He
did not say his identity is the body and I AM is the awareness inside
the body. He is saying there is no identity in him, no self/Self
whatsoever. This is correct. Therefore, there are just the body and mind
aggregates. Even the I AM is not seen as any different from another
aggregates after anatta realization (and not some unchanging and
permanent underlying background -- that is an illusin). This is
congruent with anatta realization. He did not deny consciousness, but he
rejected identity as an illusion.
-----Original Message-----
From: Soh Wei Yu
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:16 PM
To: Thusness
Subject: You are body, not mountain
Hi, what is richard trying to point out here by saying you are not the
world? That there is no cosmic consciousness?
RESPONDENT: 'There is nothing but x'; substitute for 'x' any term ...
RICHARD: Okay ... as you say 'any term' here is what I report looks like
under your schemata:
. [example only]: 'There is nothing but this actual world. You are this
actual world'.
Now, as this actual world is the world of this body...the world of the
mountains and the streams...and so on and so on...what you are saying is
that you are everything... whereas I say I am this flesh and blood body only
(sans identity in toto).
There is no such self-aggrandisement...(there is no identity in actuality).
And this is truly wonderful.
John Tan's reply:
It is like saying there is only aggregates. No aggrandisement at all. It
is a way of attempting to get grounded to the most fundamental facts so that
there is no abstraction or reification. A way of anchoring PCEs. It is
similar to getting oneself grounded in the here and now. But I do not not
want to comment about AF. Do not want u to create unnecessary problems.
I AM is actually a PCE, although Richard may not see it that way.
Why is I AM a PCE? This is also explained in the I AM chapter of AtR guide:
"As John Tan also said in 2011:
“John: what is "I AM"
is it a pce? (Soh: PCE = pure consciousness experience, see glossary at the bottom of this document)
is there emotion
is there feeling
is there thought
is there division or complete stillness?
in hearing there is just sound, just this complete, direct clarity of sound!
so what is "I AM"?
Soh Wei Yu: it is the same
just that pure non conceptual thought
Soh Wei Yu: no, an ultimate identity is created as an afterthought
John: indeed
it is the mis-interpretation after that experience that is causing the confusion
that experience itself is pure conscious experience
there is nothing that is impure
that is why it is a sense of pure existence
it is only mistaken due to the 'wrong view'
so it is a pure conscious experience in thought.
not sound, taste, touch...etc
PCE (Pure Consciousness Experience) is about direct and pure experience of whatever we encounter in sight, sound, taste...
the quality and depth of experience in sound
in contacts
in taste
in scenery
has he truly experience the immense luminous clarity in the senses?
if so, what about 'thought'?
when all senses are shut
the pure sense of existence as it is when the senses are shut.
then with senses open
have a clear understanding
do not compare irrationally without clear understanding”
(9:12 PM) Thusness: you don't think that "I AMness" is low stage of enligthenment leh
(9:12 PM) Thusness: the experience is the same. it is just the clarity. In terms of insight. Not experience.
(9:13 PM) AEN: icic..
(9:13 PM) Thusness: so a person that has experience "I AMness" and non dual is the same. except the insight is different.
(9:13 PM) AEN: oic
(9:13
PM) Thusness: non dual is every moment there is the experience of
presence. or the insight into the every moment experience of presence.
because what that prevent that experience is the illusion of self and "I
AM" is that distorted view. the experience is the same leh.
(9:15
PM) Thusness: din you see i always say there is nothing wrong with that
experience to longchen, jonls... i only say it is skewed towards the
thought realm. so don't differentiate but know what is the problem. I
always say it is misinterpretation of the experience of presence. not
the experience itself. but "I AMness" prevents us from seeing.
"
Some of his PCE description actually isn't different from I AM:
RESPONDENT:
Furthermore, if you make the argument that since there is no ‘I’, there
can also be no immortality of the ‘I’, you have to accept the argument
that since there is no ‘I’, there can also be no death of the ‘I’.
Otherwise, while you might be beyond enlightenment, you would not be
very consistent.
RICHARD:
Oh, yes … it is a delicious sensation to be here; I experience myself
as no-one in particular; I am simply a body enjoying this exquisite
moment of being alive unimpeded by any ‘self’ within. Only this moment
actually exists, for there is no lasting ‘I’ present which would make
the past and future real. The freedom from enduring over time as the
past, the present and the future, leaves one completely able to
appreciate the impeccable purity of being here. This appreciation is the
exclusive attention paid to being alive right here and now. This type
of attention is best known as apperception, which happens when the mind
becomes aware of itself. Apperception is an awareness of consciousness.
It is not ‘I’ being aware of ‘me’ being conscious; it is the mind’s
awareness of itself. Apperception is a way of seeing that can be arrived
at by pure contemplation. Pure contemplation is when ‘I’ cease thinking
... and thinking takes place of its own accord. Such a mind, being free
of the ‘thinker’ and the ‘feeler’ – ‘I’ as ego and soul – is capable of
immense clarity and purity. All this is born only out of pure intent.
Pure intent is derived from the PCE experienced during a peak
experience, which all humans have had at some stage in their life. A
peak experience is when ‘I’ spontaneously cease to ‘be’, temporarily,
and this moment and place is here and now. Everything is seen to be
perfect as-it-is. Diligent attention paid to the peak experience gives
rise to pure intent. With pure intent running as a ‘golden thread’
through one’s life, reflective contemplation rapidly becomes more and
more fascinating. When one is totally fascinated, reflective
contemplation becomes pure awareness ... and then apperception happens
of itself.