is an erroneous concept that there is a relative world make up of thoughts AND there is an 'absolute source' that is watching it. The I AM stage person will make attempts to 'dissociated from the relative world' in order to enter the 'absolute source'.
However, at Non-dual (& further..) stage understanding, one have understood that the division into a relative world and an absolute source has NEVER occcured and cannot be... Thus no attempt/effort is truly required.
• 
  
• • Reply
  • 25m
  • Edited
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Edmond Cigale, who realised anatta after I conversed with him back in DhO and those conversations somehow triggered his further investigation and breakthrough into nondual and anatta back in 2011, wrote this: [link redacted]
Where he compared the different types of samadhi he has gone through. Please don't share this file outside as it is going to be published into a book but here is an excerpt.
Back in his I AM phase he was able to enter kevala nirvikalpa samadhi at will,
" this context, Sri Ramana Maharshi used to say: "That which is not present in deep dreamless sleep is not real.”(quoted in Wilber 1998). Well, I have faced such notions withslight apprehension. How can emotions and thoughts (mine or those of others) be unreal, if they obviously exist? Yes, they are not absolutely real, as far as the Causal Self is concerned, but they exist nonetheless. I tried to compensate the inner disharmonyby focusing on impersonal aspect of the “I am” presence, trying to realize and hold on to “That which is only Real" during my wake consciousness. I have failed to achieve that.This tendency, however,eventually yieldedfree flow and easy entry into the Causalstate samādhi at will, but that was all. There was no way (for me) to handle the relative sensory input with mere Awareness of the naked Truth by entering samādhi at will.There was always this duality present: Me or the Absolute Reality on one hand, and the world drama of sensory input, on the other; almost unperceivable subtle tension and clear disharmony were always present.Obviously, my Causal realization was not perfected yet (and the nondual was not known, yet)."
APP.BOX.COM
Box
Box
• 
  
• • Reply
  • Remove Preview
  • 16m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
From Edmond's text:
• 
  
  
  
  
• • Reply
  • 15m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
This state of Nirvikalpa Samadhi is also described even by Theravada monks like Ajahn Brahmavamso:
“When the Body Disappears.
Remember "con men," "con women" as well. These con men can sell you anything! There's one living in your mind right now, and you believe every word he says! His name is Thinking. When you let go of that inner talk and get silent, you get happy. Then when you let go of the movement of the mind and stay with the breath, you experience even more delight. Then when you let go of the body ,all these five senses disappear and you're really blissing out. This is original Buddhism. Sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch completely vanish. This is like being in a sensory deprivation chamber but much better. But it's not just silence, you just don't hear anything. It's not just blackness, you just don't see anything. It's not just a feeling of comfort in the body, there is no body at all.
When the body disappears that really starts to feel great. You know of all those people who have out of the body experiences? When the body dies, every person has that experience, they float out of the body. And one of the things they always say is it's so peaceful, so beautiful, so blissful. It's the same in meditation when the body disappears, it's so peaceful, so beautiful, so blissful when you are free from this body. What's left? Here there's no sight, sound, smell, taste, touch. This is what the Buddha called the mind in deep meditation. When the body disappears what is left is the mind.
I gave a simile to a monk the other night. Imagine an Emperor who is wearing a long pair of trousers and a big tunic. He's got shoes on his feet, a scarf around the bottom half of his head and a hat on the top half of his head. You can't see him at all because he's completely covered in five garments. It's the same with the mind. It's completely covered with sight, sound, smell, taste and touch. So people don't know it. They just know the garments. When they see the Emperor, they just see the robes and the garments. They don't know who lives inside them. And so it is no wonder they're confused about what is life, what is mind, who is this inside of here, where did I come from? Why? What am I supposed to be doing with this life? When the five senses disappear, it's like unclothing the Emperor and seeing what is actually in here, what's actually running the show, who's listening to these words, who's seeing, who's feeling life, who this is. When the five senses disappear, you're coming close to the answer to those questions.
What you're seeing in such deep meditation is that which we call "mind," (in Pali it's called Citta). The Buddha used this beautiful simile. When there is a full moon on a cloudy night, even though it's a full moon, you can hardly see it. Sometimes when the clouds are thin, you can see this hazy shape shining though. You know there is something there. This is like the meditation just before you've entered into these profound states. You know there is something there, but you can't quite make it out. There's still some "clothes" left. You're still thinking and doing, feeling the body or hearing sounds. But there does come a time, and this is the Buddha's simile, when the moon is released from the clouds and there in the clear night sky you can see the beautiful full disc of the moon shining brilliantly, and you know that's the moon. The moon is there; the moon is real, and it's not just some sort of side effect of the clouds. This is what happens in meditation when you see the mind. You see clearly that the mind is not some side effect of the brain. You see the mind, and you know the mind. The Buddha said that the mind released is beautiful, is brilliant, is radiant. So not only are these blissful experiences, they're meaningful experiences as well.
How many people may have heard about rebirth but still don't really believe it? How can rebirth happen? Certainly the body doesn't get reborn. That's why when people ask me where do you go when you die, "one of two places" I say "Fremantle or Karrakatta" that's where the body goes! [3] But is that where the mind goes? Sometimes people are so stupid in this world, they think the body is all there is, that there is no mind. So when you get cremated or buried that's it, that's done with, all has ended. The only way you can argue with this view is by developing the meditation that the Buddha achieved under the Bodhi tree. Then you can see the mind for yourself in clear awareness - not in some hypnotic trance, not in dullness - but in the clear awareness. This is knowing the mind
Knowing the Mind.
When you know that mind, when you see it for yourself, one of the results will be an insight that the mind is independent of this body. Independence means that when this body breaks up and dies, when it's cremated or when it's buried, or however it's destroyed after death, it will not affect the mind. You know this because you see the nature of the mind. That mind which you see will transcend bodily death. The first thing which you will see for yourself, the insight which is as clear as the nose on your face, is that there is something more to life than this physical body that we take to be me. Secondly you can recognise that that mind, essentially, is no different than that process of consciousness which is in all beings. Whether it's human beings or animals or even insects, of any gender, age or race, you see that that which is in common to all life is this mind, this consciousness, the source of doing.
Once you see that, you have much more respect for your fellow beings. Not just respect for your own race, your own tribe or your own religion, not just for human beings, but for all beings. It's a wonderfully high-minded idea. "May all beings be happy and well and may we respect all nations, all peoples, even all beings." However this is how you achieve that! You truly get compassion only when we see that others are fundamentally just as ourselves. If you think that a cow is completely different from you, that cows don't think like human beings, then it's easy to eat one. But can you eat your grandmother? She's too much like you. Can you eat an ant? Maybe you'd kill an ant because you think that ants aren't like you. But if you look carefully at ants, they are no different. In a forest monastery living out in the bush, close to nature, one of the things you become so convinced of is that animals have emotions and , especially, feel pain. You begin to recognise the personality of the animals, of the Kookaburras,(Australian bird) of the mice, the ants, and the spiders. Each one of those spiders has a mind just like you have. Once you see that you can understand the Buddha's compassion for all beings. You can also understand how rebirth can occur between all species - not just human beings to human beings, but animals to humans, humans to animals. You can understand also how the mind is the source of all this.”
- Ajahn Brahmavamso, https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:p0B7NPPnQBsJ:https://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebmed065.htm+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=sg ”
WEBCACHE.GOOGLEUSERCONTENT.COM
Ajahn Brahm - Meditation: The Heart of Buddhism
Ajahn Brahm - Meditation: The Heart of Buddhism
• 
  
• • Reply
  • Remove Preview
  • 13m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
But as Ajahn Brahmavamso also said, this is not Buddhist nirvana yet and it is not the same as stream entry or buddhist enlightenment, and Ajahn Brahmavamso defined the anatta realisation as stream entry (same as us). And John Tan has said the same about this I AM not being what Buddha called enlightenment (although it may be considered enlightenment in Hinduism, etc).
John Tan said to Sim Pern Chong back in 2005:
Excerpt
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../early-forum-posts...
Hi LongChen,
The blankness is a form of absorption where the knowing faculty of consciousness is temporarily suspended. Complete clarity and Presence without a 'Self' is more crucial. Smile
The 'Self' that is created over countless lives of attachment cannot be underestimated.
We are in almost helpless bondage that our perceptions are shaped and held in a sort
of hypnosis that we feel, think, experience and deduced our understandings from the
perspective of an 'I'. Thus analytical understanding derived from the glimpse of
the Pure Presence Reality will very quickly get distorted.
When Presence is experienced with the six sense doors shut,
Presence is experienced as a form of "I AMness".
When Presence is experience with six sense doors widely open,
Presence is experienced as a form of "I AM All".
However neither experience tells us the TRUE NATURE of Pure Presence.
Even the very sense of Realness, of Existence, of Life and Vividness is so strong,
due to the sense of 'I' there will be a sense of location somewhere,
and the true face of Pure Presence remains hidden.
The mind is just not used to knowing the absolutely nothing, non-local,
nowhere to be found yet pure, brilliance bright and ever luminous.
It will locate, it will find, it will grasp.
There must come a time for the mind to let go of itself completely.
If we are bold enough to let go and enter into the world that is wordless,
labelless and thoughtless, and if this is sustained, wisdom and insight will arise.
This wisdom is the extraordinary Clarity, Vividness and Realness, wholeness whole.
It is crystal clear filling all spaces and places.
Both in silence and in noise, in blankness and somethingness.
Those that experience the Pure Presence will appreciate this crystal clear reality.
This re-visiting of Pure Presence will be thorough and entire.
There will be no doubt.
Buddhism Emptiness is deep and profound. Do go into it. Smile
Happy Journey

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Early Forum Posts by Thusness
Early Forum Posts by Thusness
• 
  
• • Reply
  • Remove Preview
  • 11m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Also http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../a-common-wrong...
Quote:
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Anything lesser than Thusness Stage 5 does not even meet the criteria of scriptural 'stream entry', let alone Arahantship.
·
Reply
· 1w
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
More pasting to come:
·
Reply
· 1w
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
2011:
Soh: Btw u saw my email regarding teacher chen summary
Thusness: i do not know
Thusness: i don't want to comment on teacher chen
Thusness: it is disrespectful
Thusness: what summary
Thusness: the diagram?
Soh: He says hinayana realise anatta, then mahayana arise the realization of emptiness
Thusness: no
Soh: Then finally the realization of equality arise
Thusness: he sees hinayana as "I am"
Soh: That's like what u said right I mean sounds like the process he went through
Soh: Oic..
Thusness signed in.
Soh: The diagram sounds like a process he went through himself
Thusness: Yeah
Thusness: like polishing mirror
Soh: What u mean
Thusness: 证悟觉体 (realizing the substance of awareness) as the final destination of theravada practice (comments by Soh: I have seen more than one Mahayana teacher made this mistaken equation of theravada as I AM and mahayana as One Mind)
Thusness: maybe that is the practice and realization in modern time
Thusness: but not during Buddha's time i am sure.
Soh: I see
Thusness: for anyone talking about that will kena (get scolded) from Buddha...lol
Soh: Lol
Thusness: Theravada is the realisation of anatta
Thusness: that must be very clear
Thusness: it is not substantialist non dual
Soh: Oic..
Thusness: only the clarity of anatta and clearly seeing what it means is not clear
Thusness: into the second fold emptiness
Thusness: that is 'seeing' the true meaning of the view
Thusness: one can realize anatta and experience no-mind, no agent
Thusness: but not depth in the view
Soh: Oic.. Btw pegembara is from theravada and the phena sutta which he quotes is also from pali canon... I think the clarity of phena sutta on the secondfold emptiness is on par with the prajnaparamita sutras
Thusness: yet there is no direct insight of anatta
Soh: Also I'm not sure about this but apparently different arhats can have different degree of insight into emptiness. Sariputra is known as "jie kong di yi" (foremost in understanding emptiness).. But I guess its true that arhats mostly stress on anatta
Soh: Oic
Thusness: of course.
Soh: I see..

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
A Common Wrong Explanation of Hinayana vs Mahayana
A Common Wrong Explanation of Hinayana vs Mahayana
• 
  
• • Reply
  • Remove Preview
  • 9m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Most people do not get to anatta realisation though, it is very rare. Many teachers talk about 'no self' but what they are talking about is what I call 'impersonality', or perhaps even the nondual aspect. But not anatta. (See http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../this-is... )
I often state that my estimate is that roughly 90% of so called enlightened spiritual teachers and practitioners are only at the I AM level, maybe 8% are one mind/nondual and 2% and less are at anatta and beyond. In fact I am thinking even less than 2%. Of course, it is not easy (although not very difficult with correct pointers and contemplative practice) even to reach I AM, most practitioners and teachers do not even reach I AM realization.
As John Tan said 15 years ago,
"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
  • 7m
  • Edited




• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Also, Culadasa’s cessation is not the same as Mahasi cessation.
Pure objectless consciousness is I AM, not the Mahasi cessation.
• 
  
• Reply
• 1d
• 
  
David Brown
Soh Wei Yu In this thread people are interpreting 'cessation' to mean many different things according to the existing concepts in their mind. Much confusion. This is the reason I do not normally post comments in A2R.
• 
  
• • Reply
  • 5h




• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
As John Tan also said before, “...There is nothing underneath everything, in the state of I AM, it is just I AM. The rest of the 5 sense doors are shut. Everything else is excluded. It is called I simply because of the koan, nothing else.
What’s experienced is similar to hearing sound without the sense of hearer. So keep the experience but refine the view.” - John Tan to someone in Awakening to Reality Discussion Group, 2019
• 
  
• • Reply
  • 1d
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
It is also similar to the hindu nirvikalpa samadhi
• 
  
• • Reply
  • 1d
• 
  
William Kong
;tldr - For those who've experienced the blackout cessation, how long do those last for you?
***
There seems to be so many varying descriptions of cessations, with varying degrees of importance depending on the school.
***
Culadasa seems to indicate two different types of cessations.
The first kind : "complete cessation of mental fabrications of any kind" + the insight that "the only kind of information that ever appears in the mind that isn’t purely mind-generated is the input coming to them directly from the sense organs." He seems to be describing the temporary cessation of all mental fabrications, yet the other senses are completely functioning.
The second kind is described in footnote 9:
> [9] This particular scenario, requiring a fully unified mind, corresponds to the unique form of saññā-vedayita-nirodha known as nirodha-samāpatti.
This seems to be describing more of a blackout state.
***
The ones described by Delson Armstrong are not "blips" - but he goes into complete blackout for 6 days. Apparently 7 days is the upper limit the body can handle.
I took an online retreat with one of Bhante Vimalaramsi's instructors, and he told me the cessation Bhante was describing is nirodha, which is distinct from nirvana, but that Bhante does not talk about nirvana since he believes that leads to confusion. However, on one of his talks, IIRC he describes it as the "domain of non conceptuality".... which sounds a lot like the first type of cessation that Culadasa describes."
***
For those who've experienced the blackout cessation, how long do those last?
• 
  
• Reply
• 23h
• Edited
• 
  
Jayson MPaul
William Kong They last less than a second. I can get them if I incline my practice towards them now and they will happen in the next few minutes to days. The first day I ever got one and started getting repeat ones I was able to get one that lasted 20 minutes. I know because my wife said she was trying to wake me and couldn't
• 
  
• • • Reply
    • 16h
• 
  
Preston Putzel
The strong interest in blackout states is just strange to me. Fruition is not describe in these terms in the texts. Very strange extreme readings of ancient abhidhamma maps and commentaries (atthakatha) of commentaries (abhidhammattha sangaha) of commentaries (modern commentaries) have twisted the meaning. https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=8158...

DHAMMAWHEEL.COM
Concerning Kearney's "Development of Insight" - Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum
Concerning Kearney's "Development of Insight" - Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum
• 
  
• Reply
• 22h
• Edited
• 
  
Preston Putzel
Once we start relying on four or five layers of commentarial interpretation we should start wondering what the text actually says. Every single layer of commentarial interpretation starting even with canonical abhidhamma introduces its own novelties.
• 
  
• Reply
• 22h
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Preston Putzel It is a modern phenomena.
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../the-meaning-of...
Geoff:
"
The suttas define and describe the goal in sufficient terms. The difficulty in this discussion relates to whether one accepts what the canon states about the fruition of the path, or alternatively, accepts much later commentarial interpretations of the "path-moment" and "fruition-moment" as re-interpreted by a few 20th century Burmese monks. Without sufficient common ground for discussion there isn't much possibility of meaningful dialogue."

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
The Meaning of Nirvana
The Meaning of Nirvana
• 
  
• • Reply
  • Remove Preview
  • 5m




• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• • 
    
  
  
• 
  
David Brown
Blackout states ae NOT cessation / Awareness without Content.
• 
  
• Reply
• 5h
•  
•  
• ----------
•  
•  
• Soh Wei Yu shared a link.

  Admin

    · 2m  ·
  Regarding blackout cessation vs Buddha's nirvana/cessation:
  
  “Regarding arahant, John Tan thinks perfection of wisdom is not necessary, but dispassion and experience of cessation [of passion, aggression and delusion] are crucial:

  John TanSaturday, November 1, 2014 at 6:58pm UTC+08

  Perfection of wisdom is not necessary IMO.

  John TanSaturday, November 1, 2014 at 6:59pm UTC+08

  Dispassion and experience of cessation are crucial factors.

  John TanSaturday, November 1, 2014 at 7:00pm UTC+08

  That is why I thought of reading autonomy school of thoughts

  ...

  John TanThursday, October 23, 2014 at 11:02pm UTC+08

  Cessation imo is not just the ability to shut down consciousness ... It is consciousness coming to a complete rest due to dispassion...genuine calming down of the mind 贪嗔痴 (passion, aggression, delusion)...the fruition of a mind in total peace...

  ...

  John TanTuesday, August 26, 2014 at 12:29am UTC+08

  In later phase, you will prefer dispassion, letting go than concentration

  John TanTuesday, August 26, 2014 at 12:30am UTC+08

  You will find you know very little of how to let go despite strong attainment in concentration. Then you will revisit whatever you learnt and realized.

  ...

  John TanSunday, July 13, 2014 at 9:59pm UTC+08

  Dispassion will grow with time if you practice. When you experience the truth of 成住坏空 (formation, existence, destruction and emptiness) in life, together with your practice...dispassion will eventually arise.

  ...

  “John TanFriday, January 23, 2015 at 6:04pm UTC+08

  Cyclical existence ends when selflessness of person is actualized because that is the cause of cyclical existence. However in mahayana and vajrayana if i am not wrong, anatta ends cyclical existence and led to liberation whereas further realization and actualization of selflessness in phenomena resulted in omniscience Buddhahood.”

  ...

  John TanWednesday, January 28, 2015 at 12:08pm UTC+08

  I don't think the Theravada teaching is about that [annihilation]. In the lower tenet of the great exposition and sutra systems, they are very careful not to fall into the extremes of annihilation. When you get up the ladder be it yogacara, middle way up to Dzogchen and mahamudra, it is imo just a matter of refining the view of selflessness with direct experiential insights but still a sort of "middle path" from top to bottom...nvr a skewed towards the extreme of annihilation.

  John TanWednesday, January 28, 2015 at 12:25pm UTC+08

  Cessation is imp and once cessation is actualized, attachment to experiences of whatever samadhi is "cool down", so any form of promotion towards annihilation is unnecessary and extra (imo). Even shutting down of senses into an oblivious state is not exactly an extraordinary state, we enter in deep sleep every night anyway. The seeing through of any form of experience as dis-satisfactory that led to the direct taste of dispassion, dis-identification and atammayata should be the focus. Peace and liberation is directly related to this taste, so is the non-arisen of dharma. This is a state of evenness, calm and peace...and consciousness as well as senses can come to a shut down. Shutting down is not a secret or some exalted state for one that has gone through deep letting go in meditation but the cause that let one into it is. Anyway that is just my opinion.

  ...

  John TanMonday, January 26, 2015 at 8:36am UTC+08

  You must also understand a state of oblivion like deep sleep too is a landing ground, an escape into the cessation of experience. A movement from experience into non-experience and therefore it is driven by the same cause. It is not extinguishing the cause. The cessation is not to be understood as a shut down of senses and consciousness but disenchantment and dispassion that led to the ending of grasping. The mind no more chases anything and everything settles down, gone cool and is seen to be in a state of rest and peace.

  John TanMonday, January 26, 2015 at 8:40am UTC+08

  But it can and will lead to the shut down of senses and consciousness like deep sleep which is a natural consequent. So do not chase of the state of oblivion but the gradual extinguishing of grasping and into 寂静 (quiescence).

  John TanMonday, January 26, 2015 at 8:45am UTC+08

  This is no different from deep sleep...what is important is the cause that led a practitioner into that state...in any case if seen from the perspective of the cause, the shutting down of senses and consciousness become quite irrelevant and should not be presented that way.

  ...

  John TanSunday, January 25, 2015 at 8:47am UTC+08

  This is what must be tasted as an experience ... The experience of cessation...everything coming to a complete rest...relax and rest...relax and let go of whatever completely into cessation. Even to the extent of cessation of consciousness...be more nihilistic than nihilist… are you able to do that?

  John TanSunday, January 25, 2015 at 8:53am UTC+08

  Not as what Kenneth said as a "realization" but as a taste until the ending of that taste...everything comes to an end...it is like what you wrote the other time...Arahat happily waiting for death...terminating all passions...extinction...all your so called grand beauty of lsd experiences into extinction… are you able to do that?

  [Soh: This is referring to this text:

  Ven. Sañkicca:
  I don’t delight in death,
  don’t delight in living.
  I await my time
  as a worker his wage.
  I don’t delight in death,
  don’t delight in living.
  I await my time
  mindful, alert. — Thag 11]

  Soh Wei YuSunday, January 25, 2015 at 9:22am UTC+08

  Don’t think so yet..

  John TanSunday, January 25, 2015 at 9:51am UTC+08

  Should paste it in blog...it is a good realization of 寂...寂靜 (quiescence) is often overlooked and presence is often over-emphasized. As such even non-arising nature is understood analytically, it is not appropriately tasted. There are blissful experience but there is no peace and there is no liberation without 寂. As for 万法无生，本自寂静(all dharmas are non-arising, fundamentally quiescent) is a realization. To actualize it, we must be able to have some taste of 寂静 (quiescence) first then we can recognize it when insight dawn.

  ...

  John TanSunday, November 16, 2014 at 9:10am UTC+08

  Bliss of presence and bliss of cessation... both are related to the emptying of self/Self. After anatta the sense of self/Self is realized to be fabrication and the entire chain of afflictive D.O. [dependent origination] can come to a rest by seeing how stressful, dis-satisfying and suffering the chain is. That is right intention in the Noble Eightfold Path. Taste this afflictive D.O. coming to rest in relation to the need to maintain the Self/self or beingness. When the mind let go this way seeing the dis-satisfactoriness... it is by way of renunciation, dispassion, dis-identification… the freedom and bliss that come from Atammayata is the bliss of cessation (寂灭为乐), it is understood to be many times more blissful than any form of pleasure and beingness. However cutting the cause of suffering at root in Mahayana is about seeing the emptiness of self and phenomena. The bliss of cessation of the Theravadins are replaced by tasting the non-arising of phenomena therefore 观法如化，三昧常寂, 见闻觉知，本自圆寂。（contemplating all dharmas as illusory, [always in] samadhi-quiescence, seen-heard-cognized-sensed, are by nature completely quiescent [nirvana])” - Soh, 2020
  
  
  
  Also see:
  
  The Meaning of Nirvana
  
  The Deathless in Buddhadharma?
  
  Great Resource of Buddha's Teachings
  
  What is Nirvana?
  
  [insight] [buddhism] A reconsideration of the meaning of "Stream-Entry" considering the data points of both pragmatic Dharma and traditional Buddhism
  
  https://www.reddit.com/r/streamentry/comments/igored/insight_buddhism_a_reconsideration_of_the_meaning/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf%20
  
   
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
  
      Stian Gudmundsen Høiland
      Ooh, nice
          Reply
          1h
      Liu Zhi Guan
      AFAIK cessation in Theravada is broad topic to broach,considering the extensive amount of suttas in Sutta Piṭaka(10000 of them). That said,one way of interpreting cessation is the breaking of the latent vortex or the looped dependent arising (of name-and-form and consciousness):
      "Existential consciousness
      It is said: ‘With consciousness as condition, there is name-and-form.’
      Ānanda, how consciousness conditions name-and-form should be known in this manner:
      If, Ānanda, there were no consciousness to descend into a mother’s womb, would name-and-form take
      shape in the mother’s womb?”
      “Certainly not, bhante.”
      “ If, Ānanda, after descending into the mother’s womb, the consciousness were to depart, would
      name-and-form be generated in this state of being here?”
      “Certainly not, bhante.”
      “If, Ānanda, the consciousness of a young boy or a young girl were to be cut off, would name-andform grow, develop and mature?”
      “Certainly not, bhante.”
      “Therefore, Ānanda, this itself is the reason, this is the connection, this is the arising, this is the condition for name-and-form, that is to say, consciousness.
      Cognitive consciousness
      It is said: ‘With name-and-form as condition, there is consciousness.’
      Ānanda, how name-and-form conditions consciousness should be known in this manner:
      If, Ānanda, there were no name-and-form to find a footing in consciousness, would there be further arising
      of birth, decay, death and suffering?”
      “Certainly not, bhante.”
      “Therefore, Ānanda, this itself is the reason, this is the connection, this is the arising, this is the
      condition for consciousness, that is to say, name-and-form."
      https://www.themindingcentre.org/.../5.17-Mahanidana-S...
          Reply
          11m
      Soh Wei Yu
      Liu Zhi Guan That is the three life interpretation. I also mentioned this in the AtR guide:
      "
      In the suttas (scriptures) and traditional Buddhism, there is both the three lifetimes model of the twelve links, where afflictive dependent origination plays out through past (first two links), present (next eight links) and future (last two links) lifetimes, as well as the one-lifetime model where all twelve links are exerted in one life or in each moment of afflicted experience. While this guide focuses on the dependent origination that can be experienced in this very lifetime, it should also be mentioned that the Buddha clearly did have the three lives in mind as evinced when he talked about gandhabba (rebirth-linking consciousness) descending into the mother’s womb as part of the process of the twelve links (DN 15: Mahā Nidāna Sutta - read this to have a thorough and clear analysis by Buddha on the twelve links of dependent origination), and it is taught that it is the rebirth-linking consciousness which contributes to the birth and development of the fetus’s body (and the goal of his teachings is to put an end to suffering and the uncontrolled cycle of rebirth - the Mahayana Buddhists hold the higher goal of Buddhahood for the benefit of all sentient beings rather than the cessation of arahants of early Buddhism, but that is another topic of discussion) and the rest of the chain of dependent origination, thus the twelve links of dependent origination is not merely psychological in the context of the Buddhadharma (teachings of Buddha). However going into the details of this, along with the topic of rebirth is beyond the scope of this guide. Suffice to say, both the three and one lifetime model of the twelve links of dependent origination are seen to be valid in the teachings of Buddhadharma. The process of rebirth does not require a soul, a self or a Self, but is explained as a causal process of dependent origination - more details in https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../reincarnation...
      The doctrine of rebirth is intrinsically tied to the three-lives model of the twelve links of dependent origination. Even if you don’t believe in rebirth or reincarnation, it is doubtless that the Buddha clearly had literal rebirth (i.e. rebirth/afterlife in the literal and not merely metaphorical or psychological sense) in mind when describing the twelve links of dependent origination, plus it is irrefutable that he had discussed about rebirth and his countless past lives in more than numerous occasions. It is important to understand this to see the context in which the twelve links of dependent origination and the so called ‘death-free’ and ‘not-conditioned’ nature of Nirvana is taught, otherwise it will be misunderstood. If you have read the suttas and Pāli Canon, you will see that the Buddha does not hold any sort of view of an Essence and only taught about process and dependent origination, that is to say, suffering, the origin of suffering, the end of suffering and the path that ends suffering. He has never taught about an I, me and mine, or an ultimate source and substratum, in fact he rejected all these views such as in (MN 1 - The Root Sequence, Mūlapariyāya Sutta - read this one if you have not, including the commentary by Ven. Thanissaro at the top of the page). The whole process of birth and death is simply the chain of dependent origination in action and the reversal or cessation of rebirth (becoming, birth and death) is likewise through the cessation of the afflictive chain of dependent origination with the cessation of ignorance, and so on. Death-free simply means the end of birth, ageing, sickness and death, which precisely and merely means the end of rebirth, it does not require or posit some “deathless ground” that remains after cessation. Because most people do not understand essencelessness, they wrongly grasp on the wrong translation of the epithet of nibbana/nirvana (which literally means cessation or extinguishment, a big hint there already) - amata (death-free) and turn it into an apophatic absolute “THE Deathless” and thereby distort Buddhism into a doctrine of their own making that is no different from Advaita Vedanta.
      Furthermore, not only did the Buddha recalled his past lives, but so did many of his students, and even today there are many seasoned practitioners and meditators that recalled their past lives, including John Tan, Sim Pern Chong and many others. There are also many interesting researches and findings that validates rebirth, including Dr. Ian Stevenson’s research into the past life memories of children. Whether you treat these findings, experiences and memories as valid and regardless of your belief/lack-thereof in rebirth or reincarnation, it is doubtless that rebirth and ending rebirth in the literal sense is a major theme of Buddha’s teachings, and the secular version of Buddhism devoid of literal rebirth is a rather modern offshoot or development where modern materialists try to sell their version of Buddhism stripped of its spiritual contents and only go for the tangible benefits of practice to be experienced in this life only. From the perspective of traditional Buddhism, it is as Dzogchen teacher Acarya Malcolm Smith said, “Dharma sets out to solve one existential problem and one only: rebirth in samsara due to afflictions. If you are practicing ethics, meditation, etc. with any view in mind other than ceasing to take rebirth in samsara, you may be engaged in this or that practice, but you are not practicing Dharma. As Mañjuśrī said, "If one has clinging to this life, one is not a Dharma person."”
      I am not saying that the secular approach is completely devoid of merits (you can certainly benefit from the practice in various ways even if you do not accept rebirth, although perhaps to a different extent than someone who wholeheartedly accepts, investigates and practices Buddhadharma in its entirety), and it is not the purpose of this guide here to convince you of rebirth (although it certainly helps to be more open minded when it comes to exploring spirituality). But as I mentioned, in order to even understand what the Buddha was teaching in the first place, it is important to understand the context in which the twelve links of dependent origination, as well as the death-free nirvana (cessation) is taught. Why is this so? In the context of one-life dependent origination, ‘death-free’ does not make sense, as even an arahant’s body is subjected to ageing, sickness and death (sometimes in gruesome and unpleasant ways - such as Mogallana’s death), and although a living arahant has ended passion, aggression and delusion, and ended all identifications and the conceit of ‘I Am’ or any traces of self-identity, their five senses remain unimpaired and still experience pleasure and pain*. However, this all makes sense in a three-lifetime model - because there is no more birth in a future life, there is henceforth no more future ageing, sickness and death of a future lifetime, and hence death-free is spoken in that context (absolutely not in the sense of an unchanging metaphysical substrate).
      Rebirth Without Soul
      AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
      Rebirth Without Soul
      Rebirth Without Soul
          Reply
          Remove Preview
          6m
      Soh Wei Yu
      (*'Monks, there are these two forms of the nibbāna property. Which two? The nibbāna property with fuel remaining, and the nibbāna property with no fuel remaining.
      'And what is the nibbāna property with fuel remaining? There is the case where a monk is an arahant whose effluents have ended, who has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetter of becoming, and is released through right gnosis. His five [sense] faculties still remain and, owing to their being intact, he experiences the pleasing & the displeasing, and is sensitive to pleasure & pain. His ending of passion, aversion, & delusion is termed the nibbāna property with fuel remaining.
      'And what is the nibbāna property with no fuel remaining?
      There is the case where a monk is an arahant... released through right gnosis. For him, all that is sensed, being unrelished, will grow cold right here. This is termed the nibbāna property with no fuel remaining.'
      — Iti 44)
          Reply
          5m
      Soh Wei Yu
      The Buddha said in Dhātuvibhanga Sutta: The Exposition of the Elements
      https://www.wisdompubs.org/.../middle-length-discourses...
      28. “Formerly, when he was ignorant, he experienced covetousness, desire, and lust; now he has abandoned them, cut them off at the root, made them like a palm stump, done away with them so that they are no longer subject to future arising. Formerly, when he was ignorant, he experienced anger, ill will, and hate; now he has abandoned them, cut them off at the root, made them like a palm stump, done away with them so that they are no longer subject to future arising. Formerly, when he was ignorant, he experienced ignorance and delusion; now he has abandoned them, cut them off [246] at the root, made them like a palm stump, done away with them so that they are no longer subject to future arising. Therefore a bhikkhu possessing [this peace] possesses the supreme foundation of peace. For this, bhikkhu, is the supreme noble peace, namely, the pacification of lust, hate, and delusion.
      29. “So it was with reference to this that it was said: ‘One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, should cultivate relinquishment, and should train for peace.’
      30. “‘The tides of conceiving do not sweep over one who stands upon these [foundations], and when the tides of conceiving no longer sweep over him he is called a sage at peace.’ So it was said. And with reference to what was this said?
      31. “Bhikkhu, ‘I am’ is a conceiving; ‘I am this’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall not be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be possessed of form’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be formless’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be non-percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient’ is a conceiving. Conceiving is a disease, conceiving is a tumour, conceiving is a dart. By overcoming all conceivings, bhikkhu, one is called a sage at peace. And the sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die; he is not shaken and is not agitated. For there is nothing present in him by which he might be born. Not being born, how could he age? Not ageing, how could he die? Not dying, how could he be shaken? Not being shaken, why should he be agitated?
      32. “So it was with reference to this that it was said: ‘The tides of conceiving do not sweep over one who stands upon these [foundations], and when the tides of conceiving no longer sweep over him he is called a sage at peace.’ Bhikkhu, bear in mind this brief exposition of the six elements.”
      WISDOMEXPERIENCE.ORG
      Page not found - The Wisdom Experience
      Page not found - The Wisdom Experience
      Reply
      Remove Preview
      4m 
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• ............
• 
  
• 
  
• Conversation from June 2010, during Soh's I AM phase
  

• Prior to Consciousness

• An Eternal Now

  23 Jun 10, 01:47

  Hi, just a sharing from a book 'The Light Behind Consciousness' by John Wheeler.

  I'm also interested to hear comments from Thusness and Longchen on these articles. And what is the defining characteristic/difference between the experience of 'Consciousness/Impersonal Witness/I Am' and the 'Absolute/Awareness/Awareness-Unaware-Of-Itself' that John Wheeler (and Nisargadatta Maharaj whom John traces his lineage from) talked about? All I 'know' is that I am undeniably present and aware and this presence-awareness is ever-present, whether it is called Consciousness, or Awareness or I Am, I can't see the difference.

  update: on hindsight, during deep sleep it does seem that any types of consciousness has faded into oblivion... sometimes when I woke up I wonder 'where has my consciousness gone to while I slept' even though presence-awareness can never be lost since it is ever-present... so this is the 'awareness unaware of itself' since it does not have any objects to reflect it's presence? Hence, consciousness does indeed come and go on the screen of awareness. Presence-Awareness cannot say it is present (become self-conscious) or create a sense of being or self without reflecting upon itself via the body-mind instrument/object, and being so is prior to consciousness... and is utterly incomprehensible (since comprehension = consciousness)... we can only dissolve into It by letting go/disidentifying from all 'knowing' and 'self-consciousness'. (?)

  Another question: some practitioners are able to maintain Pure Witnessing 24/7 into dream and deep sleep... and as Ken Wilber (who himself is able to achieve this) himself said, this will come only after about 20 years of meditative practice. But if the above perspective is correct, then that is not necessary since grasping onto any form of self-consciousness is still not 'accessing' the Absolute, right? Why not just let go into awareness unaware of itself?

  Speaking of this, it just reminded me of what Thusness told me 4 years ago:

  "There is nothing wrong with the experience of Presence, but it is the attachment (that hinders). It is the subtle attachment that prevents us from deep sleep because we are unwilling to let go of that experience (even into sleep). Though one will not feel anything wrong or it does not disturb one much, it is not a form of achievement as described. It is a retrogression instead. When one is able to let go and let everything subside, even the loss of consciousness, it is a more profound state instead. It has to be a natural momentum that is being built up, until the propensities is gone, the letting go is complete, it is illuminated everywhere."

  and his reply and comment on my non-dual experience in Death, Consciousness, Nondual Perception:

  
  Kok ur head! Ur mind is full of attainments and fruitions.  Nirodha Samapatti is a definite fruition of anagami and arahat.  I have no comments.

  I am merely telling you that it is too early to conclude as follow:

  and suddenly, it feels like "I" completely died and disappeared.. But instead of losing consciousness...

  ...Anyway I learnt from this that 'death' is not as scary as we might think and in fact is quite blissful.

  
   Associating 'death of I' with vivid luminosity of your experience is far too early.  This will lead you into erroneous views because there is also the experience of practitioners by way of complete surrendering or elimination (dropping) like Taoist practitioners.  An experience of deep bliss that is beyond that of what you experienced can occur.  But the focus is not on luminosity but effortlessness, naturalness and spontaneity.  In complete giving up, there is no 'I' ; it is also needless to know anything; in fact 'knowledge' is considered a stumbling block.  The practitioner drops away mind, body, knowledge...everything.  There is no insight, there is no luminosity there is only total allowing of whatever that happens, happen in its own accord.  All senses including consciousness are shut and fully absorbed.  Awareness of 'anything' is only after emerging from that state.
   
  One is the experience of vivid luminosity while the other is a state of oblivious.  It is therefore not appropriate to relate the complete dissolving of 'I' with what u experienced alone.

   

  Furthermore Nisargadatta Maharaj said:

  "Awareness is primordial; it is the original state, beginningless, endless, uncaused, unsupported, without parts, without change. Consciousness is on contact, a reflection against a surface, a state of duality. There can be no consciousness without awareness, but there can be awareness without consciousness, as in deep sleep. Awareness is absolute, consciousness is relative to its content; consciousness is always of something. Consciousness is partial and changeful, awareness is total, changeless, calm and silent. And it is the common matrix of every experience."

  Anyway the John Wheeler quotes.

  John Wheeler (from this week's pointer):

  http://www.naturalstate.us/pointers.html

  

  When consciousness dawns upon arising from sleep, it is simply pure "knowing that I am". It is not individual, and is in fact impersonal and unlimited. The notion of a limited self or "me" spins up in the subsequent conceptualizing in the mind after consciousness has already arisen. But don't forget that your real position is the ever-present reality on which waking (consciousness) and sleep (unconsciousness) both appear.

   

  

  A lot of people come up to the level of consciousness or recognizing the sense of being and take that as the absolute. Here they get stuck and mistake the dawn for the noon, so to speak. The "knowing that I am" or state of consciousness is the first eruption or modification on the absolute, eternal state. People generally miss the fact that consciousness is an intermittent appearance. It is the first modification on the absolute and the beginning of duality. What people are often expounding as reality is really the root of the illusion! What is prior to consciousness — which is what you really are — cannot properly be named. Whatever term is used is only a pointer. Sure, it may be pointed to as consciousness, awareness, being, emptiness, etc. but these are provisional pointers only. In the end, even these are discarded. Even statements like "I am consciousness", "consciousness is all there is", "there is no one here", etc., are only mental concepts. So don't settle for pointers! Let the pointers go and BE what is being pointed to.

  http://www.non-dualitypress.com/sample/The%20Light%20Behind%20Consciousness_sample.pdf

  (excerpts)

  Reality Beyond Consciousness

  
  Reality is beyond all characteristics, even of being, consciousness,
  emptiness or any other designation. To ‘awaken’ to your
  identity as being, consciousness, oneness, presence, emptiness
  or what have you is still moving in the realm of phenomena
  as an imagined entity. Your essential nature is prior to the
  sense of consciousness and being. There is something in you
  that knows the sense of being conscious and present. That is
  your real nature. It is forever unknowable as an object. It is
  beyond being and non-being, consciousness and unconsciousness.
  There is a temptation to take reality to be the sense of
  being, presence, consciousness, aliveness or even something
  more objective, such as stillness or a peaceful state. But all
  those things are objective. You know them. What you are is
  evidently beyond them all.

  
  At some point, there may arise a resonance with the
  pointer that there is something prior to consciousness, prior
  to being, prior to peace, prior to oneness, prior to emptiness.
  Why? Because all of those, however subtle, are conditioned
  states. They are experiences that can be grasped, understood
  or recognized. Even the sense of ‘I am’ is an appearance. It has
  appeared upon your true nature. It is the primary concept or

  experience, which is the basis of all other experiences. Without
  the sense of ‘I am’, there can be no other experiences. You
  are beyond all experience, even the experience of ‘I am’.

  
  At the core of the mind is an empty space, a void through
  which the primordial, non-conceptual reality shines forth as
  consciousness. The whole world appears in the light of consciousness.
  Consciousness itself is a time-bound, phenomenal
  state, an appearance on that unconditioned source which is
  prior to consciousness. Reality is non-conceptual awareness
  that does not even know that it is. Simply put, you are the
  one who is aware of being and of being conscious. That ‘you’
  is entirely beyond the body, senses, mind, consciousness and
  anything else that can be perceived or conceived. It cannot be
  grasped or even be understood, because it is what you are.

  Prior to Consciousness

  
  When you awake in the morning, consciousness dawns.
  In this state of being conscious, you perceive a body, mind
  and world. These are appearances only, not what you are in
  essence. To identify oneself with any of these appearances
  gives rise to the notion of being a separate person, self or
  individual entity. This is the cause of all seeking, suffering
  and doubts. Consciousness is a state that comes and goes.
  In sleep, unconsciousness or under anesthesia, the experience
  of being conscious subsides. So it is clearly a transitory
  state. However, before you awoke and became conscious
  of anything else, including the fact of being conscious, you
  existed. Consciousness happened to you who were there to
  experience it.

  
  Your fundamental position is prior to consciousness. From
  this non-conceptual source, which is what you are, arises initially
  the sense of conscious presence. This is also the sense of
  being, the experience that ‘I am’, or the bare fact of knowing
  that you are. This is the first appearance upon your original
  state. Little can be said about your essential nature because it
  is clearly beyond all concepts and even prior to consciousness.
  Some pointers that have been used are: non-conceptual awareness,
  awareness unaware of itself, pure being (beyond being
  and non-being), the absolute, the unmanifest, noumenon,
  cognizing emptiness, no-thing-ness—to name a few.

  
  This non-conceptual essence is pure non-duality or unicity
  in which the notions of both subject and object are merged.
  Just as the sun does not know light because it is light, so you
  do not know your original nature (as an object) because you
  are that. It is forever beyond the grasp of concepts and subject-
  object knowledge. Yet it is entirely evident and inescapable
  as that which allows you to say with utter certitude ‘I
  am’ and ‘I know that I am’. Even when those words subside,
  you are. Even when the consciousness that knows those words

  subsides, you are. Consciousness is the light of creation. But
  you are the primordial non-conceptual awareness, being or
  ‘no-thing-ness’ in which consciousness and all subsequent
  appearances come and go.

  
  

  The Analogy of the Sun

  
  To understand your true nature, consider the sun. Imagine
  you are the sun shining in space with no other objects
  present. You are present and shining, and yet you see nothing—
  neither light, other objects, nor yourself. Why? Because
  you are singular and there are no objects available to reflect
  your light and confirm your presence objectively. Should an
  object appear, you perceive your light reflected in that object
  and become conscious of something that appears as other or
  apart. In truth, you are only perceiving your own light, nothing
  else. The object is the means for you to perceive yourself
  indirectly. The reflected light takes the apparent form and
  location of the object. The reflected light may in turn light up
  other objects. The perception of light is time bound because
  it lasts only so long as the objects are present. Without any
  object, you (as the sun) revert back to your unmanifested,
  original condition (that is, the shining sun that sees nothing
  at all, including its own light).

  
  This analogy is parallel to your own original state or true
  nature. Your essence is pure non-duality, one without a second,
  which we might point to as non-conceptual awareness
  or pure being that is unaware of its awareness and without a
  sense of its own existence. When the mind, body and objects
  appear, they are perceived as objects in consciousness, which
  is the objective manifestation of your innate, aware presence.
  Consciousness is like the reflected sunlight. The state
  of being conscious arises along with the body-mind and
  appears limited to the time, place and presence of the bodymind.
  The body-mind ‘gives birth’ to consciousness. When
  the body-mind subsides, the consciousness of objects also
  subsides. Consciousness appears as a transient state on your
  original condition. It is intimately tied to the presence of the
  body-mind, which reflects the light of awareness, allowing
  consciousness to manifest in a tangible way. With the rising

  of the body-mind in our experience, you have the instruments
  to say, ‘I am’, ‘I am present’, ‘I know’, ‘I am conscious’.

  
  So the presence of the body-mind is a necessary requirement
  for consciousness to manifest and for awareness to
  become aware that it is. Just as sunlight and reflected sunlight
  are really not two separate things, neither are non-dual awareness
  and manifested consciousness actually different. With the
  appearance of the body-mind, we become conscious, we know
  ‘we are’. And with the rise of the sense of being conscious, all
  other objects are then known. Consciousness itself is really
  an object or experience, since it is a state that appears to you.
  With the subsidence of the experience of the body-mind, consciousness
  also departs. It ‘returns’ to its source of non-dual
  awareness or being. But nothing happens to you at all. In none
  of this have you ever left your original condition. You were,
  are and ever must be the timeless, unconditioned, non-dual
  being-awareness beyond body, mind and consciousness.

  
  

  Back to the Sperm and the Egg

  
  Take it back to the sperm and the egg. When they came
  together, life-energy infused the fetus and consciousness
  began to manifest in that body. Following birth, the sense of
  consciousness gradually matured. The world of experience
  appeared within consciousness, when you came to know
  ‘I am’. Without consciousness, there is no world. Clearly,
  all things appearing in the field of consciousness, including
  the body-mind and everything perceivable and conceivable,
  depend on consciousness. They are impermanent and cannot
  be the abiding essence of what you are.

  
  What is often missed is that consciousness itself, the basis
  of the appearance, is also time-bound. You are that which was
  present before consciousness appeared on you. Before consciousness
  appeared, you were, but you did not know yourself
  or have any sense of existence. That is the absolute, non-dual
  or perfect state. You often hear that you are consciousness,
  presence, the witness or the stillness beyond thought. This is
  only an initial pointer that is useful to free you from a grosser
  identification with the body, mind and personality. But to
  stop there and identify yourself as consciousness, presence or
  stillness is an error. Consciousness is not what you are ultimately.
  In fact, consciousness is the initial movement upon the
  unmanifest that gives rise to duality. Consciousness is duality
  itself. You are prior to consciousness, prior to being, prior to
  presence, prior to the knower, prior to stillness. Spirituality
  takes place in the domain of consciousness and is in duality.
  You are offered things to do, achieve and attain, because reality
  is being viewed through the lens of becoming and time. The
  overt or subtle message is that there is some state that you
  will get in the future. Abandon all such dubious concepts and
  be what you already are—the timeless, inconceivable absolute
  that is prior to the body, mind and personality—even prior to
  consciousness and being.

  
  

  Non-Conceptual Awareness

  
  Your true nature is non-conceptual awareness. This is the
  necessary ground of all experiences, even the presence and
  absence of being conscious (as in waking and dreaming) or
  unconscious (as in deep sleep). You are not the appearances
  or even the states of consciousness that come and go. You
  are to whom they appear. Seeing this, you can drop all the
  labels and just be what you are. The term ‘presence-awareness’
  is another pointer to your natural state prior to consciousness.
  Consciousness is sometimes referred to as the ‘I
  am’ or witness. Presence-awareness equates with non-conceptual
  awareness itself, the absolute, which is what you are.
  This is the basis of all appearances, including the sense of
  ‘I am’. After all, you do not have the sense or thought of ‘I
  am’ in sleep. So the sense of ‘I am’ comes and goes. But you
  are there in sleep and all states as the basic aware-presence
  itself. ‘I am’ and the ego are not the same. Ego is the notion
  of being a separate person, which is based on identifying
  oneself as the body, mind and/or personality. When you see
  that you are not that concept (the separate person), you see
  yourself as the impersonal consciousness or witness in which
  all experiences rise and set. But actually, your fundamental
  identity lies beyond (or prior to) this. You are the non-conceptual
  presence-awareness in which even the witness and
  the world of experiences come and go. That is the absolute or
  ultimate state. That is your natural condition even now, for
  you are aware not only of appearances, but the fact of being
  conscious or witnessing also. So you must be the awareness
  beyond all states, experiences and concepts.

  
  

  The Absolute, Unconditioned Reality

  
  The world of our everyday experience consists of the various
  things we sense and interact with, including external objects
  and our own bodies. We also experience an internal world
  of thoughts and feelings. To experience any of these things
  requires the presence of consciousness. How many thoughts,
  feelings or experiences could we have apart from consciousness?
  This is a simple point that is usually overlooked. In
  non-duality, primacy is given to consciousness as the basic
  fact of experience. In fact, at the level of appearances, consciousness
  is what you are, because it is the only continuously
  present factor in our experience. The world, mind and
  body appear as objects within consciousness. They have no
  independent existence apart from being perceived in consciousness.
  To overlook one’s real position as the conscious
  knowing presence and identify oneself with the body is due
  to a basic misunderstanding, a conceptual error. The body
  is an object that appears in consciousness. You are the one
  to whom it appears. Essentially, the body, mind and world
  are fleeting and insubstantial appearances coming and going
  within consciousness. Relatively speaking, consciousness is
  more enduring, more substantial and more ‘real’ than the
  appearances. Because most of us are ignorantly identified as
  the body and mind, a first step in clarifying our identity is
  to see our identity as consciousness rather than any of the
  objects of consciousness.

  
  Because objects only exist in consciousness and have no
  independent reality, we can view them as manifestations or
  appearances of consciousness, much as waves have no independent
  reality but are only appearances of the underlying
  water which is their substratum. In the wave analogy, all that
  is present is water. The wave is just a label for something that
  appears but has no independent existence as a thing apart
  from its source. In terms of consciousness, this means that

  the objects (body, mind and world) do not exist as independent
  realities as such. It is consciousness alone that exists. This
  means that there has never been an actual independent body,
  mind or world at all. All of those things are only appearances
  of consciousness. All that is truly present in and through all
  experiencing is consciousness alone.

  
  Consciousness itself is not a continuous or unchanging
  experience in and of itself. In waking and dreaming, consciousness
  is present, but in deep sleep we do not experience the
  fact of being conscious. It is not that we disappear, for some
  presence or essence continues as the backdrop of sleep, and
  that something subsequently experiences the re-emergence
  of consciousness and its objects. From this perspective, we
  can view consciousness itself as an experience that comes and
  goes. It is only after the appearance of consciousness that we
  experience the body, mind and world. These are experienced
  within consciousness.

  
  Who or what experiences the arising and setting of
  consciousness? Consider the moment before consciousness
  emerges. No objects are present. There is no time, space or
  duality at all. It is entirely unconditioned, non-dual, without
  distinctions. There is no separation, no lack, no suffering. And
  yet that state is, because it is what consciousness arises from.
  Consciousness is a momentary flicker that arises out of the
  timeless, absolute source. The body, mind and world appear
  within that flicker of consciousness. Consciousness is like a
  light flashing on and off within the unconditioned absolute
  state. In a certain sense, we might say that the absolute is
  what cognizes the coming and going of consciousness. Just as
  the world is registered in consciousness, so is consciousness
  itself registered in the primal space of reality. That is why the
  absolute is sometimes referred to as the pure awareness that
  knows consciousness. It is the light behind consciousness. It
  is the source from which consciousness derives its substance
  and energy. This source is what the most radical and penetrating
  presentations of spirituality are pointing to as our fundamental
  and essential nature. It is not a state or experience,
  because states and experiences only occur after consciousness

  appears. Our fundamental identity is prior to consciousness.
  That underlying and ever-present reality is the source which
  enables consciousness to be conscious and for being to be, so
  to speak.

  
  What is the relationship of consciousness to that prior
  source, the absolute? When we looked at the relationship of
  consciousness to its objects, we saw that there really were
  no separate objects, only consciousness. We can also see
  that consciousness cannot stand apart from its source as a
  separate independent reality. This means that consciousness
  is an expression or modification of the absolute, whatever we
  may choose to call that. Consciousness, which contains all
  that appears in dualistic experience, is itself a ripple arising
  and setting on the timeless, unconditioned, non-dual state,
  which is our true reality. If consciousness is only a modification
  of the absolute, non-dual reality, then consciousness as
  such does not truly exist, since it has no actual independent
  nature. Consciousness appears but it has never truly existed
  as an independent reality. All there is, is the unconditioned,
  absolute, non-dual source. That absolute reality is all there
  is, and it is all that we have ever been. There has never been
  anything else except this.

  
  To speak poetically, consciousness is a fleeting ripple on the
  fathomless ocean of the unconditioned, absolute reality. Consciousness
  simply arises and sets as a vibration or pulsation of
  the uncreated and eternal non-dual awareness. In that apparent
  ripple of consciousness appear universes, worlds, living
  beings and everything within the domain of time and space.
  Yet no thing has ever really come to be, because objects have
  never existed apart from consciousness and consciousness has
  never existed apart from the absolute. That absolute is beyond
  time, space, body, mind, world, being and consciousness. This
  is what your true nature is at this very moment—the absolute,
  unconditioned reality prior to consciousness.

   

• 
  
• longchen

  23 Jun 10, 08:44

  Hi,

  The article is too long. I didn't read in entirety.

  I can only share from own experience... please read with a pint of salt :)

  For one who is abiding in presence practice, he/she will not be really concerned about describing or putting 'how things works' into a framework. He/she will have already recognised the incompleteness and inaccuracy of any form of description.

  As for 'No "I" ' experience, it is not the same as the experience of complete mental formation shut down. AEN, I don't think you have that experience of complete consciousness blank-out yet.... It will be a very distinctive experience. In my case, the initial experience happened during a meditation which led me to the misassumption of 'I AM'. The experience is pure, but the latter interpretation of it was wrong.

  In 'No-I' experience, one simply realised that there is no self in any experience even when consciousness is rolling own. There can be thinking, but there is no thinker.

  On the other hand, in complete consciousness blank-out, yet awareness persists, there is not a single thought or any form of mental formation. Basically, there is no thinking, no mental image or any form of consciousness that we normally have. It will be distinctive because it is this experience that will allow one to see for the first time the difference between mental-mixed consciousness and pure presence.

  Complete mental formation shut down and yet awareness still exist, it is not the same as sleep.

  Personally, I don't see a point in maintaining witnessing even into sleep. It is really a desire to have that expereince of Presence.

  Regards

• An Eternal Now

  23 Jun 10, 13:02

  Originally posted by longchen:

  Hi,

  The article is too long. I didn't read in entirety.

  I can only share from own experience... please read with a pint of salt :)

  For one who is abiding in presence practice, he/she will not be really concerned about describing or putting 'how things works' into a framework. He/she will have already recognised the incompleteness and inaccuracy of any form of description.

  As for 'No "I" ' experience, it is not the same as the experience of complete mental formation shut down. AEN, I don't think you have that experience of complete consciousness blank-out yet.... It will be a very distinctive experience. In my case, the initial experience happened during a meditation which led me to the misassumption of 'I AM'. The experience is pure, but the latter interpretation of it was wrong.

  In 'No-I' experience, one simply realised that there is no self in any experience even when consciousness is rolling own. There can be thinking, but there is no thinker.

  On the other hand, in complete consciousness blank-out, yet awareness persists, there is not a single thought or any form of mental formation. Basically, there is no thinking, no mental image or any form of consciousness that we normally have. It will be distinctive because it is this experience that will allow one to see for the first time the difference between mental-mixed consciousness and pure presence.

  Complete mental formation shut down and yet awareness still exist, it is not the same as sleep.

  Personally, I don't see a point in maintaining witnessing even into sleep. It is really a desire to have that expereince of Presence.

  Regards

  Hi,

  I have experienced Presence and a complete certainty of Being in a state of thoughtlessness... not a single thought as you said, however I do not know if it is the 'consciousness blank out' you mentioned... because I do not have a distinct feeling that if someone were to come and talk to me at that moment, I would be unaware of it or unable to hear it. However at that moment all I experienced is pure empty Presence and nothing else, no thought, no sound, etc. It is what remains after every thought and everything subsides... as I wrote in Certainty of Being, "As the thoughts subside, an intense and palpable sense of beingness and presence, the only 'thing' that remains that I feel to be my innermost essence."

  I do agree though that probably an initial experience of Presence Awareness led on to an image of I Am... as a form of reflection of itself because otherwise it has no way to account for its existence on the mental level. Presence Awareness by itself would not be able to reflect upon itself this way and create a sense of Self (aka Consciousness). Presence Awareness would remain un-selfaware without the body-mind instrument to become self-conscious. However just because Presence Awareness is unable to reflect upon itself in states like deep sleep, does not mean it does not exist, it simply returns to its natural state of 'Awareness-Unaware-Of-Itself'... a state of potentiality where consciousness can return at any moment on the screen of Awareness. Everything depends on Presence-Awareness as the Source of all.

  As John Wheeler says, The "knowing that I am" or state of consciousness is the first eruption or modification on the absolute, eternal state.

  and "The body-mind ‘gives birth’ to consciousness. When
  the body-mind subsides, the consciousness of objects also
  subsides. Consciousness appears as a transient state on your
  original condition. It is intimately tied to the presence of the
  body-mind, which reflects the light of awareness, allowing
  consciousness to manifest in a tangible way. With the rising

  of the body-mind in our experience, you have the instruments
  to say, ‘I am’, ‘I am present’, ‘I know’, ‘I am conscious’."

   

  Premananda wrote about ultimately giving up the "universal I Am" to become "pure awareness",

  http://www.prahlad.org/disciples/premananda/essays/NISARGADATTA%20CONSCIOUSNESS%20AND%20AWARENESS.htm

  It took me years to figure this much out. Each realization builds on and becomes possible because of the previous realizations, and the final realization can even seem to contradict a previous realization.

  1. First I realize I am not all this other stuff that people usually think they are. I am not a person. The person is memories, knowledge, habits, and other false identies: "Mr. So- and-so." So I dispense with that. I can see that it is all a false identity made up by thoughts.

  2. Then I realize I am not even the more intimate stuff that people usually think they are. I am not the body (that is the toughest one, as Nisargadatta points out again and again). I am not the mind or its thoughts either. I am not the chemistry of all this either. One could spend an entire lifetime and not ever get through this realization.

  3. Then I realize that if I subtract all the above, what is left? Only my sense of existing itself, my sense of presence, my sense of being here, the consciousness. I realize that I am that consciousness only, the feeling of existing. I must be THAT. What IS that? It is very subtle. But now I am coming closer. This is the realization of the mystical phrase "I am that I am." And along with this stage of realization comes the realization of my universality. This realization of the "I am" brings with it the explosive understanding that there is no such thing as an individual, the "I am" is universal, everyone and every living thing is feeling it the same way. We don't ourselves create our sense of "I am." Rather we inherit the prior existing sense of presence of the original beingness which spontaneously first appeared on the background of the void, or the object-less pure awareness.

  4. When I am thus established in sense of identity with this universal sense of presence, or the "I am," I am at last poised for the final realization. Remember, the realization of the "I am" is already a very high state, and many will simply stop here to enjoy living in the universal personless beingness. This is the knowledge of God and the knowledge that I am God. But some rare ones keep going and keep questioning deeper and come to the breakthrough realization that ALL beingness, even the beingness of "God" is still a form of illusion and duality, and they will realize and move into and "become" the pure awareness only, giving up even that last and very high identity as the universal "I am." The consciousness will continue on no doubt, and the all the activities of life, but the identity of myself will now be fixed back at its original home, the pure awareness which was prior to consciousness.

  This last step is still incomprehensible to me but I love to think about it again and again. Many can give up the lesser false identifications, casting them off like tattered old clothes and stripping naked down to the singular universal consciousness. But who can give up that very sense of beingness itself? We LOVE to be, and fear terribly not being anymore. It is frightening! Looked at from a lower level the final realization seems like absolute and utter anihilation itself, and who on earth wants to be completely anihilated? Thus, very few rare souls ever realize the final realization! Above all, I WANT TO BE!

  But the true sage makes the final realization and the final step and is in fact completely anihilated. "He" ceases to exist, and all that is left of him is what was there at the beginning of the world, as Buddha became the Void itself and entered into the great nirvana. A friend of mine called it "The Great Suicide." Then one realizes the final incredible and terrifying reality: there is nothing. And though really and truly there is absolutely nothing, at the same time that nothingness is inexplicably filled to fullness with an indescribable "something which is not a thing," the pure awareness, the absolute, unaware of itself. That is the one and only "thing-which-is-not- a-thing" which is truly real. All else is false, a fraud made of spacetime, of things which begin and end and come and go, the Great Maha Maya, the dreams of the universal mind.

   

  Thanks..

• longchen

  23 Jun 10, 13:40

  Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

  Hi,

  I have experienced Presence and a complete certainty of Being in a state of thoughtlessness... not a single thought as you said, however I do not know if it is the 'consciousness blank out' you mentioned... because I do not have a distinct feeling that if someone were to come and talk to me at that moment, I would be unaware of it or unable to hear it. However at that moment all I experienced is pure empty Presence and nothing else, no thought, no sound, etc.

  
  I see...

  Just to verify. The experience should not be vast or spacious. It should be borderless with no 'you' there.

• An Eternal Now

  23 Jun 10, 14:04

  Originally posted by longchen:

  
  I see...

  Just to verify. The experience should not be vast or spacious. It should be borderless with no 'you' there.

  There is no sense of vastness or spacious at that time. There is only Self.. not a mental identification but a sense of presence prior to all thoughts, a very palpable and undeniable sense of Presence-Awareness that is prior to, behind, everything. I intuitively understood this to be 'Who I Am' (I was practicing the koan 'Before birth, who am I?' at that point) even without thought-reflection, a non-conceptual certainty and conviction because this actually goes beyond all doubts... it is impersonal and yet it feels more 'Me' than anything else. There is just this certainty of Being.

• An Eternal Now

  23 Jun 10, 14:05

  I had sense of vastness or spaciousness many times even before (and subsequently after) that experience, but that was something distinct from all the previous experiences... a conviction grew on what I am, a certainty of 'I am'. I do not remember vastness or spaciousness in that experience.

  I do remember however subsequent experiences which clarified further... includes a sense of borderlessness, and this made me understood the 'universal' and 'impersonal' nature of Awareness even more. The personal sense of witness which has a sense of locality dissolved into a universal witness that is simultaneously nowhere and everywhere. It is now understood that Perceiving/Witnessing has no center... it is universal awareness perceiving the sounds, the sights, and everything else.

• longchen

  23 Jun 10, 14:25

  Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

  I had sense of vastness or spaciousness many times even before (and subsequently after) that experience, but that was something distinct from all the previous experiences... a conviction grew on what I am, a certainty of 'I am'. I do not remember vastness or spaciousness in that experience.

  I do remember however subsequent experiences which clarified further... includes a sense of borderlessness, and this made me understood the 'universal' and 'impersonal' nature of Awareness even more. The personal sense of witness which has a sense of locality dissolved into a universal witness that is simultaneously nowhere and everywhere. It is now understood that Perceiving/Witnessing has no center... it is universal awareness perceiving the sounds, the sights, and everything else.

  
  I see. Yes, it should be borderless and will overturn our previous belief of finite locality.

• An Eternal Now

  23 Jun 10, 19:01

  Originally posted by longchen:

  
  I see. Yes, it should be borderless and will overturn our previous belief of finite locality.

  Yes... I think, when the mind tries to understand Presence... at the same time it localizes it in the form of 'I AM'.

  The Source is totally ungraspable... non-local, centerless, infinite, all-pervading, unknowable as an object yet IS, and as such the mind in its attempt to 'know' Presence has made a closest substitute. This self-reflexive consciousness arises naturally right after deep sleep... but later gradually evolved into grosser identifications like 'I am this, I am that'.

  When Pure Awareness is experienced, it is non-local, centerless, borderless, but later gets mixed up with the first thought/sense that arose from Pure Awareness which is the sense of 'I Am', because it is the first act of 'self-consciousness', the closest 'thing' to pure awareness that can be cognized. Before that is just 'awareness unaware of itself'.

  John Wheeler:

  

  To know any experience, there must be a knowing that "I am". That is just the basic conscious knowing of being present. That is what first appears out of deep sleep. It is not a personal "I" or any other notion. Call it impersonal knowing. Subsequently, the mind begins operating and the separate "I" notion is created in thought.

  

  Pure awareness, or non-conceptual reality, is non-dual. Upon or within this arises self-consciousness, which is the pure sense of "I am", but not yet individualized. Then follows the "I" concept, or the notion of separate individuality. Lastly, there appear notions such as I am this or that (body, mind, personality, etc.).

   

  

  All phenomena appear in consciousness. That consciousness is NOT personal. It is the primordial or first experience in duality. It is the pure sense of "I am" with no other content, just knowing "I am" without words, or being self-consciously aware. But that is still an experience. You are the space in which even that comes and goes.

• Thusness

  23 Jun 10, 22:21

  Like what longchen said, it is quite a long article. Haven't got the time to really go through it.  I will go through it during the weekends.  Was quite busy these days. :)

• An Eternal Now

  23 Jun 10, 23:23

  Originally posted by Thusness:

  Like what longchen said, it is quite a long article. Haven't got the time to really go through it.  I will go through it during the weekends.  Was quite busy these days. :)

  I see.. take your time, will look forward to your reply. Thanks :)

• seotiblizzard

  23 Jul 10, 06:34

  Hello People! Just saying Hi.

  This thread like damn serious.

•