Someone asked:

How do you recommend to break through to I AM? After a few years of self inquiry, it feels like that avenue is exhausted. How do I know I'm not wasting more time?

 

Soh replied:


How did you practice self enquiry? Do you fall into concepts or do you have glimpses of Being?

On self enquiry, see:

Soh's translation:
Yuan Yin Lao Ren:
In the past there was a Master who contemplated, "what is the original face before my parents were born?" He contemplated for many years, but did not awaken. Later on he encountered a great noble person and requested for his compassionate guidance. The noble one asked: "What koan did you contemplate?" He replied: "I contemplated what is the original face before my parents were born?" Noble one replied: "You contemplated too far away, should look nearby." He asked: "How should I look nearby?" Noble one replied: "Don't look into what is before your parents were born, need to look at: before a thought arise, what is it?" The Zen practitioner immediately attained great awakening.
Everyone that is sitting here, please look at what is this before a moment of thought's arising? IT is radiating light in front of everybody's [sense] doors, the brightness radiates everything yet is without the slightest clinging, nothing is known and nothing is seen yet it is not similar to wood and stones, what is This? IT is right here shining in its brilliancy, this is awakening to the Way. Therefore it is said, "the great way is not difficult, just cease speech and words"!

.....


Meditation and Self-Enquiry
I wrote this to my mother today in Chinese about the purpose of practicing and to encourage her to meditate. English translation below.
参禅是要参究本来面目是什么,自性是什么,不是要达到一种境界
是要发现,体悟,什么是自性、觉性。要达到完全没有疑惑才是”悟”
要一切念头断后还要回光返照,我是谁?在觉知的是什么?如果有念头回答是这个那个就错,因为答案不在语言文字,所以把念头舍掉再继续参、回光返照。这是明心最直接的法。
要每天打坐,元音老人叫弟子每天打坐两小时。
如果不能把心静下来到无念,很难开悟。你要想想你最容易把心静下的方法是什么?是打坐吗?还是念佛持咒?什么方法如果能安心都可以,可是要每天修,不能断断续续。
可是无念还不是开悟,达到无念时还要回光返照,找出了了分明的是谁,是什么,才能悟到自性,不然你的打坐只是一种静态,还没悟到自性。
悟到自性后只是明心,还不算是悟性(人法二空之理、登地菩萨),还要继续。所以”明心见性”其实是两个:先明心(真心),后见性。
所以要努力修到明心见性。
六祖慧能说过:不识本心学法无益。
English translation:
Contemplating Zen [Koan] is about inquiring what exactly is our original face, what is our Self-Nature, it is not about achieving a meditative state.
It is rather to discover, to realize, what exactly is our Self-Nature/Awareness. One must reach a state of utter doubtlessness/certainty to be considered '[Self-]Realization'.
After the utter cessation of all thoughts, one must turn one's light around to find out, What am I? What is it that is Aware? If there is a thought which answers 'it is this or that' then that's wrong, because the real answer lies not in words and letters. Therefore cast aside those thoughts and continue inquiring, turning the light around. This is the most direct method to apprehend one's Mind.
You should meditate everyday. Master Yuan Yin asks his student to meditate two hours a day.
If you are unable to quiet your mind to a state of no-thought, it will be difficult to realise. You should think carefully what is the best method for you to still your mind? Is it meditation? Or is it chanting the Buddha's name and reciting mantras? Whatever methods which calms the mind will do, but you have to practice everyday, not only practice intermittently or occasionally.
However, reaching a state of no-thought is not awakening. Upon reaching a state of no-thought, continue turning the light around to find out Who is that which is the Clear Knowingness? What is it? Then you will realise your Self-Nature. Otherwise your meditation is merely a state of stillness, not yet realising Self-Nature.
Realizing Self-Nature is only Apprehending one's Mind, it is not yet realizing Nature [the nature of mind and phenomena] (the principle of the twofold emptiness of persons and phenomena as realized by a first bhumi Bodhisattva), therefore one must continue. Hence, "Apprehending Mind and Realising Nature" consists of two parts: first apprehend one's Mind (True Mind), later realize [Empty] Nature.
Therefore practice hard to Apprehend Mind and Realize Nature.
The Sixth Ch'an Patriarch said: It is useless to learn the dharma without recognising original Mind.


-----


Mr. C: Hello Soh,


I have been practicing a lot of Self Inquiry during the past week. I’m reaching that thoughtless state and when I inquire “Who’s aware of this experience?” there’s no change. Is just this boundless space where there’s just awareness.

I read your journal and you describe being in a blank and asking “Who is aware of this experience?” and having a experience of being.

I wouldn’t say that the “place” I dwell it’s blank because it is very clear. And there’s a feeling of just being That. But at the same time I don’t feel anything really different in my perception of reality (beyond few thoughts and higher space awareness)

Am I missing something?

Thank you 
 
 
Soh replied: 
 
What you experience is good. Continue inquiring.
 
Session Start: Sunday, 25 October, 2009

(2:07 AM) AEN: just now it occurred to me that the places i've been are hazy like a dream, they come and go.... then i realised my thoughts also are like a dream, they come and go... when i dropped that theres only my own existence and presence left which is real and not hazy at all and doesnt come and go
(2:34 AM) AEN: then for a short while i was only aware of my own existence... until i got distracted :P
(5:16 AM) Thusness: not bad... 🙂 That is the beginning phase of I AM.
(5:19 AM) Thusness: first drop ur thoughts, drop all sort of mental chattering, drop everything, don't think of non-dual. Allow urself to be filled with only this sense of existence. This is the first phase.
(5:19 AM) AEN: icic..
(5:20 AM) Thusness: then u will realize what existence is. 🙂
 
Mr. C:
 
That’s good to hear. I’ll keep working 🙏🏼
You said to keep inquiring, but this advice from Jon about dropping everything and allowing to be filled with sense of existence, to do this I need to stop the Inquiry right?
 
 
To clarify, this state of Being is different from the blank state. If it is the blank state I should keep inquiring but if it is the Being (sense of existence) should I let go of Inquiring? 
 
 
Soh replied:
doesnt mean stop inquiry
i still inquired all the way to February 2010 when I realized I AM
inquiry is supposed to lead to the non-conceptual taste and realization of Existence, so its non contradictory
as long as there is slightest doubt what Existence is then continue inquiry. if you are just resting as Existence then just go into it 
 
 
Mr. C:
Yeah my question is during practice. If I should stop inquiring when I’m just at a state of Being, not a blank state but a very clear Existence.

Thank you Soh! 
 
 
Soh replied:
yes. the purpose of inquiry is not to keep repeating the question but to turn your attention to the Self
 
 
5. Nāṉ Ār? paragraph 6: if or as soon as anything other than ourself appears in our awareness, we should simply turn our attention back towards ourself, the one to whom all other things (all thoughts, forms or phenomena) appear

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

If we find ourself being concerned about such things and therefore distracted by them, that is due to the strength of our viṣaya-vāsanās, and the most effective means to weaken our viṣaya-vāsanās and thereby wean our mind off its interest in all other things is just to persevere in this simple practice of being self-attentive. Therefore, no matter what may distract us or seem a problem to us, let us not be concerned about them but just patiently and persistently continue trying to be self-attentive, unmindful of everything else.
 
 
 
.... 
 
Mr C: Yeah, it seems that I was still inquiring even when I was aware of Being. That's why I was feeling stuck.

I will now Inquire only there's something othar than "myself" appearing.

This pointer "To whom?" is really good. Short and direct.

Thank you!
Hey Soh, just wanna say that those last instructions made a huge difference.

Practice now is really sharp and asking “To whom?” has been the perfect inquiry to return to Being.

Outside formal practice the sense of self is expanding everywhere even though there was no “eureka” moment yet. There’s a feel of awareness being 360 degrees specially behind my head and shoulders. 
 
 
Soh: (thumbs up) 
 
Told someone something similar today: 
 
[5:19 PM, 8/4/2021] Mr. W: Trying to find the unfindable "me"...

"Where" the hell is this "awareness" if it is not inside my head?
[7:03 PM, 8/4/2021] Soh Wei Yu: If you are trying to locate it in your field of experience thats like looking in the display for the screen. Looking for the experiencer in the experience. I AM realization is the realization of You, so you don’t look for You outside anywhere
[7:03 PM, 8/4/2021] Soh Wei Yu: Find out to whom does head and everything appear to/in
[7:05 PM, 8/4/2021] Mr. W: I suppose that's being aware of being aware?
[7:06 PM, 8/4/2021] Soh Wei Yu: You can say so. Turn your attention around to realize what You/Awareness is
[7:11 PM, 8/4/2021] Mr. W: Yah, will focus on this
[7:11 PM, 8/4/2021] Mr. W: As in one of your recent comments... it's not an intellectual questioning yah?
[7:24 PM, 8/4/2021] Soh Wei Yu: You need to investigate but investigation is not verbally repeating a question
[7:24 PM, 8/4/2021] Soh Wei Yu: Investigate means you distinguish what is you and what is not you
[7:25 PM, 8/4/2021] Soh Wei Yu: Then you turn away from the not you to realise you
[7:25 PM, 8/4/2021] Soh Wei Yu: All these is done in a non verbal manner
[7:35 PM, 8/4/2021] Mr. W: I know the answer is the one that is aware of experience. But what is missing?
[8:06 PM, 8/4/2021] Soh Wei Yu: Realization comes with total certainty and direct taste
[8:25 PM, 8/4/2021] Mr. W: Okay, keep trying. Hope the Eureka moment happens sooner rather than later.
 
 
.....
 

As Jayson pointed out, with any of these perceptions, experiences you can simply inquire “who is the one perceiving?” Then look “there.”  Also can just notice the vantage FROM which you seem to be perceiving each experience and rest there.  Often this comes with a sort of stepwise inward moving experience but hold that description loosely. When you come to a truly contentless experience there will be nothing to do no where specific to look and an alertness to any arising thought or perception which will be immediately discounted as such. Once this is clear there’s not a lot more to do but stay with it, stay alert but don’t strain. There are a few expected “reactions” at this point one being physiologic fear/terror. If it comes and you remain in thoughtless clarity it will pass.  Practice this way and let me know what you find.  I’ve worked with a handful of people in exactly the way you are practicing in last couple weeks who all broke through.  You got this. But you gotta go where you no longer know where you are 😉

 

- Angelo Dilullo

 

“Inquiry for First Awakening 


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


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


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


Happy Travels.


Art by: Platon Yurich”

- Angelo Dilullo

 

Soh Wei Yu: Malcolm rejects notion of unchanging awareness or turiya in sleep, says sleep is both unconscious and unaware:

https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=671528#p671528

 

Malcolm:

" No, when you are unconscious, for example in deep sleep, you are also unaware. "


" You are just unconscious:

https://www.webmd.com/sleep-disorders/d ... deep-clean

When one is awake and aware, one's brain is very active."

" Yawn. Boring. Turiya is just an Advaita:imputation, "


Someone asked: " Are you denying the experience of those who claim to have a continuous sense of a 'knower' into deep sleep?"

Malcolm:

"Yes. Categorically. If they are aware when they are asleep, it isn't deep sleep. Not only that, people can claim anything. But how can one test the claim, "I am continuously aware in a state of deep sleep"? "


" I would argue it is not the case that experience and awareness are phenomenologically distinct. If we are color-blind for example, we cannot experience certain colors. so we are not aware of them. Same goes for certain kinds of deafness.

In deep sleep, our brains switch to delta waves. In this state we are not aware of the outside world nor do we "experience" it. If we are woken from deep sleep, we are generally startled awake. Experience is only conscious, never unconscious."



John Tan: 👍

Someone posted about non meditation but in order for people not to have the wrong idea that non meditation means the neo advaita notion of literally no need for meditation, I shared these excerpts:


    Soh Wei Yu
    Admin
    Top contributor
    Coincidentally, I just read this on Kyle pdf yesterday:
    Author: krodha
    Date: Wed Dec 25, 2013 9:28 pm
    Title: Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals
    Content:
    You as an individual are the result of confusion (or ignorance) about your primordial state. Your primordial state is originally pure and is always undefiled, however your knowledge of that primordial state requires introduction and refinement. The kun byed rgyal po is saying that from the perspective of your primordial state [primordial wisdom i.e. ye shes], practice, rituals and so on are extraneous, because your primordial state is naturally perfected. You as an individual on the other hand, need to refine your knowledge of your primordial state, and therefore for you, practice and rituals and so on, are necessary. So it's a paradox. The ultimate state requires nothing, but you in your relative condition do require practice. When your knowledge of your primordial state is complete (through practice and integration), there will no longer be a difference between you and primordial wisdom. Until that time though, relative effort is required.
    Author: krodha
    Date: Wed Dec 25, 2013 10:01 pm
    Title: Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals
    Content:
    Skillful effort is required until the ultimate nature of mind [sems nyid] is recognized. Through that recognition, the ability to distinguish mind from wisdom occurs, and the practice then is to familiarize and rest in one's knowledge [rig pa] of wisdom [ye shes]. That practice is 'effortless', because effort necessarily entails a subject who is attempting to 'do something' or 'maintain something'. However there is nothing which is being 'done' in that sense, because that definitive rigpa is free of mind, and is therefore free of a subject which is mediating experience. So the praxis is simply resting in that effortless natural state.
    The definitive practice is effortless, however initially, some (skillful) effort is required. Good that you're maintaining a relationship with a qualified teacher though, the seemingly contradictory paradoxes like the issue you've raised here are precisely why the guru is an indispensable aspect of Dzogchen.
    Author: krodha
    Date: Wed Dec 25, 2013 10:24 pm
    Title: Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals Content:
    Yes, and here is a qualified teacher clarifying this point:
    "Lopon comments that while the practitioner is not distracted but is continuously in the natural state it is as if he or she is in space - whatever is done, no traces are left behind. As we said, whether you paint black or white on space nothing remains. The base that keeps the traces is lost; it is empty.
    Of course this only applies to a practitioner who has achieved continuous contemplation. For other people who still grasp at their karmic traces this does not apply. When the Lopon first came to Swayambhu in Nepal in 1944 he met some Tibetans with whom he travelled for some days. One man was a former monk who had a wife and children and was carrying a huge load of luggage on his back.
    When he was a monk he had met Dega Rinpoche, a famous Dzogchenpa, in the mountains and consequentially he gave up his robes because he felt he was too tied up with the vinaya vows. But Lopon pointed out that he was equally tied up with his children. The man replied that in Dzogchen it is said that it does not matter what you do - so he was free to do anything and that was okay. But this is a complete misunderstanding of Dzogchen. The teachings only apply when you are totally absorbed in the natural state. It depends on your practice and only you can judge.
    So it is a paradox that beginners must take actions even though the ultimate Dzogchen view has no action. The beginner must take a very strong action - a decision - otherwise there will be doubt and hesitancy. All the preparatory methods help us realize the natural state. But once it is seen and understood then the situation is different. The experience Dzogchenpa would not need to do preparatory practices at all."
    - Lopon Tenzin Namdak
    and another from him on the same issue:
    "In the practice of Dzogchen, we do not find it necessary to do visualizations of deities or to do recitations like the Refuge and Bodhichitta. Some would say that these are not necessary to do at all, but this is speaking from the side of the Natural State only. They say in the Natural State, everything is present there already in potential, and so there is nothing lacking and nothing more to do to add or acquire anything. This is fine. But on the side of the practitioner, there is much to do and practices such as Refuge and Bodhichitta are very necessary. In its own terms, Dzogchen has no rules; it is open to everything. But does this mean we can do just what we feel like at the moment? On the side of the Natural State, this is true and there are no restrictions or limitations. All appearances are manifestations of mind (sems kyi snang-ba), like reflections seen in a mirror, and there is no inherent negativity or impurity in them. Everything is perfectly all right just as it is, as the energy (rtsal) of the Nature of Mind in manifestation. It is like white and black clouds passing overhead in the sky; they equally obscure the face of the sun. When they depart, there are no traces left behind. However, that is speaking only on the side of the Natural State, which is like the clear, open sky, unaffected by the presence or absence of these clouds. For the sky, it is all the same. But on the side of the practitioner, it is quite different because we mistakenly believe these clouds are solid, opaque, and quite real and substantial. As practitioners we must first come to an understanding of the insubstantiality and unreality of all these clouds which obscure the sky of our own Nature of Mind (sems-nyid). It is our Tawa (lta-ba), or view, our way of looking at things, which is basic and fundamental, and we must begin here. Then we must practice and attain realization. So on the side of the practitioner, practice and commitment are most certainly required. The Natural State in itself is totally open and clear and spacious like the sky but we, as individuals, are not totally open and unobstructed.”
    - Lopon Tenzin Namdak
    Author: krodha
    Date: Thu Dec 26, 2013 1:25 am
    Title: Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals
    Content:
    The kun byed rgyal po is speaking from the ultimate standpoint as primordial wisdom. The system of Dzogchen is a means to recognize primordial wisdom, integrate with primordial wisdom, and then actualize buddhahood. That is what practice is for.


    Sim Pern Chong
    Admin
    Top contributor
    Soh Wei Yu So clear. Thanks for sharing.








  • Soh Wei Yu
    Admin
    Top contributor
    Author: krodha
    Date: Mon Oct 07, 2013 5:19 pm Title: Re: Integration
    Content:
    Jean-Luc Achard on integration:
    "Oh yes there are plenty of things to do. Rushen for instance in order to clearly deepen this knowledge and have a direct experience that is not produced by our discursiveness. Then, the training of the 3 doors. Then specific techniques such as the Four Natural Accesses to properly access the state of Trekcho. You seem to imply that there is nothing to do: there are things to do to enter this state, and once you're in it you just cultivate it by integrating other things (after having become familiarized with it). This appears to be not understood at all in this discussion. When you are in this state, you just have to stabilize it. This takes the whole path to do so! (Don't bypass it because you don't like it, it's precisely like this, one has to practice, period). You may state otherwise but this is
    not Dzogchen anymore. This is Chan. We don't accept Chan as having a definitive perspective on the natural state in Dzogchen. This is a sutra-based approach which is at best dualistic (the 2 truths) or at worst nihilistic (don't do nothing). Then, what is happening in the meditation? Nothing, nothing at all. No integration. Once you are stable in the experience of the natural, you realize that this experience is uncompounded, unaltered, etc., and you don't have to do anything to correct it. But in general everybody (including our masters at a stage in their life) regresses from it. So one has to become familiar with it, through contemplation practice. But this contemplation practice is aimless if it just mean sitting and doing nothing. That means that each time you quit your sitting meditation, you are regressing from that state because ordinary life is particularly good at putting you back into an ego- centered life. But, if you want to integrate the natural state in a non-regressive way, you have to do something (otherwise it does not do it by itselt just for you). And integration is the very purpose of Trekcho otherwise your Thogel is not going to go very far. So again, i'm sorry to repeat it, but in while in the Trekcho state, you have to integrate 4 things (please Jax learn this by heart, I wrote it several times but you by-pass it constantly whereas it is the core of Trekcho practice and of all Dzogchen practices):
    1. integration of the activities of the 3 doors (there are specific things to integrate here, very precise), 2. integration of the six sense consciousnesses (also specific things here too),
    3. integration of thoughts (same as above), and
    4. integration of various things (this larger in scope but precise too).
    I'm not enumerating this list out of my imagination. This is precisely what one has TO DO in Trekcho practice. If your Trekcho and experience of the natural state consists in doing nothing, then your result is nothing. If you try to integrate the 4 modalities listed above (and you have a lot of specific practices in there), then you integrate your whole being to the natural state and that is real Trekcho." - Jean-Luc Achard
    P.s. this is adding context to what Lama Lena said above and is not in any way contradicting what Lama Lena has said


  • Soh Wei Yu
    Admin
    Top contributor
    Another nice quote:
    Dudjom Rinpoche explains:
    "The mere recognition of vidyā will not liberate you. Throughout your lives from beginningless time, you have been enveloped in false beliefs and deluded habits. From then till now you have spent every moment as a miserable, pathetic slave of your thoughts! And when you die, it’s not at all certain where you will go. You will follow your karma, and you will have to suffer. This is the reason
    why you must meditate, continuously preserving the sate of vidyā you have been introduced to. The omniscient Longchenpa has said, 'You may recognize your own nature, but if you do not meditate and get used to it, you will be like a baby left on a battlefield: you’ll be carried off by the enemy, the hostile army of your own thoughts!' In general terms, meditation means becoming famiIiar with the state of resting in the primordial uncontrived nature, through being spontaneously, naturally, constantly mindful. It means getting used to leaving the state of vidyā alone, divested of all distraction and clinging."
    ….
    From kyle pdf post:
    Title: Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals
    Content:
    I posted some of this elsewhere but it is relevant here and explains my point:
    The guru gives you pointing out instructions, you recognize primordial wisdom, you rest in that knowledge [vidyā], unerringly, and that is the path. When that knowledge ripens to it's full measure your vidyā is dharmakāya, and you are a buddha. The basis, path and result are never apart from vidyā, because they are simply the refinement of vidyā via the exhaustion of traces. Our illusory and deluded experiences as sentient beings, are merely the complex interaction of these karmic traces, habitual tendencies and afflictive propensities.
    Buddhahood is only attained when these propensities are exhausted, as Longchenpa elucidates: "Ordinary beings are truly buddhas, but this fact is obscured by adventitious distortions, once these are removed, truly there is buddhahood."
    There is no method to apply other than resting in vidyā. The path is familiarization, stabilization and integration in that view [tib. ta wa]. It is crucial that the view is maintained tenaciously and one cultivates non-distraction. If this isn't performed skillfully, then there is undoubtably a danger of regression into deluded mind. In time the view will become more and more effortless, however initially it is important to rely on practice and so on.
    This principle is identical to the three testaments of Garab Dorje: (i) Introduction to one's nature [basis], (ii) Confidence in one's nature [path], (iii) Continuation in one's nature [result].
    Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche:
    "A seeming confusion obscures the recognition of the basis [gzhi]. Fortunately, this seeming delusion is temporary. This failure to recognize the basis is similar to dreaming. Dreaming is not primordial; it is temporary, it can be purified. Purification happens through training on the path. We have strayed from the basis and become sentient beings. To free the basis from what obscures it, we have to train. Right now, we are on the path and have not yet attained the result. When we are freed from obscuration, then the result - dharmakāya - appears. The liberated basis, path and result are all perfected in the realm of the single essence, the continuity of rig pa [vidyā].
    In fact, there is no difference whatsoever between the basis and result. In the state of the basis the enlightened qualities are not acknowledged, but they are manifest at the time of the result. These are not new qualities that suddenly appear, but are like the qualities of a flower that are inherent in the seed. Within the seed are the characteristics of the flower itself. The seed holds the potential for the flower's color, smell, bud and leaves. However, can we say that the seed is the result of the flower? No, we cannot, because the flower has not fully bloomed. Like this analogy, the qualities of the result are contained in the state of the basis; yet, they are not evident or manifest. That is the difference between the basis and the result. At the time of the path, if we do not apply effort, the result will not appear."
    So even after recognition the view must be maintained, this is what practice is for, otherwise karmic propensities will cause distraction and deviation to arise in one's condition, as Dudjom Rinpoche explains:
    "The mere recognition of vidyā will not liberate you. Throughout your lives from beginningless time, you have been enveloped in false beliefs and deluded habits. From then till now you have spent every moment as a miserable, pathetic slave of your thoughts! And when you die, it’s not at all certain where you will go. You will follow your karma, and you will have to suffer. This is the reason
    why you must meditate, continuously preserving the sate of vidyā you have been introduced to. The omniscient Longchenpa has said, 'You may recognize your own nature, but if you do not meditate and get used to it, you will be like a baby left on a battlefield: you’ll be carried off by the enemy, the hostile army of your own thoughts!' In general terms, meditation means becoming famiIiar with the state of resting in the primordial uncontrived nature, through being spontaneously, naturally, constantly mindful. It means getting used to leaving the state of vidyā alone, divested of all distraction and clinging."
    Author: krodha
    Date: Sun Jan 26, 2014 10:03 pm
    Title: Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals
    Content:
    Actually this passage from Dudjom Rinpoche is even better:
    "Similarly: first, the rigpa [vidyā] of having had the introduction is like the first part of the early dawn; in the middle, the rigpa of having gained assurance, free from equipoise and post-attainment is like the daybreak; and finally the rigpa of having gained liberation from extremes is like the sun shining."
    And Mipham Rinpoche states:
    "The training of rigpa comes in three steps: recognition, training and finalization."

  • Reply
  • 13m

"Yes. Conventionally, there are external objects and self, ultimately they are empty and there is no contradiction. Spontaneous presence and dependent arising, they are neither same nor different too. When mind conceptualizes and separates, parts and whole originate dependently and empty, that is precisely because the natural state is free and spontaneous."

 - John Tan