Chris Pedersen

1h  ·
AF is anatta, but still in duality so anatta that skipped I AM. Correct?
16 Comments

Comments

• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

Sorry can you rephrase?
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 1h
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

Anatta is without duality.
Richard went through I AM. But not sure how thorough it is. I disagree with some of his characterization of I AM.
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 1h
• 
  
Chris Pedersen
Author
Ok. Then I wonder why he says his identity is the body which in I AM is awareness?
Maybe like you say there was something lacking.
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 54m
• 
  
Chris Pedersen
Author
Ok... I think I understand it, he never got the nonceptual knowing of being awareness. So still believing he is the body.
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 47m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

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.
March 2011:
-----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
John: is there 'being'?
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”
In 2007:
(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.
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 27m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

JT agrees with Richard that anatta is deconstruction of both self and Self (the ultimate Self):
“(9:46 AM) Thusness: impersonality is the doing away of the ego (Soh: see four aspects of I AM in the stage 1 chapter), doing away with the I AM is anatta …
See More
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 26m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

AF Richard cannot be faulted in anatta, he can only be faulted in not going far enough with his deconstruction and analytical insights. He did not push into twofold emptiness and got stuck only in anatta.

1
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 25m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

“André, to me anatta is a very specific and definite phase of seeing through the background self/Self quite thoroughly at least in the waking state but there is a tendency that experience can somehow turn very "physical, sense-based and causal" for me.
Every experience is direct, gapless, non-dual, non-conceptual and radiance even total exertion is present, just not empty. Almost equivalent to Actual Freedom as narrated by Richard. In fact I find Richard's description very much my version of arahat .
For Kyle, due to his view in emptiness, the experiential insight of anatta not only pierce through the self/Self but also triggered the arising insight of emptiness. However this may not be true (imo) in most cases if one's view isn't firmly established. For me when I first encountered the chariot analogy, there is an immediate and intuitive recognition that it is referring to anatta but I am unable to grasp the essence of the phrase "emptiness and non-arisen" there and then.
In other words, in addition to self immolation, a specific insight must arise, it is the prajna that clearly sees through the referent is empty and non-arisen. So anatta I would say is about severing the self/Self whereas phase 6 is the blossoming of this specific insight. Extending this insight from self to phenomena, from conventions to magical appearances is then a natural progression.
As for first bhumi (Soh: related: [insight] [buddhism] A reconsideration of the meaning of "Stream-Entry" considering the data points of both pragmatic Dharma and traditional Buddhism , Definition of First Bhumi) I am seriously not sure and never thought of it.
I can only say if we practice long enough, there is a frequent occurrence of a clear, clean and pure spring of joy that emerges from nowhere, floating like cloud. A very helpful antidote for negative emotions.
Even the experience of drinking water is like experiencing a clean and pure stream of luminous sensations in zero dimension similar to a mirage flowing spring water floating in the air.” - John Tan in the Awakening to Reality Discussion Group, 2019, John wrote this maybe a month or two before a breakthrough that Soh had which led to the writing “The Magical Fairytale-like Wonderland and Paradise of this Verdant Earth Free from Affective Emotions, Reactions and Sufferings”
“Soh: as Richard said, the out of control experience can happen even before anatta (the complete dissolution of self/Self), that is why the "doer" dissolves but the "be-er" is still there, but in actual freedom both dissolves
John Tan: Quite acute insight and thorough for the state no mind. Means "being" is also deconstructed.”
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 24m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

John Tan wrote on 24 March 2019 to me,
“Not going back. If you want to write a guide, write with sincerity. If you write with a sincere heart, I am sure people will benefit as those are genuine insights leading to effortlessness of instant presence. However, never claim or even suggest the phases of insight are end of journey, that is very naive, untrue and misleading.
As for powerful vivid radiance, they are normal if you have spent quality time post your anatta insight. When the center is gone, externally you will feel like a ball of radiance appearing as the world. Internally, energetic radiance will beam through your body cells, vibrating on your crown, your face, dancing as pulsation of your flowing blood, that is the time you should seriously look into energy practice. If you are not interested in energy practice, just learn deep rhythmic abdominal breathing until a state of no mind into deep release, it will help to contain and regulate and the powerful energetic radiance.
As for AF, the immolation of Self/self is simply the deconstruction of mental construct of self as a center background. Richard has carried it far enough to reach total exertion which he called "realizing one's destiny" if I remember correctly. However the same cause reifying the background is now manifesting in the foreground as the "actual world", therefore there is no thorough liberation. Imo from the perspective of self immolation, he has carried it further than you and his essays can definitely help to guide you. It does seems final in a pseudo sense.
For you, it will be difficult to find a teacher but if you humble yourself, everyone, every event is your teacher. When I tell you to differentiate experience from realization and established firmly on the view as your guide, the purpose is not for you to go around stereotyping people, it is strictly for your own development.
Lastly due to the Awakening to Reality group and your relentless advertisement, I have been receiving messages. I do not want to mislead people and I am not a spiritual teacher and I do not wish to develop it into a cultic group. As for me, practice is ongoing and there is no finality. So I will continue my never ending journey. You can WhatsApp me just don't message me who is at what stage… lol.”
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 19m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

“Yes and very good. There is a very big difference between substantialist non-dual of One-Mind and what you said. In this experience, there is no background reality. It is not about the background Awareness but rather the foreground aggregates that you are talking about - A thought. There is just aggregates that are like foams, bubbles, ethereal having all the same taste without substantiality and implicitly non-dual. No sense of body, mind and the world, nothing actual or truly there.
Before, when insight of anatta first arose, you still risk the danger of seeing the physical as inherent and truly existing. Therefore there is a period that you are lost, unsure and AF (Actual Freedom) seems appealing - a sign that you have not extended the insight of emptiness to phenomena though you kept saying twofold emptiness.
At present you focus on the following:
1. When there is no cold or heat (Soh: See glossary at the bottom of the article)
2. Total exertion
For 1, it is not difficult to understand now but for 2, you have not directly or adequately replace the 'Self/self' with the interdependence of whatever arises.” - John Tan, 06/12/2011 E-mail
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 19m
• 
  
Chris Pedersen
Author
Ok so when he says 'I am the body' he means in the actual sense not in the sense of the body being the identity.
Here just dropped a ton that stopped progress. More joy, more just seeing but still a subtle mental self as center background as JT calls it.

1
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 16m
• 
  
Chris Pedersen
Author
I can see how progress can be stopped without the insight of emptiness since the actual then is just the actual, one has not penetrated appearances.

1
• 
  
•  · 
  Reply
•  · 13m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

Chris Pedersen
As long as you have right view, you don't have to worry about not penetrating further than anatta.
The problem is only when you are not guided by right view, then you get stuck.
This is not just in anatta -- even in I AM, John Tan and Sim Pern Chong got stuck for a decade or more, but I progressed to anatta from I AM within one year. Why? The answer is clear.
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 10m
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

For me, I recommend people to first penetrate I AM. I am not worried that they will get stuck at I AM because as long as they are guided by AtR, they are safe.
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 10m
• 
  
Chris Pedersen
Author
Right view and bodhicitta intention here so no problem. Everything is so luminous now. Pretty crazy.

1
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 8m
Write a reply…


• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

All self/Self/center/background are to be deconstructed for true and total freedom. You already know the direction so I think it you should get there eventually, likely in 1 to 2 years or less if you are open and willing to deconstruct them. There is really nothing scary about it. The worst thing is people like Mark Leher and Jackson Peterson. There is this deep unwillingness to investigate and deconstruct the Absolute to them because it seems to be the most cherished thing. This is just a misunderstanding. Nothing is lost after anatta, the luminosity is made even more effortless and full-blown and free from obstructions. Just the seeing through and dissolving the illusion of a background preventing that full blown blossoming of Instant Presence. As explained in https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../no-awareness...
Actually those who go through anatta would not be familiar with "flesh and blood body" because there are just these luminous aggregates and nothing behind or besides these aggregates. The issue is whether one can realise the aggregates are also empty.
Zen Master Dogen who is thoroughly clear about anatta also spoke like Richard on this:
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../the-magical...
Dogen:
"Our present-day seven feet of skull and bones is precisely the form and image of the whole universe in all ten directions. Indeed, the whole universe in all ten directions which trains and enlightens us in the Buddha's Way is our skull and bones, our physical body with its skin, flesh, bones, and marrow." - Dogen
....
"Thus, the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, and mind that fully manifest before us here and now are what an arhat is." - Dogen
....
Four years later, when Dogen returned to Japan, he said, "I have come back empty-handed. I have realized only that the eyes are horizontal and the nose is vertical."
....
"For Dogen this “dropping off body and mind” is the true nature both of just sitting and of complete enlightenment, and is the ultimate letting go of self, directly meeting the cold, clear wind and moon. After turning within while just sitting, it is carried on in all activity and throughout ongoing engagement with the world. Although just sitting now has been maintained for 750 years since Dogen, the teachings of Hongzhi and Dogen remain as primary guideposts to its practice." - Taigen Dan Leighton
....
“In Dogen’s view, the only reality is reality that is actually experienced as particular things at specific times. There is no “tile nature” apart from actual “tile forms,” there is no “essential Baso” apart from actual instances of “Baso experience.” When Baso sits in zazen, “zazen” becomes zazen, and “Baso” becomes Baso. Real instances of Baso sitting in zazen is real instances of Baso and real instances of zazen – when Baso eats rice, Baso is really Baso and eating rice is really eating rice.” - Ted Biringer, https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../zazen...

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
No Awareness Does Not Mean Non-Existence of Awareness
No Awareness Does Not Mean Non-Existence of Awareness
• 
  
•  · 
  Reply
•  · 
  Remove Preview
•  · 11m
•  · 
  Edited

 Someone posted to me,

"In our practice the most important thing is to realize that we have buddhanature. Intellectually we may know this, but it is rather difficult to accept. Our everyday life is in the realm of good and bad, the realm of duality, while buddhanature is found in the realm of the absolute where there is no good and no bad. There is a twofold reality. Our practice is to go beyond the realm of good and bad and to realize the absolute. It may be rather difficult to understand."

~ Shunryu Suzuki

 

I said,

 

Yes. I don't think Shunryu Suzuki is reifying some monistic oneness as Absolute. His views are pretty in line with anatta and impermanence.

 

"Each existence depends on something else. Strictly speak-ing, there are no separate individual existences. There are just many names for one existence. Sometimes people put stress on oneness, but this is not our understanding. We do not emphasize any point in particular, even oneness. One-ness is valuable, but variety is also wonderful. Ignoring variety, people emphasize the one absolute existence, but this is a one-sided understanding. In this understanding there is a gap between variety and oneness. But oneness and variety are the same thing, so oneness should be appreciated in each existence. That is why we emphasize everyday life rather than some particular state of mind. We should find the reality in each moment, and in each phenomenon. This is a very important point" - Shunryu Suzuki

 

"The basic teaching of Buddhism is the teaching of transiency, or change. That everything changes is the basic truth for each existence. No one can deny this truth, and all the teach-ing of Buddhism is condensed within it. This is the teaching for all of us. Wherever we go this teaching is true. This teaching is also understood as the teaching of selflessness. Because each existence is in constant change, there is no abiding self. In fact, the self-nature of each existence is noth-ing but change itself, the self-nature of all existence. There is no special, separate self-nature for each existence. This is also called the teaching of Nirvana. When we realize the 102 RIGHT UNDERSTANDING everlasting truth of "everything changes" and find our com-posure in it, we find ourselves in Nirvana. "

 

“When we practice zazen our mind always follows our breathing. When we inhale, the air comes into the inner world. When we exhale, the air goes out to the outer world. The inner world is limitless, and the outer world is also limitless. We say “inner world” or “outer world,” but actually there is just one whole world. In this limitless world, our throat is like a swinging door. The air comes in and goes out like someone passing through a swinging door. If you think, “I breathe,” the “I” is extra. There is no you to say “I.” What we call “I” is just a swinging door which moves when we inhale and when we exhale. It just moves; that is all. When your mind is pure and calm enough to follow this movement, there is nothing: no “I,” no world, no mind nor body; just a swinging door.”

 

“Wherever you are, you are one with clouds

and one with sun and the stars you see.

You are one with everything.

This is more true than I can say,

and more true than you can hear.”

 

“When you bow, you should just bow; when you sit, you should just sit; when you eat, you should just eat. If you do this, the universal nature is there. In Japanese we call it ichigyo-zammai, or ‘one act samadhi.’ Zammai (or samadhi) is ‘concentration.’ Ichigyo is ‘one practice.’ ”

 

“Doing something is expressing our own nature.”

 

“There are, strictly speaking, no enlightened people, there is only enlightened activity.”

 

“When you do something,

you should burn yourself up completely,

like a good bonfire,

leaving no trace of yourself.”

 

“When you listen to someone, you should give up all your preconceived ideas and your subjective opinions; you should just listen to him, just observe what his way is. We put very little emphasis on right and wrong or good and bad. We just see things as they are with him, and accept them. This is how we communicate with each other. Usually when you listen to some statement, you hear it as a kind of echo of yourself. You are actually listening to your own opinion. If it agrees with your opinion you may accept it, but if it does not, you will reject it or you may not even really hear it.”

 

“If your mind is empty, it is always ready for anything,

it is open to everything.

In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities,

but in the experts mind there are few.”

 

“There is also the real secret of the arts:

always be a beginner.”

“The world is its own magic.”

 

“Zen is not some fancy, special art of living.

Our teaching is just to live, always in reality,

in its exact sense.

To make our effort, moment after moment, is our way.”

 

Source: Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind

 

You can get the book from here: https://www.amazon.com/.../ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi...