Sensation, the Key to Satipatthāna
Related: Buddha's Path Is to Experience Reality
Vipassana Must Go With Luminous Manifestation
Four Foundations of Mindfulness: The Direct Path to Liberation
Vipassana
Thusness's Vipassana
 

Source: https://www.vridhamma.org/node/2479
Sensation, the Key to Satipatthāna
Vol.4 No.1 January 1994
Words of Dhamma

Sāriputto etadacova: Kimārammaṇā, samiddhi, purisassa saṅkappavitakkā uppajjantī"ti? "Nāmarūpārammaṇā, Bhante"ti.
"Te pana, Samiddhi, kiṃsamosaraṇā"ti? "Vedanāsamosaraṇā, bhante"ti.

- Sariputta spoke thus: "What is the base, Samiddhi, from which thoughts and reflections arise in men?" "From the base of mind and matter, sir."
"And what, Samiddhi, accompanies them?"
"Sensation accompanies them, sir."

-Samādhi Sutta, Aṅguttara Nikāya, IX. ii. 4 (14)

Sensation, The Key to Satipatthāna
-by S N Goenka

Whatever truth is outside can be found within as well; whatever is within also exists outside. We may accept truth out of devotion or intellectual conviction, but in order to apprehend it directly we must explore within, to experience truth within ourselves. By thus coming face to face with truth, we can develop experiential wisdom that will make a real change in our lives.
The meditator starts investigation from a superficial level at which gross, solidified truths appear. But as one observes the apparent truth objectively, one starts penetrating from gross to subtler truths and finally witnesses ultimate truth. This ultimate truth can be experienced only only by exploring reality within oneself.
The exploration of the truth within is Vipassana meditation. In the course of this exploration the meditator must investigate two fields, two aspects of reality: matter and mind. Investigation of the physical reality is called in Pāli kāyānupassanā. Investigation of the mental reality is called cittānupassanā. In fact, however, matter and mind cannot be experienced separately from each other because they are interdependent, interconnected.
Exploring one is bound to involve an exploration of the other. Neither can be fully understood without the other.
The field of matter: kāyānupassanā and vedanānupassanā
The physical reality of oneself must be invwestigated by direct experience; it will not help merely to imagine or speculate about it. How then to experience this truth, the reality of one's own body? If in the names of kāyānupassanā one sits with closed eyesand simply names or imagines the different parts of the body, such a person is far away from correct practice of Vipassanā, from the direct exploration of truth. We actually experience our bodies by feeling them - that is, by means of our bodily sensations. Therefore awareness of physical sensation is indispensable to the practice of kāyānupassanā. Sensations exists, of one type or another, at every part, every atom of the body.
Thus the investigation of the truth of body is bound to involve the exploration of bodily sensations - in Pāli, vedanānupassanā. Sensations can be experienced only within one's body, and the reality of body can be experienced only by means of sensations.
But though sensation is always based on the body, the truth of vedanā is not exclusively physical in nature; it is also one of the four mental aggregates. Sensation overlaps the two fields of mind and matter. For this reason observations of sensation, as we shall see, is a way to explore the mental-physical phenomenon in its entirety.
In the practice of kāyānupassanā, observation of sensations will enable the meditator to experience directly the changing nature of the physical structure. By examining every part of the body in turn, one realizes that all sensations arise and pass away. As one repeats this practice, eventually a stage comes in which one experiences the instantaneous dissolution of every particle of the body. In this very subtle stage the meditator observes directly that the entire material structure is dissolving every moment; this experience is called in Pāli bhaṇga-ñāṇa, the realization of the truth of dissolution.
Through observing sensations as well, one can experience that the body is composed of four basic elements: earth, or solidity; water, or fluidity; air, or gaseousness; and fire, or temperature. Particles arise with the predominance of one or more elements, giving rise to the infinite variety of sensations. They arise to pass away. Ultimately the body is merely wavelets arising and passing away, constant dissolving. The apparently solid material structure is in reality nothing but ripples, vibrations, oscillations.
This truth of anicca can be realized directly only by the experience of bodily sensations. With this realization comes the understanding that one has no control over the changes constantly occurring in the body - aniccā. Therefore any attachment to what is changing beyond one's control is bound to bring nothing but suffering - dukkha. Knowing these facts now by personal experience, the meditator develops the wisdom of equanimity. By observing sensations he has reached the ultimate truth about body, and as a result his attachment to the body is shattered. He emerges from the folly of identifying with the body and develops real detachment, real enlightenment.
In the practice of vedanānupassanā as well, the meditator gives importance to observing all that happens within the body, all sensations. Whether they are pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral one learns to observe them objectively, and by doing so one breaks the old habit of wallowing in sensory experiences. By repeatedly observing the arising and passing away of sensations, the meditator learns not to be swayed by them, to keep an inner balance in the face of any experience whatsoever.
In this way the sensations that arise within the body are the base for the practice of both kāyānupassanā and vedanānupassanā. By investigating sensations the meditator explores to the depths the reality of the physical atructure. The understanding arises, "Such is the body and such are bodily sensations, which create so many illusions and complications for us!" Previously one may have understood these phenomena intellectually, but now this understanding becomes the wisdom that develops from experience - the experience of bodily sensations.
The field of mind: cittāmupassanā and dhammānupassanā
Another aspect of the practice of Vipassanā meditation is exploration of mental reality. As body cannot be experienced without the sensations that arise within it, similarly mind cannot be experienced apart from what its contents - in Pāli, Dhamma. Hence observation of mind (cittānupassanā) and observation of mental contents (dhammānupassanā) are inseparable. When the mind contains craving the meditator realizes this fact. When it is free from craving the meditator realizes this as well. Similarly he realizes when the mind contains aversion or ignorance, and when it is free from these defilements. He realizes when the mind is agitated and scattered, or tranquil and concentrated. This is how he practises cittānupassanā.
The meditator simply observes objectively whatever happens within the mind, whatever mental phenomenon, whatever Dhamma; this is the practice of dhammānupassanā. Without becoming upset, he accepts whatever the mind contains at this moment: craving or aversion, sloth and torpor or agitation, guiltiness or sceptical doubts. And the law of nature is such that by observing them objectively, one automatically eradicates these hindrances. The meditator also accepts when such dhammas arise as awareness, penetrative investigation, effort, joy, tranquility, concentration, and equanimity. And the law of nature is such that as one observes objectively, these wholesome mental qualities are multiplied.
Positive or negative, one simply accepts all mental phenomena. All dhammas arise within the dhammas that it contains. Hence dhammānupassanā and cittānupassanā are inseparable.
Further, the meditator realizes that the mind and mental contents are inextricably linked to the body. The mind is constantly in contact with the physical structure; whatever dhammas arise within it have the base not of mind alone but also of body. This physical aspect of mental events is easily apparent when strong emotions or agitation arise, but is exists as part of every mental phenomenon. Even the slightest passing of thought manifests not in the mind alone but in the combined field of mind and matter; that is, it is accompanied by a sensation within the body.
For this reason awareness of physical sensations is essential for the observation of mind and mental contents. Without this awareness, the exploration of mental reality will be imcomplete and superficial.
All that happens within this mental and physical phenomenon manifests as bodily sensation. Every moment there is a contact of mind and matter at the subtlest level, and from this contact sensation arises. By means of sensation one can experience directly every aspect of the phenomenon of oneself. Therefore, not only kāyānupassanā and vedanānupassanā but also cittānupassanā and dhammānupassanā must be practised by observing bodily sensations.
And as the meditator does so he realizes, "Such is the mind, and such is all that it contains: impermanent, ephemeral, dissolving, changing every mement!" This is not a dogma that he accepts on faith alone, not merely the result of logical deduction, not an imagination or the fruit of contemplation. The meditator realizes the truth for himself directly by experiencing and observing bodily sensations.
Thus sensation becomes the base for the exploration of the entire world of mind and matter. Exploring in this way, the meditator comes to understand truth in all its aspects, the whole truth of oneself. This is sampajañña, the fullness of understanding; this is satipaṭṭhāna, the establishing of awareness. This is how to develop wisdom that will be unshakable, because it arises from a realization of the entire truth.
Observation of sensation leads the meditator to experience the ultimate truth of matter, mind, and mental contents: changing every moment. Then transcending the field of mind and matter, one comes to the ultimate truth which is beyond all sensory experience, beyond the phenomenal world. In this transcendent reality there is no more anicca: nothing arises, and therefore nothing passes away. It is a stage without birth or becoming: the deathless. While the meditator experiences this reality, the senses do not function and therefore sensations cease. This is the experience of nirodha, the cessation of sensations and of suffering.
In this way a Vipassana meditator practises all four satipaṭṭhānas by observing the sensations that arise within the body. He realizes directly the changing nature of body and mind, and as he continues the exploration within, at last he comes to the truth- first within the field of mind and matter, and then in the field beyond. This is how dhammānupassanā is practised completely. This is how the four satipaṭṭhānas are properly practised. This is how one's meditation, one's exploration of truth comes to frution.
Come, oh meditators! With the help of bodily sensations let us explore the entire truth of ourselves, and by doing so let us achieve the final goal of real happiness, real peace.
Labels: , , 2 comments | | edit post
The Root Sequence
Was commenting to Thusness, "Actually I much prefer the MN1 sutta over many Dzogchen teachings that I've read, much more resonating with my insight. No source at all, Buddha say any view of emanation is wrong.. not skilful to conceive things coming out of infinite space, infinite consciousness, etc

Is like in the seen just the seen.. no coming out of, no I, me, mine, just direct perception

"He directly knows water as water... the All as the All...

"He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? Because he has known that delight is the root of suffering & stress, that from coming-into-being there is birth, and that for what has come into being there is aging & death. Therefore, with the total ending, fading away, cessation, letting go, relinquishment of craving, the Tathagata has totally awakened to the unexcelled right self-awakening, I tell you."

------------

The Root Sequence
Mūlapariyāya Sutta  (MN 1)

NavigationSuttas/MN/1

Introduction

The Buddha listed clinging to views as one of the four forms of clinging that tie the mind to the processes of suffering. He thus recommended that his followers relinquish their clinging, not only to views in their full-blown form as specific positions, but also in their rudimentary form as the categories & relationships that the mind reads into experience. This is a point he makes in the following discourse, which is apparently his response to a particular school of Brahmanical thought that was developing in his time—the Sāṅkhya, or classification school.
This school had its beginnings in the thought of Uddālaka, a ninth-century B.C. philosopher who posited a “root”: an abstract principle out of which all things emanate and which remains immanent in all things. Philosophers who carried on this line of thinking offered a variety of theories, based on logic and meditative experience, about the nature of the ultimate root and about the hierarchy of the emanation. Many of their theories were recorded in the Upaniṣads and eventually developed into the classical Sāṅkhya system around the time of the Buddha.
Although the present discourse says nothing about the background of the monks listening to it, the Commentary states that before their ordination they were brahmans, and that even after their ordination they continued to interpret the Buddha’s teachings in light of their previous training, which may well have been proto-Sāṅkhya. If this is so, then the Buddha’s opening lines —“I will teach you the sequence of the root of all phenomena”—would have them prepared to hear his contribution to their line of thinking. And, in fact, the list of topics he covers reads like a Buddhist Sāṅkhya. Paralleling the classical Sāṅkhya, it contains 24 items, begins with the physical world (here, the four physical properties), and leads back through ever more refined & inclusive levels of being & experience, culminating with the ultimate Buddhist concept: unbinding (nibbāna). In the pattern of Sāṅkhya thought, unbinding would thus be the ultimate “root” or ground of being immanent in all things and out of which they all emanate.
However, instead of following this pattern of thinking, the Buddha attacks it at its very root: the notion of a principle in the abstract, the “in” (immanence) & “out of” (emanation) superimposed on experience. Only an uninstructed run of the mill person, he says, would read experience in this way. In contrast, a person in training should look for a different kind of “root”—the root of suffering experienced in the present—and find it in the act of delight. Developing dispassion for that delight, the trainee can then comprehend the process of coming-into-being for what it is, drop all participation in it, and thus achieve true awakening.
If the listeners present at this discourse were indeed interested in fitting Buddhist teachings into a Sāṅkhyan mold, then it’s small wonder that they were displeased—one of the few places where we read of a negative reaction to the Buddha’s words. They had hoped to hear his contribution to their project, but instead they hear their whole pattern of thinking & theorizing attacked as ignorant & ill-informed. The Commentary tells us, though, they were later able to overcome their displeasure and eventually attain awakening on listening to the discourse reported in AN 3:126.
Although at present we rarely think in the same terms as the Sāṅkhya philosophers, there has long been—and still is—a common tendency to create a “Buddhist” metaphysics in which the experience of emptiness, the Unconditioned, the Dharma-body, Buddha-nature, rigpa, etc., is said to function as the ground of being from which the “All”—the entirety of our sensory & mental experience—is said to spring and to which we return when we meditate. Some people think that these theories are the inventions of scholars without any direct meditative experience, but actually they have most often originated among meditators, who label (or in the words of the discourse, “perceive”) a particular meditative experience as the ultimate goal, identify with it in a subtle way (as when we are told that “we are the knowing”), and then suppose that level of experience to be the ground of being out of which all other experience comes.
Any teaching that follows these lines would be subject to the same criticism that the Buddha directed against the monks who first heard this discourse.
* * *
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Ukkaṭṭhā, in the shade of a royal Sal tree in the Very Blessed Forest. There he addressed the monks, “Monks!”
“Yes, lord,” the monks responded to him.
The Blessed One said, “Monks, I will teach you the sequence of the root of all phenomena [or: the root sequence of all phenomena]. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak.”
“As you say, lord,” they responded to him.
The Blessed One said: “There is the case, monks, where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person—who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for people of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma—perceives earth as earth. Perceiving earth as earth, he supposes (things) about earth, he supposes (things) in earth, he supposes (things) coming out of earth, he supposes earth as ‘mine,’ he delights in earth. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you.
“He perceives water as water… fire as fire… wind as wind1… beings as beings… devas as devas… Pajāpati as Pajāpati… Brahmā as Brahmā… the Radiant devas as Radiant devas… the Beautiful Black devas as Beautiful Black devas… the Sky-fruit devas as Sky-fruit devas… the Conqueror as the Conqueror2… the dimension of the infinitude of space as the dimension of the infinitude of space… the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness as the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness… the dimension of nothingness as the dimension of nothingness… the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception as the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception3… the seen as the seen… the heard as the heard… the sensed as the sensed… the cognized as the cognized4… singleness as singleness… multiplicity as multiplicity5… the All as the All6…
“He perceives unbinding as unbinding.7 Perceiving unbinding as unbinding, he supposes things about unbinding, he supposes things in unbinding, he supposes things coming out of unbinding, he supposes unbinding as ‘mine,’ he delights in unbinding. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you.

The Trainee

“A monk who is a trainee—yearning for the unexcelled relief from bondage, his aspirations as yet unfulfilled—directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, let him not suppose things about earth, let him not suppose things in earth, let him not suppose things coming out of earth, let him not suppose earth as ‘mine,’ let him not delight in earth. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you.
“He directly knows water as water… fire as fire… wind as wind… beings as beings… devas as devas… Pajāpati as Pajāpati… Brahmā as Brahmā… the Radiant devas as Radiant devas… the Beautiful Black devas as Beautiful Black devas… the Sky-fruit devas as Sky-fruit devas… the Conqueror as the Conqueror… the dimension of the infinitude of space as the dimension of the infinitude of space… the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness as the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness… the dimension of nothingness as the dimension of nothingness… the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception as the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception… the seen as the seen… the heard as the heard… the sensed as the sensed… the cognized as the cognized… singleness as singleness… multiplicity as multiplicity… the All as the All…
“He directly knows unbinding as unbinding. Directly knowing unbinding as unbinding, let him not suppose things about unbinding, let him not suppose things in unbinding, let him not suppose things coming out of unbinding, let him not suppose unbinding as ‘mine,’ let him not delight in unbinding. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you.

The Arahant

“A monk who is a Worthy One, devoid of effluents—who has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetters of becoming, and is released through right knowledge—directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he doesn’t suppose things about earth, doesn’t suppose things in earth, doesn’t suppose things coming out of earth, doesn’t suppose earth as ‘mine,’ doesn’t delight in earth. Why is that? Because he has comprehended it, I tell you.
“He directly knows water as water… fire as fire… wind as wind… beings as beings… devas as devas… Pajāpati as Pajāpati… Brahmā as Brahmā… the Radiant devas as Radiant devas… the Beautiful Black devas as Beautiful Black devas… the Sky-fruit devas as Sky-fruit devas… the Conqueror as the Conqueror… the dimension of the infinitude of space as the dimension of the infinitude of space… the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness as the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness… the dimension of nothingness as the dimension of nothingness… the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception as the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception… the seen as the seen… the heard as the heard… the sensed as the sensed… the cognized as the cognized… singleness as singleness… multiplicity as multiplicity… the All as the All…
“He directly knows unbinding as unbinding. Directly knowing unbinding as unbinding, he doesn’t suppose things about unbinding, doesn’t suppose things in unbinding, doesn’t suppose things coming out of unbinding, doesn’t suppose unbinding as ‘mine,’ doesn’t delight in unbinding. Why is that? Because he has comprehended it, I tell you.
“A monk who is a Worthy One, devoid of effluents… directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he doesn’t suppose things about earth, doesn’t suppose things in earth, doesn’t suppose things coming out of earth, doesn’t suppose earth as ‘mine,’ doesn’t delight in earth. Why is that? Because, with the ending of passion, he is devoid of passion, I tell you.
“He directly knows water as water… the All as the All…
“He directly knows unbinding as unbinding. Directly knowing unbinding as unbinding, he doesn’t suppose things about unbinding, doesn’t suppose things in unbinding, doesn’t suppose things coming out of unbinding, doesn’t suppose unbinding as ‘mine,’ doesn’t delight in unbinding. Why is that? Because, with the ending of passion, he is devoid of passion, I tell you.
“A monk who is a Worthy One, devoid of effluents… directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he doesn’t suppose things about earth, doesn’t suppose things in earth, doesn’t suppose things coming out of earth, doesn’t suppose earth as ‘mine,’ doesn’t delight in earth. Why is that? Because, with the ending of aversion, he is devoid of aversion, I tell you.
“He directly knows water as water… the All as the All…
“He directly knows unbinding as unbinding. Directly knowing unbinding as unbinding, he doesn’t suppose things about unbinding, doesn’t suppose things in unbinding, doesn’t suppose things coming out of unbinding, doesn’t suppose unbinding as ‘mine,’ doesn’t delight in unbinding. Why is that? Because, with the ending of aversion, he is devoid of aversion, I tell you.
“A monk who is a Worthy One, devoid of effluents… directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he doesn’t suppose things about earth, doesn’t suppose things in earth, doesn’t suppose things coming out of earth, doesn’t suppose earth as ‘mine,’ doesn’t delight in earth. Why is that? Because, with the ending of delusion, he is devoid of delusion, I tell you.
“He directly knows water as water… the All as the All…
“He directly knows unbinding as unbinding. Directly knowing unbinding as unbinding, he doesn’t suppose things about unbinding, doesn’t suppose things in unbinding, doesn’t suppose things coming out of unbinding, doesn’t suppose unbinding as ‘mine,’ doesn’t delight in unbinding. Why is that? Because, with the ending of delusion, he is devoid of delusion, I tell you.

The Tathāgata

“The Tathāgata—a worthy one, rightly self-awakened—directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he doesn’t suppose things about earth, doesn’t suppose things in earth, doesn’t suppose things coming out of earth, doesn’t suppose earth as ‘mine,’ doesn’t delight in earth. Why is that? Because the Tathāgata has comprehended it to the end, I tell you.
“He directly knows water as water… fire as fire… wind as wind… beings as beings… devas as devas… Pajāpati as Pajāpati… Brahmā as Brahmā… the Radiant devas as Radiant devas… the Beautiful Black devas as Beautiful Black devas… the Sky-fruit devas as Sky-fruit devas… the Conqueror as the Conqueror… the dimension of the infinitude of space as the dimension of the infinitude of space… the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness as the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness… the dimension of nothingness as the dimension of nothingness… the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception as the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception… the seen as the seen… the heard as the heard… the sensed as the sensed… the cognized as the cognized… singleness as singleness… multiplicity as multiplicity… the All as the All…
“He directly knows unbinding as unbinding. Directly knowing unbinding as unbinding, he doesn’t suppose things about unbinding, doesn’t suppose things in unbinding, doesn’t suppose things coming out of unbinding, doesn’t suppose unbinding as ‘mine,’ doesn’t delight in unbinding. Why is that? Because the Tathāgata has comprehended it to the end, I tell you.
“The Tathāgata—a worthy one, rightly self-awakened—directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he doesn’t suppose things about earth, doesn’t suppose things in earth, doesn’t suppose things coming out of earth, doesn’t suppose earth as ‘mine,’ doesn’t delight in earth. Why is that? Because he has known that delight is the root of suffering & stress, that from coming-into-being there is birth, and that for what has come into being there is aging & death. Therefore, with the total ending, fading away, cessation, letting go, relinquishment of craving, the Tathāgata has totally awakened to the unexcelled right self-awakening, I tell you.
“He directly knows water as water… the All as the All…
“He directly knows unbinding as unbinding. Directly knowing unbinding as unbinding, he doesn’t suppose things about unbinding, doesn’t suppose things in unbinding, doesn’t suppose things coming out of unbinding, doesn’t suppose unbinding as ‘mine,’ doesn’t delight in unbinding. Why is that? Because he has known that delight is the root of suffering & stress, that from coming-into-being there is birth, and that for what has come into being there is aging & death. Therefore, with the total ending, fading away, cessation, letting go, relinquishment of craving, the Tathāgata has totally awakened to the unexcelled right self-awakening, I tell you.”
That is what the Blessed One said. Displeased, the monks did not delight in the Blessed One’s words.
Notes
1. Earth, water, fire, and wind are the four properties that comprise the experience of physical form.
2. In this section of the list, “beings” denotes all living beings below the level of the gods. “Devas” denotes the beings in the sensual heavens. The remaining terms— Pajāpati, Brahmā, the Radiant devas, the Beautiful Black devas, the Sky-fruit devas, & the Conqueror—denote devas in the heavens of form & formlessness.
3. The dimension of the infinitude of space, the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, the dimension of nothingness, & the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception are four formless states that can be attained in concentration.
4. “The seen, the heard, the sensed, & the cognized” is a set of terms to cover all things experienced through the six senses.
5. Singleness = experience in states of intense concentration (jhāna). Multiplicity = experience via the six senses. See MN 137.
6. “What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This is termed the All. Anyone who would say, ‘Repudiating this All, I will describe another,’ if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his assertion, would be unable to explain and, furthermore, would be put to grief. Why is that? Because it lies beyond range.” —SN 35:23
For more on this topic, see The Mind Like Fire Unbound, Chapter 1.
7. Unbinding = nibbāna (nirvāṇa).
See also: MN 49; MN 72; MN 140; SN 12:23; AN 4:24; AN 4:199; AN 4:200; AN 9:36; AN 10:81; Ud 1:10
Labels: , 0 comments | | edit post
Three Paradigms with Nondual Luminosity


“There's another insight that sometimes arises, and I don't know where it fits in. My field of experience (indeed, everything I can call "reality") consists of a nondual (i.e., self-experiencing) luminosity.”

My reply:

For now you are having glimpses of No Mind but not yet realization of anatta. (Relevant: https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2018/10/differentiating-i-am-one-mind-no-mind.html and https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2018/11/no-mind-and-anatta-focusing-on-insight.html )  How often does it occur and for how long? When you get to MCTB 4th path, it will be effortless and perpetual/permanent.

To get to Thusness Stage 4 realization, certain realizations must arise, particularly through the 2nd Stanza of anatta in http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/03/on-anatta-emptiness-and-spontaneous.html and one will realize as Zen Master Seung Sahn wrote,

"Your true self has no outside, no inside
Sound is clear mind, clear mind is sound
Sound and hearing are not separate, there is only sound"

There is a direct realization involved with regards to the relationship between luminous awareness and phenomenal manifestation.

Before that, it’s not yet Thusness Stage 4 or Stage 5. The experiences will come and go, not the gateless gate without entry and exit, not realization of the nondual or anatta nature of awareness. Your peak experiences are good but actually far more common than you seem to think. Realizations are rarer, and anatta is much more rare, yet is crucial for effortless and perpetual experience of non-dual luminosity, and more importantly a liberating experience (non-dual luminosity in itself is blissful but not liberating).

(Non-dual luminosity is the vivid presence-awareness or clarity experienced in/as everything without falling into a dichotomy of subject and object, perceiver and perceived)

“When my thoughts are extremely still, it becomes obvious that all my assumptions about what is causing it (either a world, or a self, or a brain...) are totally baseless. In that moment, all of experience becomes utterly miraculous. It feels like staying with the source of that wonder, awe, gratitude, joy, love, etc. is very relevant to practice, but I never hear anyone write about this exactly. At that point the belief in materialism should shatter, but I see so many practitioners still believe in it.”



Even after nondual realization (Thusness Stage 4/5) or perhaps before, there are three ways one’s experience can unfold, and in each of these three phases nondual luminosity is clearly experienced:


  1. Deconstruct all objectivity but subsume into an inherently existing subjectivity or cosmic consciousness. Everything is just the modulations of an inherently existing Mind. (Late I AM to One Mind~No Mind phase) Examples of such approach: Direct Path of Sri Atmananda as taught by Greg Goode, Refuting the External World by Goran Backlund, Hall of Mirror teachings, Advaita Vedanta teachings, George Berkeley and many other substantialist nondual teachings, yet most Buddhist practitioners and teachers get stuck here at Subjective Realism even though the Buddhist scriptures are of a non-reductionist kind (see number 3)
  2. Deconstruct all subjectivity, initial phase of Anatta but fall into the extremes of Objective Realism. (Example: Actual Freedom teachings, U.G. Krishnamurti) This is more similar to Thusness Stage 5 but a sub-phase of it, a sidetrack or common deviation of it that can only be corrected or remedied by Stage 6 – non-arising through dependent origination
  3. Further expand on the anatta insight and realize all appearances as vivid empty-clarity and total exertion not through subsuming into object to subject nor subject to object. One neither falls into subjective realism nor objective realism. It is here that dependent origination is realized. All phenomena are realized to be neither arising and ceasing, nor non-arising and non-ceasing, rather it is directly realized to be non-arising because of dependent origination, and thus all appearances are empty and illusory, due to dependent origination but not because they are merely mental projections nor subsumed into an overarching universal consciousness. Thusness Stage 6, and is taught in varying degrees in Buddhadharma, from Pali Suttas and Theravada to Dogen (more on Anatta and Total Exertion), Madhyamika, Tsongkhapa, Mipham (more on Empty-Clarity) and other Tibetan, Mahamudra and Dzogchen texts and so on. Soto Zen (Dogen) stresses more on anatta and total exertion while Vajrayana/Mahamudra/Dzogchen tend to stress more on all appearances as one's empty-radiance.

There are some variance and diversity of views and paths. Most people who simply deconstruct objectivity still ends up with the reification of consciousness into a changeless and ultimate source and substratum. However, at the very end of Greg and Atmananda's Direct Path path, even the notion of 'consciousness' is dissolved, as he wrote in various books including 'After Awareness'. (Also, a side-note: Greg has also dwelt into Madhyamika teachings and wrote about them) Also, Goran Backlund and Hall of Mirror does not seem to reify an unchanging consciousness as source or substratum and their experience is non-dual yet seem to treat Pure Subjectivity as real and ultimate (but not separate from manifest experience). In particular, Goran Backlund stressed that 'Consciousness' only refers to the flow of experiences in the six sense doors (seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, thinking).

All 3 of those cases above experiences non-dual luminosity but clearly have different view (paradigm/framework) in which the experience is viewed or perceived. In 1 and 3, materialism (or more accurately objective realism) is gone, but for different reasons. But 1) will cause one to fall into reified absolutistic spiritual views (i.e. Atman-Brahman, Cosmic/Universal Consciousness, Pure Subjectivity, All is Self, an unchanging and independent Source and Substratum of all phenomena, etc), or on the other extreme, it might cause one to fall into weird solipsistic view by overemphasizing ‘there is no other’ and reducing everything to 'there is only You/This' (e.g. Hall of Mirrors/John Mirra/Empty Mirror neo-Advaitin group in Facebook). There is due to the reductionist tendency in 1) and 2) to absolutize something -- i.e. Everything is only X, or There are no Y but only X -- e.g. there is no Objects, but only Consciousness/Pure Subjectivity, or... there is no Subject, but only Universe/Physical Body and World, etc. Whereas in 3) there is no reductionism involved, there is no establishing some final principle or irreducible Existence to land on, be it in terms of subjectivity or objectivity. I think I first heard the term 'non-reductionist' from Greg Goode.

Although Hall of Mirror/John Mirra's insights and experience are quite close to anatta, there is a key difference. In true Anatta, there is no reducing of everything to some principle ('This', 'Pure Subjectivity', 'The Universe', etc). John Mirra likes to establish 'There is only This', 'There is only You, no other', even as he equalifies that 'You' is only referring to the direct experience of 'vroomyumouch'. For example, John Mirra once told me, '"This" is a word that points to what is. Would you prefer the term "vivid, clear, present"? Or "lemon-meringue-pie"? I replied to him that "teaspoon bangs on a teacup, tings...Vivid, clear and present" is not a pointer to "anything" but simply a description. Descriptions are phenomenal, whereas pointers imply hidden noumenons, referencing something. Yet this is just anatta (not yet twofold emptiness). In the seen only the seen, no seer, but the seen (colors, teaspoon bangs on a teacup, ting...) are not referencing some static or foundational principle.

You can say they are self-luminous, self-aware, vivid, clear and present, as a description but there is no reducing them nor subsuming them into the some greater or ultimate metaphysical (or even physical) principle. Instead there is just a dynamic, seamlessly interdependent play of diversities and multiplicity of vivid display/activity/total exertion that goes on without end without referencing anything, without some ultimate final landing ground to grasp (therefore Practice-Enlightenment is dynamic and endless). When I encounter another person, I do not think "You are Me", or "There is only Me", but simply experience and engage with that other person fully without self/Self, without trying to reduce or subsume or re-confirm anything, because it is clearly seen that any form of self/Self/static principles are completely delusional, and there has just been no more tendency or slightest trace of subject/object duality nor subsuming tendency for the past 8 years. And there is nothing in direct experience that tells me 'There is only Me, no others', in the seen only the seen does not imply there are no other mindstreams, it only means in the seen there is just the seen without a background seer/agent apart that is watching the seen from behind, that what we call 'seeing' or 'awareness' is simply that manifest experience. This anatta insight is best described in terms of the 'non-referentiality' of direct experience and is not reductionist. It negates any referencing centerpoint, any sense of an unchanging and independent Self, Agent or Substance from which experience is viewed (any self/Self/agent) but does not affirm an absolute position in place of its negation (You/This/Pure Subjectivity/Pure Objectivity/etc). Furthermore, correct comprehension of anatta does not reject dependencies and conditionality but allows us to see them clearly as there is no attempting to subsume everything to an absolute principle.

It is my experience that deeper insights into 3) of the non-essentialist or non-reductionist kind leads to deeper freedoms and liberation. However there are many teachings belonging to 1) that does not see essentialism or substantialism as 'wrong' but completely buys into this view. As Greg Goode wrote before,

Greg Goode: Oh, another thing - Advaitins don't see (what we're calling) susbstantialism or essentialism as a bad thing. For them, it is the only thing. Since Brahman = truth, being and freedom from suffering, it makes no sense to be without it. One needs it even to deny it, is the thinking there. So even the standards of evaluation are different. Not to mention the varna/caste system, which is defended on upanishadic, doctrinal grounds. Oops, I just mentioned it!
February 10 at 12:33pm · Like · 3

Greg Goode: I love the Mandukya Upanishad and the Gaudapada Karika. I think it is effective and profound, and like many views, doesn't need to be reconciled with other views. I know that some Advaitins shy away from that Upanishad because of gossip about G's Buddhist influences. I studied that text for a few years, and it never felt subversive to me...
February 10 at 12:43pm · Like · 4

And in 3, the conventional efficacy of causality between the world, self and brain are not in any way negated or denied but are not held to be intrinsically existing in any way. Rather the web of interdependencies are totally exerting from moment to moment like a net of indra, and everything takes on a sense of illusoriness, just like the reflections of a mirror or the reflection of moon on the lake or the reflections of the interplay of nodes in the net of indra in real-time – they are clearly realized and experienced to be mere dependent reflections/appearances no where residing ‘inside’ the lake or ‘inside’ the mirror (not inherently existing anywhere) but merely appearing due to intricate dependencies but not truly arising or coming into existence or existing by its own essence. The relative individuality or rather uniqueness of various mindstreams and various ‘external phenomena’ are not negated conventionally just like the uniqueness of each node in the net of indra isn’t negated and yet they are not held to exist by way of its own essence, nor are they subsumed into an overarching universal consciousness. Vivid non-dual presence/consciousness is merely the appearances of those vivid colors, sounds, sensations yet nothing truly existing ‘there’, no ‘essence’ to be found here, there or anywhere.

Here in 3) there is no subsuming of appearances into some overarching ultimate or universal awareness as by 2) the ‘awareness’ and ‘radiance’ is already clearly realized to be the mere foreground manifesting transience, no unchanging background or subject behind. Consciousness is also not reified to be some inherently existing/unchanging and independent source and substratum of all phenomena as in the case of 1) or Thusness Stage 1~4. At this 3) phase one can also have better understanding of the play of karmic conditioning, and one understands that afflictions cannot be destroyed through hard will in the same way as we cannot get rid of the moon in the mirror by trying to break the mirror, because the moon never resided inside the mirror ‘inherently’ to begin with, and afflictions do not reside 'inside the mind' inherently but merely appears due to karmic tendencies meeting secondary conditions, so rather the practice is by way of facing and uncovering the conditions and releasing those conditions through wisdom.

Number 2) is a good example to demonstrate that experiencing nondual luminosity need not lead to a deconstruction of material reality, depending on one’s conditions it may in fact cause one to reify the physical universe as absolutely existing with intrinsic existence, as an immature insight into anatta fails to address the deeper underlying ignorance or view of inherency/inherent existence, therefore once the Subject is completely deconstructed (and one no longer reifies an Ultimate Subjectivity or Consciousness as some metaphysical and ultimate, changeless and independent source and substratum behind all phenomena) and dissolved, the underlying ‘ignorance’ then swaps its object of grasping from the Subjective pole to the Objective pole, as the Subject is seen as unreal therefore (it seems) the objects has to be real? Not knowing that this is just the underlying ignorance that projects inherent existence re-appearing in another guise.

This is even though nondual luminosity is also experienced at 2), as Richard demonstrated his realization and experience of the luminosity as foreground manifestation:

Actual Freedom’s Richard Maynard wrote, “Yet what I experience is neither materialismhttp://www.actualfreedom.com.au/richard/images/note-icon.jpg nor spiritualismhttp://www.actualfreedom.com.au/richard/images/note-icon.jpg; I experience actualismhttp://www.actualfreedom.com.au/richard/images/note-icon.jpg. I am neither materialistic nor spiritualistic; I am actualistic. I am neither a materialist nor a spiritualist; I am an actualist. An actualist is a person who, unlike a spiritualist, does not believe that matter is passive (as in inactive, inert, quiescent, stagnant, static, torpid, supine, idle, moribund or dormant) and, unlike a materialist, does not believe that nature and/or life is a random, futile event in an empty, aimless, universe. Actualism is the direct experiencing of the meaningful, vibrant, dynamic, effervescent, sparkling, pulsating, amazing, marvellous, wondrous and magical happening that is this very physical universe in action.
To be actualistic is to be living the infinitude of this fairy-tale-like actual world with its sensuous quality of magical perfection and purity: where everything and everyone has a lustre, a brilliance, a vividness, an intensity and a marvellous, wondrous, scintillating vitality that makes everything alive and sparkling ... even the very earth beneath one’s feet. The rocks, the concrete buildings, a piece of paper ... literally everything is as if it were alive (a rock is not, of course, alive as humans are, or as animals are, or as trees are). This ‘aliveness’ is the very actuality of all existence ... the actualness of everything and everyone. We do not live in an inert universe ... but one cannot experience this whilst clinging to immortality.

….

... and just as the moving picture is visually brilliant, vivid, sparkling, so too is the sound track aurally rich, vibrant, resonant.

….

Therefore, when I wrote that ‘as [the qualities of] splendour and brilliance are intrinsic to the properties of this actual world’ and that ‘they present themselves openly where apperception is operating’ I am reporting that literally everything is ‘bright, shining, vivid, intense, sparkling, luminous, lustrous, scintillating and coruscating in all its vitality here in this actual world’ ... thus it is not the imposition of subjective attributes (which phrase may very well equate to what you called ‘internal percepts’ in the previous e-mail) that I am talking about.
Rather it is the absence of such subjectively imposed attributes – due to the absence of identity – which reveals the world as-it-is.

….

The actualism website states: You could say that mysticism pursues the subjective to the  vanishing point of the self – everything becomes subjectivity. In  other words, ‘I’ envelope the world to the point where the  distinction between subject and object no longer makes sense and  the objective is ‘sucked into’ the subjective with no distinction  between the two.
Actualists pursue objectivity to the vanishing point of the self –  ‘I’ become so whittled down that eventually the distinction between  the objective and the subjective collapses, but this time it is the  objective that replaces the subjective – everything becomes (as it  already is) objective – factual. No 37 to No 61(R)



..............

p.s. Thusness wrote in early 2010:

https://sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/391975/

....What David Carse said requires more than the “I AMness” realization you narrated in your post “Certainty of Being”.  It also requires more than just glimpses of the non-dual state that can be induced by penetrating the question:

"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"

It requires a practitioner to be sufficiently clear about the cause of ‘separation’ so that the perceptual knot that creates the ‘division’ is thoroughly seen through.  At this phase, non-dual becomes quite effortless.  The three following articles that you posted in your blog are all about the thorough insights of seeing through the illusionary division created by mental constructs.  They are all very well written.  It is worth revisiting these articles.

1. Body/No-Body
2. The Teachings of Atmananda and the Direct Path
3. The Direct Path
Of all the 3 articles, I like Joan’s article Body/No-body best.  Do not simply go through the motion of reading, read with a reverent heart.  Though a simple article but is not any less insightful than those written by well-known masters, it has all the answers and pointers you need. :)
Next, there are several points you made that is related to the deconstruction of mental objects but you should also note that there exist a predictable relationship between the 'mental object to be de-constructed' and 'the experiences and realizations'.  For example “The Teachings of Atmananda and the Direct Path” will, more often than not lead a practitioner to the realization of One Mind whereas the article from Joan will lead one to the experiential insight of No-Mind.  As a general guideline,
1. If you de-construct the subjective pole, you will be led to the experience of No-Mind.
2. If you de-construct the objective pole, you will be led to the experience of One-Mind.
3. If you go through a process of de-constructing prepositional phrases like "in/out" "inside/outside" "into/onto," "within/without" "here/there", you will dissolve the illusionary nature of locality and time.
4. If you simply go through the process of self-enquiry by disassociation and elimination without clearly understanding the non-inherent and dependent originated nature of phenomena, you will be led to the experience of “I AMness”.
Lastly, not to talk too much about self-liberation or the natural state, it can sound extremely misleading.  Although Joan Tollifson spoke of the natural non-dual state is something “so simple, so immediate, so obvious, so ever-present that we often overlook”, we have to understand that to even come to this realization of the “Simplicity of What Is”, a practitioner will need to undergo a painstaking process of de-constructing the mental constructs.  We must be deeply aware of the ‘blinding spell’ in order to understand consciousness.  I believe Joan must have gone through a period of deep confusions, not to under-estimate it. :)



..............

I'll end this with a quote from Bernadette Roberts:

"That everyone has different experiences and perspectives is not a problem; rather, the problem is that when we interpret an experience outside its own paradigm, context, and stated definitions, that experience becomes lost altogether. It becomes lost because we have redefined the terms according to a totally different paradigm or perspective and thereby made it over into an experience it never was in the first place. When we force an experience into an alien paradigm, that experience becomes subsumed, interpreted away, unrecognizable, confused, or made totally indistinguishable. Thus when we impose alien definitions on the original terms of an experience, that experience becomes lost to the journey, and eventually it becomes lost to the literature as well. To keep this from happening it is necessary to draw clear lines and to make sharp, exacting distinctions. The purpose of doing so is not to criticize other paradigms, but to allow a different paradigm or perspective to stand in its own right, to have its own space in order to contribute what it can to our knowledge of man and his journey to the divine.

Distinguishing what is true or false, essential or superficial in our experience is not a matter to be taken lightly. We cannot simply define our terms and then sit back and expect perfect agreement across the board. Our spiritual-psychological journey does not work this way. We are not uniform robots with the same experiences, same definitions, same perspectives, or same anything."
Labels: , 14 comments | | edit post
The Breakthrough
Related: The Buddha on Non-Duality


From new book by Ajahn Amaro, “The Breakthrough”. Source: https://forestsangha.org/.../The%20Breakthrough%20...


Ajahn Amaro:

They went back and forth three times, and after a third time a Tathāgata has to respond, so the Buddha said:
‘Listen carefully to what I have to say. In the seen there is only the seen. In the heard there is only the heard. In the sensed there is only the sensed. In the cognized there is only the cognized. When you, Bāhiya, can see that in the seen there is only the seen, and in the heard there is only the heard, and so forth, then you will indeed recognize that there is no thing there; there is no substance in the world of the object. And when you see that there is, indeed, no thing ‘there’, you will also recognize that there is no thing ‘here’; there is no being or person, no real ‘I’ in the realm of the subject. You will recognize the
128
object is empty, the subject is empty. When you see that there is no thing there and no thing here, you will not be able to find yourself either in the world of this or in the world of that, or any place between the two. This, Bāhiya, is the end of suffering.’ And Bāhiya instantly became an arahant.
‘You will not be able to find a self in the world of this or in the world of that, or in any place between the two...’ Bāhiya obviously had some spiritual potential, since he became an arahant right then and there. He then said, ‘Please, Venerable Sir, may I be your disciple, and will you give me ordination as a monk?’ The Buddha asked him, ‘Have you a robe and a bowl?’ Bāhiya was an ascetic who wore clothing made of tree bark, so he didn’t have a robe or a bowl. The Buddha said, ‘If you can find a bowl and robe, I will give you the ordination. Bāhiya went off to try and find a robe and a bowl. And as he had correctly feared, his life was indeed short and uncertain; a runaway cow hit him as it was charging through the street, and he died from his wounds. But he died an arahant, so he was right to press the Buddha to give him that teaching.
‘In the heard there is only the heard. In the sensed there is only the sensed. In the cognized there is only the cognized...’ So as we hear a sound, as we feel a sensation in the body, as we smell, taste or touch something, as we have a thought or a mood – if there is just hearing, just seeing, just smelling, just tasting, just touching, just thinking, just remembering, just feeling – if they are known as just what they are, events in consciousness, then as the Buddha said to Bāhiya, ‘You will recognize that there is no ‘thing’ there.’
When we hear a sound, we might think, ‘That’s the sound of Ajahn Amaro talking’, or ‘That’s the sound of a plane going to Luton Airport.’ And we think that the sound is ‘out there’, the plane is ‘out there’. But if we know it clearly and directly, we recognize that the experience of hearing is not ‘there’; it’s happening in this awareness. The plane is in your mind. The experience of hearing is a pattern of experience in the mind. It’s happening here. The mind’s representation of that thing is experienced here and now in this field of awareness. And just as you see there is no thing there, that the object is empty, so the feeling of a ‘me’ here who is the experiencer can be seen to be empty too. There’s no person who’s the experiencer. There’s just knowing. There’s just the awareness of this moment, the unentangled participating in this pattern of experience.
The Buddha said that when you can see there is no thing there and no thing here, when you can see that the object and subject are both empty, at that point there is just subjectless awareness. You will not be able to find a self. You will not be able to find yourself in either the world of objects or the world of the subject, or any place between the two. Just this is the end of suffering.
This teaching is extraordinarily helpful, because we often fill up the world, making a ‘me’ here who is experiencing a world out there. We create a ‘me’ here watching a ‘mine’ out there: ‘Me watching my mind; me dealing with my thoughts; me and my practice.’ When that happens we are not attending in the most skilful and complete way. We are creating a subject here and an object
130
there, both laden with ‘I’ and ‘mine’. So if we bear in mind this simple teaching, it helps us to undermine that I-making and mine-making habit. It dissolves the ahaṃkara/mamaṃkara programme. It dissolves the causes of self-view. And the more we are able to let there be just seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching; the more we let things take shape, do their thing, without creating a ‘me’ here who’s experiencing a world out there, or patterns of thought and feeling and memory inside, the more we recognize our experience as being just patterns of nature coming and going and changing.

.......

After a while, though, there was a strange feeling of being cramped, a quality of containment or limitation. I thought, ‘What is this about?’ There was clear seeing that things are anicca, dukkha, anattā, not self, empty of substance; but there was also this strange limitation, a strange kind of tension in the system. And it suddenly dawned on me and became clear, ‘Ah! It’s all happening here.’ I realized that it was the mind creating the feeling of locatedness, that everything was happening in ‘my’ mind, even though the usual crystallizations of the ‘I’ feeling were absent. I realized my mind was attached to the notion that it was happening ‘here’, at this spot.
At the risk of being too abstruse, I feel this is a helpful thing to look at. It was clear to me that until that point I hadn’t actually seen the attachment to the feeling of place or the feeling of location that the mind creates – the sense of ‘here-ness’, in this spot, this geographical centre where things are felt.
I don’t know if any of you have intuited or felt this but it was very striking to me at that time. I suddenly realized there was an attachment to the idea that awareness was happening in this place, this location. So I began to look at that very feeling of locatedness and the sense of things happening here. I used a very simple and straightforward reflection: bringing to mind the word ‘here’ or saying to myself, ‘It’s all happening here.’ By bringing the attention to it, the word ‘here’ began to seem absurd. Then a whole extra layer of letting go was able to happen.
Awakened awareness, knowing, is free from bondage to the realm of time and space as well. It is timeless and unlocated.
Shortly after that, I came across a sentence in a Dhamma talk by Ajahn Mahā- Boowa. He talked how this very insight had played a radical role in his own spiritual development. It was just after the time when his teacher Venerable Ajahn Mun had passed away. Ajahn Maha-Boowa was doing walking meditation, and out of nowhere this thought appeared in his mind: ‘If there is a point or a centre to the knower anywhere, then that is the essence of birth in some level of being.’
If ‘the knower’ considers itself to have a location or a centre, then that is the essence of birth in some level of being. This means that this is where the mind gets caught. Avijjā happens right there. Until that false locatedness is recognized as a quality of grasping, the heart cannot truly be free.
So along with things being impermanent, unsatisfactory and not-self, I find it is also helpful to recollect that Dhamma is essentially unlocated in the world of three-dimensional space. Location is a useful tool in the physical world, but in the world of mind location, place does not apply. Three-dimensional space only refers to the physical world, to the rūpa-khandha. Mind, the nāma-khandhā, does not have any relationship to three-dimensional space, because mind has no material substance. Mind has no physical form; therefore three-dimensional space has no fundamental relationship to the mind.
So where is the mind? This is another helpful reflection and we can use this kind of inquiry to explore the issue as well. Ask the question: ‘Where is the mind?’ This illuminates the presumption: ‘It is here’. For in the clear light of awakened awareness, the wisdom faculty recognizes that even any kind of ‘hereness’ is not it either. So again, at the risk that this may sound abstruse or unhelpful, this is raised because it is important to look all the different habits of attachment and identification, even if they are very, very subtle.
Though we may have no sense of self, it can be that that ‘no sense of self’ is being experienced here. And that ‘hereness’ is also to be let go of in the practice of liberation. Dhamma is absolutely real, but it’s completely unlocated. You cannot say that the Dhamma is any ‘where’. You might say, ‘But it’s everywhere!’ But by looking at that whole dimension of experience it can be recognized that ‘whereness’ does not apply. Allow that recognition to have its effect upon the citta.
Labels: , , , 0 comments | | edit post