“Geovani Geo to me, to be without dual is not to subsume into one and although awareness is negated, it is not to say there is nothing.

Negating the Awareness/Presence (Absolute) is not to let Awareness remain at the abstract level.  When such transpersonal Awareness that exists only in wonderland is negated, the vivid radiance of presence are fully tasted in the transient appearances; zero gap and zero distance between presence and moment to moment of ordinary experiences and we realize separation has always only been conventional.

Then mundane activities -- hearing, sitting, standing, seeing and sensing, become pristine and vibrant, natural and free.” – John Tan, 2020

(2:52 PM) Thusness: r u denying the "I AMness" experience?

(2:54 PM) AEN: u mean in the post?

(2:54 PM) AEN: no

(2:54 PM) AEN: its more like the nature of 'i am' rite

(2:54 PM) Thusness: what is being denied?

(2:54 PM) AEN: the dualistic understanding?

(2:55 PM) Thusness: yes it is the wrong understanding of that experience. Just like 'redness' of a flower.

(2:55 PM) AEN: oic..

(2:55 PM) Thusness: Vivid and seems real and belongs to the flower. It only appears so, it is not so.

(2:57 PM) Thusness: When we see in terms of subject/object dichotomy, it appears puzzling that there is thoughts, no thinker. There is sound, no hearer and there is rebirth, but no permanent soul being reborn.

(2:58 PM) Thusness: It is puzzling because of our deeply held view of seeing things inherently where dualism is a subset of this 'inherent' seeing.

(2:59 PM) Thusness: So what is the problem?

(2:59 PM) AEN: icic..

(2:59 PM) AEN: the deeply held views?

(2:59 PM) Thusness: yeah

(2:59 PM) Thusness: what is the problem?

(3:01 PM) AEN: back

(3:02 PM) Thusness: The problem is the root cause of suffering lies in this deeply held view. We search and are attached because these views. This is the relationship between 'view' and 'consciousness'. There is no escape. With inherent view, there is always 'I' and 'Mine'. There is always 'belongs' like the 'redness' belongs to the flower.

(3:02 PM) Thusness: Therefore despite all transcendental experiences, there is no liberation without right understanding.

2009:

(5:50 PM) Thusness:      By the way, u should not tell ppl about there is no such witness exist.

(5:50 PM) AEN: oic..

(5:50 PM) Thusness:      it is right understanding of what witness is all about.

(5:51 PM) AEN: icic..

(5:55 PM) Thusness:      “Today I noticed that trying to remove perceived unclear thoughts and confusion has nothing to do with the unstained awareness that is already so.”

what have u understood?

(5:57 PM) AEN: awareness is not affected by any particular thoughts?

(5:57 PM) Thusness:      meaning?

there is awareness and there is thoughts?

(5:58 PM) Thusness:      and awareness is not affected by thoughts?

(5:59 PM) Thusness:      by the way what is meant by affected?

(5:59 PM) AEN: means its still present regardless what is arising

(6:00 PM) Thusness:      means u r referring to the state of presence?

(6:00 PM) AEN: ya.. presence and knowingness

(6:01 PM) Thusness:      what is inseparability to u?

(6:02 PM) Thusness:      do u understand  "inseparable" only at the conceptual level and stop at just the "meaning" of it?

(6:02 PM) Thusness:      just simply knowing by definition?

or at the non-conceptual level?

(6:03 PM) Thusness:      is ur understanding at the level of direct experience which is non-conceptual or conceptual?

(6:03 PM) AEN: think still more towards conceptual

(6:04 PM) Thusness:      Presence and arising are not separated

(6:04 PM) AEN: oic

(6:04 PM) Thusness:      What is 'inseparable' here?

(6:05 PM) Thusness:      at the non-dual level, at the anatta level or DO level?

(6:05 PM) AEN: nondual?

(6:06 PM) Thusness:      u must observe and directly experience every arising in bare, raw and free from labelling first.

(6:07 PM) Thusness:      then upon analysis, there is still an observer and the observed

(6:07 PM) AEN: oic..

(6:08 PM) Thusness:      until u r so clear in real time experience that the observer and the observed are one.  Then u further investigate this experience if they are always one, why is there any separation in the first place?

(6:09 PM) Thusness:      why experience occasionally appears split?

(6:09 PM) AEN: propensities?

(6:09 PM) Thusness:      continue this investigation and experience the split as well as the non-dual.

(6:11 PM) Thusness:      till u r thoroughly clear that observer and observed is merely an assumption.  There is always only observation.  Just one pure witnessing.

(6:11 PM) AEN: oic..

(6:14 PM) Thusness:      This is the non-dual experience that u must have in order to understand the Advaita witnessing.  One whole Experience.  You do not say it is flowing through the Eye, there is absolutely no difference between the light and everything.  The light is the everything.  U must have this experience first.

(6:14 PM) AEN: icic..

(6:16 PM) Thusness:      After this do not extrapolate, do not reify, do not abstract anything further.  Any urge to go beyond, see with clarity it is the tendency...until u are able to rest completely first.

(6:17 PM) AEN: oic..

(6:19 PM) Thusness:      until u are able to rest completely first. => i mean u must be able to rest deeply in this non-dual experience first then understand anatta and DO from there.

(6:19 PM) Thusness:      There is no denial of this non-dual Witnessing.  It is only right understanding of this experience.

(6:20 PM) AEN: icic..

(6:21 PM) Thusness:      Because of the inability of going beyond the dualistic framework, there is such "You are me" and "I am you" such erroneous concept by extrapolating an ultimate essence that all shares.

This is what I do not want u to get into.

(6:22 PM) Thusness:      But the dissolution of the split is most precious and important.

(6:22 PM) AEN: oic..

(6:23 PM) Thusness:      I go to go makan

(6:23 PM) AEN: ok.. cya

(10:35 PM) Thusness:    It is most important to realize that this Witnessing is by nature non-dual and has always been so but that has nothing to do with an ultimate nature.  Having this non-dual experience has nothing to do with an ultimate nature.

(10:36 PM) AEN:              oic..

(10:38 PM) Thusness:    So not to extrapolate, reify, abstract anything further but rather allow complete resting in this non-dual state first and allow the tendency to extrapolate to settle.

(10:40 PM) Thusness:    Because if we extrapolate and entertain this tendency, it blinds us further.  In fact that is the cause of suffering.  Despite this non-dual non-conceptual experience of the witnessing itself, we are still not free the tendency to reify.

(10:42 PM) AEN:              icic..

(10:47 PM) AEN:              extrapolate means think conceptually?

(10:48 PM) Thusness:    Many misunderstood that DO denies freedom as it is 'dependent'.  This is attempting to understanding DO through a dualistic framework.  In actual experience, DO leads to liberation whereas attachment to an ultimate essence is the cause of suffering despite having clear and direct experience of the non-dual non conceptual aspect of Awareness.

(10:49 PM) Thusness:    extrapolate means deducing further than what is being actually experienced.

(10:49 PM) Thusness:    I have always told u that "I AM" is a direct experience of Awareness.

But u r telling ppl it does not exist

(10:49 PM) Thusness:    I am saying it is not the experience of our Buddha nature.

(10:50 PM) Thusness:    I said that this experience is misunderstood

(10:50 PM) AEN:              oic..

(10:51 PM) Thusness:    I told u many times that nothing is more precious than a direct touch of this luminous nature but no experience is more dangerous than misinterpreting this experience, this direct touch.

I noticed that many Buddhists trained under the doctrine of anatta and emptiness seem to be put off by the description of “I AM realization” as it seems to contradict anatta. This will prevent their progress as they will fail to appreciate and realize the depth of luminous presence, and their understanding of anatta and emptiness remains intellectual. It should be understood that the I AM realization does not contradict Anatta realization but complements it. It is the “original face before your parents were born” of Zen, and the unfabricated clarity in Dzogchen that serves as initial rigpa, it is also the initial certainty of Mind discovered in the first of the four yogas of Mahamudra (see: Clarifying the Natural State by Dakpo Tashi Namgyal). Calling it “I AM” is just another name for the same thing, and you should also know that AtR’s definition of I AM is different from Buddhism’s term “conceit of I Am” or Nisargadatta’s I Am. The I AM of AtR is a direct taste and realization of the Mind of Clear Light.

The view gets refined and the taste gets brought to effortless maturity and non-contrivance in all manifestation as one’s insights deepen.

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 enlightenment 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:  didn’t 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.


....

This also reminded me of:

“It is not the contemplations that are important, it is the view brought to contemplation that makes the difference. For example, there is no actual difference between the Hindu Nirvikalpa samadhi and Vajropama samadhi in terms of its content, but the fact that one is accompanied by insight and the other is not makes the difference between whether it is mundane or liberative.” – Dzogchen Teacher Acarya Malcolm Smith, 2014

In 2009:

“(10:49 PM) Thusness:    by the way you know about hokai description and "I AM" is the same experience?

(10:50 PM) AEN:            the watcher right

(10:52 PM) Thusness:    nope. i mean the shingon practice of the body, mind, speech into one.

(10:53 PM) AEN:            oh thats i am experience?

(10:53 PM) Thusness:    yes, except that the object of practice is not based on consciousness. what is meant by foreground? it is the disappearance of the background and whats left is it. similarly the "I AM" is the experience of no background and experiencing consciousness directly. that is why it is just simply "I-I" or "I AM"

(10:57 PM) AEN:            i've heard of the way people describe consciousness as the background consciousness becoming the foreground... so there's only consciousness aware of itself and thats still like I AM experience

(10:57 PM) Thusness:    that is why it is described that way, awareness aware of itself and as itself.

(10:57 PM) AEN:            but you also said I AM people sink to a background?

(10:57 PM) Thusness:    yes

(10:57 PM) AEN:            sinking to background = background becoming foreground?

(10:58 PM) Thusness:    that is why i said it is misunderstood. and we treat that as ultimate.

(10:58 PM) AEN:            icic but what hokai described is also nondual experience rite

(10:58 PM) Thusness:    I have told you many times that the experience is right but the understanding is wrong. that is why it is an insight and opening of the wisdom eyes. there is nothing wrong with the experience of I AM". did i say that there is anything wrong with it?

(10:59 PM) AEN:            nope

(10:59 PM) Thusness:    even in stage 4 what did I say?

(11:00 PM) AEN:            its the same experience except in sound, sight, etc

(11:00 PM) Thusness:    sound as the exact same experience as "I AM"... as presence.

(11:00 PM) AEN:            icic

(11:00 PM) Thusness:    yes”

“"I AM" is a luminous thought in samadhi as I-I.  Anatta is a realization of that in extending the insight to the 6 entries and exits.” – John Tan, 2018


...


"The purpose of anatta is to have full blown experience of the heart -- boundlessly, completely, non-dually and non-locally. Re-read what I wrote to Jax.

In every situations, in all conditions, in all events. It is to eliminate unnecessary contrivity so that our essence can be expressed without obscuration.

Jax wants to point to the heart but is unable to express in a non-dual way... for in duality, the essence cannot be realized. All dualistic interpretation are mind made. You know the smile of Mahākāśyapa? Can you touch the heart of that smile even 2500 yrs later?

One must lose all mind and body by feeling with entire mind and body this essence which is 心 (Mind). Yet 心 (Mind) too is 不可得 (ungraspable/unobtainable).. The purpose is not to deny 心 (Mind) but rather not to place any limitations or duality so that 心 (Mind) can fully manifest.

Therefore without understanding 缘 (conditions)，is to limit 心 (Mind). without understanding 缘 (conditions)，is to place limitation in its manifestations. You must fully experience 心 (Mind) by realizing 无心 (No-Mind) and fully embrace the wisdom of 不可得 (ungraspable/unobtainable)." - John Tan/Thusness, 2014

 
p.s. Self-Enquiry (asking Who am I?) is a potent method to the initial awakening to one's Pure Presence-Awareness or "I AM realization". Also see: What is your very Mind right now?

Also related: The Transient Universe has a Heart