(Note: Simpo = Longchen = Sim Pern Chong)

Note: If you like to read more of Thusness/PasserBy's writings, check out:

Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment
On Anatta (No-Self), Emptiness, Maha and Ordinariness, and Spontaneous Perfection
Realization and Experience and Non-Dual Experience from Different Perspectives
Early Forum Posts by Thusness
Part 2 of Early Forum Posts by Thusness
Part 3 of Early Forum Posts by Thusness
Early Conversations Part 4
Early Conversations Part 5
Early Conversations Part 6

Thusness's Early Conversations (2004-2007) Part 1 to 6 in One PDF Document
Thusness's Conversation Between 2004 to 2012
A casual comment about Dependent Origination
Leaving traces or Attainment?
Emptiness as Viewless View and Embracing the Transience
Reply to Yacine
Direct Seal of Great Bliss 
The Unbounded Field of Awareness 
Comments section of The Buddha on Non-Duality 
Why the Special Interest in Mirror? 
What is an Authentic Buddhist Teaching? 
The Path of Anatta
The Key Towards Pure Knowingness
The place where there is no earth, fire, wind, space, water
 



Here are some early forum postings by Thusness back in 2006. (note: longchen = simpo, another friend from Singapore)

Longchen:

http://sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/173915There is one thing that puzzles me about the article though...

That is...

Is there really a perceiver of the mind? Could it be that there is no perceiver at all?

Perceiver seems to imply that there is something separate from the mind...watching it.

I think there is watching but no watcher.

There is doing but no doer.

Everything happens in the present moment... spontaneously. 'Sense of self' as a doer is just an illusion.

Thusness will have a better understanding... hmm... wonder...whether he can comment on the article or not.

Thusness:
Yes LongChen,

I agree with what you said. There shouldn’t be a separation. There are 2 seeds that I sense lying deep in Galen’s Consciousness:

1. The meditative experience he gained on the aspect of 'No-Self'
2. The meditative experience of the 'ISness Presence, Knowingness Presence

However the imprint of the Knowingness Presence' is stronger than the understanding of 'No-Self' and serves as the seed that makes Galen remarked 'We are the Watcher, not the thinker, or the doer, or the experiencer', thus, creating separation.

The meditative experience of “AMness” is a very powerful one. It creates the impression of Certainty, Absoluteness and Realness. It creates the impression that we have touched the innermost reality of our own core being where thoughts play absolutely no role in that moment of experience. This is a very unique and sacred experience but is a double edge sword. It must be cleansed with the “Emptiness” truth otherwise there will always be separation.

What is the ultimate nature of this “ISness” Presence? Is the “ISness” Presence still the “Presence” when there is separation? When we are listening to a piece of music, where and what is this Ultimate Presence right at that moment? During meditation or when one is totally submerged in appreciating the piece of music, he might exclaim, “I become the music”, “I am the listening itself” or “I am the music itself”. The Presence is the Music is the Awareness is the ‘I’. Does it mean that the subject, the object and the action have suddenly become one? Or is there really no separation from beginning?

Separation is often the result of wrong identification, labeling and attachment. This is the problem of language and attachment. When one is free from labeling and experience is direct, there is really only listening, there is no ‘I’. This is what really is happening if we are not hypnotized and deceived by thoughts and labeling -- One complete co-arising emptiness flow, ever present and ever clear. There is no ‘ghost’ and ‘shadow’ in between, the ‘I’ is unnecessary and separation is illusionary.



There is no ‘Watcher’ apart from the watching. There is no doer apart from the doing and ‘own will’apart from the volition. The ‘watching’, ‘doing’ and ‘action’ refer to the same process. This same process flows and continues life after life. The process reaps its own fruit. There is no escape.

Thusness:Hi paperflower,

The sensation of “lightening” is due to the falling away or loosening of the bond that “you are a physical self”. You sank into a state near oblivious as a result of letting go but the mental formation hasn’'t subsided (What is crucial is more on these mental formations).

“feel extremely fresh n energetic after that, I look fresh n radiant in mirror too”

This is the result of slowing down your thought process during meditation. Your senses become sharper and more alert as though you are beaming when you are out of meditation.

Do go into the Buddhism aspect of no-self and emptiness and as suggested by some forumers, look for a qualified teacher.

True experience of our Pristine Awareness must come with complete clarity and vividness. There is no vagueness in realization. There is no dropping of senses necessary; rather all senses are experienced in full without a “doer”. When no-self and emptiness is realized, the entire sense of a “doer” and “body” completely dissolve without a trace and boundless freedom becomes a moment to moment experience.

As what Joan Tollifson once asked Toni “if she'd ever had one of those big awakenings where life turns inside out and all identification with the body-mind ceases.

Toni replied, "I can't say I had it," she replied. "It's this moment, right now."

Happy Journey.


Thusness:Consciousness is/are states and mind is a flowing stream. However is there a direction of flow and does the movement take place in space?

Thusness:Hi Casino_King,

It is inadequate to use rational thought to understand spiritual matters. Logic is only that branch of philosophy that deals with reasoning. It does not deal with all types of thinking such as remembering (Recalling past life included), dreaming (Dream Yoga), day dreaming, neurosis, learning..etc. These other types of thinking are the job of psychology and parapsychology.

Although evidence is needed to serve as a base for inductive and deductive reasoning, full proof evidence to arrive at a certain conclusion is not necessary in logical analysis. In daily life, not all reasoning attempts to provide conclusive evidence for the truth of a given conclusion and more often than not, conclusive evidence cannot be produced. For pragmatic ground, we merely want the evidence we arrived at be 'well founded'.

As human, sleeping and dreaming took up pretty much percentage of our life. We are not just a rational being, to understand human, we have to deal with all these matters with spiritual issues included.


Thusness:Hi Casino_King,

‘Spiritual Matters’ is merely a term to denote paranormal phenomenon, it is not an assumption. However If I were to assert that ‘spiritual matters really exist’, then it is an assumption. I believe I have not done so. Similarly if anyone were to assert that “spiritual matters do not exist” then he/she immediately makes it an assumption. The fact is, paranormal phenomenons are neither proven nor disproved. Thus, we have to explore further. But which and what method of exploration should we adopt?

I have stated that mere logical analysis isn’t the correct approach -- “It is inadequate to use rational thought to understand spiritual matters”, I have given my reasons. If you disagree, you must, at least tell me why or how through inference or syllogism itself is sufficient to ‘understand’ spiritual matters. Or prove that -- “It is inadequate to use rational thought to understand spiritual matters” is an untrue statement through logic of syllogism. Otherwise it is only reasonable and logical to employ a different approach.

Till now I have not spoken anything about Buddhism. I certainly do not want to deviate too much from this forum but as what many forumers have pointed out, you might have to put in a little more effort towards understanding some of the main core concepts and teachings of Buddhism -- Buddhism certainly isn't what you have perceived it to be. Like you, I have made some studies and practices in other religions (add Taoism to your list), I still think Buddhism best.

Lastly I do see some of your points. You might want to look into how man is defined by symbols for your gambler case. Again what I am going to say next might not be soothing to your ears but Buddhism truly teaches us how to go beyond these symbols. In whatever case, reserve an open for a fruitful discussion. We might not reach any conclusion but without an open mind, any form of discussion will eventually prove futile.



Thusness:Yes, there is no ‘something’ coming into being and undergoing disintegration. When the mind attempts to understand the phenomenon existence through our current mode of knowing that works through comparison and measurement, the conclusion we derived seems paradoxical. When we choose to see the ‘arising’, the thinking mind cannot see the cessation. Neither ‘arising’ nor ‘cessation’ is before nor after the other. The sequence is caused by the mind. By choosing one, it has to give up the other. The thinking mind needs a base and the base becomes an ‘entity’, a ‘something’. That ‘something’, that ‘entity’ is required due to the poverty of our thinking mechanism, it is not the true face of reality. A lighting flash of moment exhibits the entirety of the Dharma seals and it is only in Buddhism that is pointed out. Not only that, Buddha also taught us the systematic way of developing the intuitive insight into reality.


Thusness:
Yes. In the first turning of the dharma wheel, Buddha taught the four noble truth and the lack of inherent existence of the self. In the second turnings, it was taught that all dharma lack inherent existence. To prevent over negation, the third turning was preached. Even in the third turning of the wheel, the Samdhinirmocana sutra of Yogacara, we also see the careful use of the word ‘Self’ and the clarification of the flow of perceptions without an enduring element. Similar emphasis can also be found in the Mahamudra teaching (some say that it is fourth turning), the emphasis of emptiness is pretty clear. What we witness is in each of the turnings, is the refinement on the idea of impermanence and prevention of people from falling into the nihilistic view that nothing exists but never the claim of the permanence of Buddha-Nature. As the great Zen master Dogen puts it, impermanence is Buddha’s Nature.

Nevertheless, any possible reasons why Mahaparinirvana Sutra and Tathagatagarbha sutras assertion for this ‘about-turn’?

Lastly, why is this emphasis of impermanence crucial and what has our pristine awareness got to do with it?



An Eternal Now: I also don't know.. can explain? And I got a question - all the different turnings are supposed to lead to the same realisations right? Then why is there a need for so many turnings?


Thusness:
Yes Eternal_Now,

My sentiment exactly. All teachings aim at the same goal (emancipation from samsara) but each turning of the dharma wheel refines our understanding of the true nature of reality during our journey towards enlightenment. Personally, I feel that practitioners should not ascribed ‘levels’ to the different turnings but should view the turnings of the Dharmachakra as arising due to the ripening of causes and conditions. The first turning focuses on the four noble truths and the emptiness of the self. The second turning is on the importance of the emptiness nature of all phenomenon existence (not only self), that is, the Prajnaparamita teachings. The third turning introduced the presence of Buddha-Nature in everyone. In whatever case, the validity of all discourses must not deviate from the authenticity of the ‘Dharma Seals’.

With regards to the bold assertion of certain tathagatagarbha sutras, some scholars ascribed the Hindu influence during the Gupta period where we see strong pressure of traditional Hindu culture. Another possible condition for the emergence of the tathagatagarbha sutras might be the result of over negation in certain practices that eventually led people to mistake Buddhism as nihilistic (On the surface, it is not uncommon that many misunderstood that Buddhism is nihilistic) and a positive language about Nirvana is needed for non-buddhist ascetics as well as buddhist-practitioners.

In my opinion, I feel that the teachings should be viewed as a single whole (Including the first two turnings). When we attempt to pick and drop and take only a part or a snapshot of the teachings and make comments, tathagatagarbha sutras will present as a problem and sound very similar to the non-buddhist ascetics’ doctrines. However when taken as a whole, the sutras glue and complement.



There truly exists a reality beyond conceptual fabrication. Its presence is abiding, the clarity unsurpassed, its action is natural and arising is spontaneous. However this reality should not be taken to mean a permanent unchanging entity. It is ultimate because it is non-dual. Conceptual fabrication categorizes and creates a subject and object division. It is the Tathagatagarbha when lost and Dharmakaya when enlightened.


An Eternal Now:Is tathagathagarbha and dharmakaya different?


Thusness:Only from a conventional point of view. It is the term used to refer to the latent condition (do not see it as a ‘thingness’) which actually brings about enlightenment. Garbha means embryo.



Sinweiy:the last deep profound understanding of impermanence seems to turn the idea of impermanence into permanence, yet also not the normal permanence. the key word is simultaneous.

like they said, the meaning of unborn is actually born and death is so close and simultaneous, it seems like unborn.

/\


Thusness:


Yes and most important. But I would use the word ‘Spontaneity’. An unborn and non-dual luminosity that arises spontaneously. This is the ‘form’ of all emptiness and must come with the complete abeyance of the 'Self'. All at once, the full essence of all arising will be understood, from the rising sun, the sky, the trees and the grass...etc. It can only be intuitively understood.

Permanence is a strong word in 'Buddhism', I would refrain from using it to cause misconceptions (Though it is explicitly used in certain sutras). But the Presence is abiding.


Isis:hey im just wondering.. iamness.. is the state of having an identity, a label/concepts given by mind and sometime the norms... man-made and not our true self..

Having real peace happens when one does not aware of iamness

Egoless?


Thusness:

Hi Isis,

Not exactly so. I AMness is a transcendental experience where consciousness is directly perceived as a pure sense of Existence. The experience is intuitive and beyond the realm of thought. It is a non-dual and precious experience of pure consciousness. The problem lies in personifying this experience which is a mental state into an entity 'Self' with inherent existence.


Thusness:Although science is the preferred mode of knowing in this modern era, it has its limitation. It is not equipped to deal with morals, aesthetics, wonder and the "face to face touch" of our pristine awareness. Thus, even if science is capable of proving what Buddha taught, every 'proof' remains as a form of external knowledge. It lacks the 'direct touch' of our buddha nature and in my view, it is this 'touch' that is most important.


Isis:
It does not matter much whether this or there things really exist. Science has tried to prove time over time and this kind of things can take super- long time.


Thusness:
I agree with most of the points you said except this. Personally I think it does matter and our entire value system and the meaning of existence will change.

My personal view:

If we are serious about life and the meaning of our own existence, we have to take steps into understanding it. It is not just about fear, it springs from the love of life and to find out more about what it is. Religion offers what science has not yet able to offer and we have the choice to choose the religion that suits us. Even if we have experienced the reality of the transcendental and rebirth, it is not final, we will soon realize how little we know about our own reality. There is no point over emphasizing anything and make objective claims about a subjective experience. Let science remains as it is and not over/under assert what it is not. The journey must still continue but walk with a truthful heart. To truly gain, the sincerity must be there.

Asking the reality of ‘rebirth’ and experiencing our luminous clarity is “unlocking” the mystery of life, we should not expect it to come easy. To unlock this mystery, seriously make all effort into understanding the meaning no-self and emptiness and practice with all our heart. It is already taught, we have to take the steps. It is the gate towards unlocking the doubt we have in mind. This has to be subjective, it has to be personal, it is an individual ‘touch’ and authentication of what that is being taught by Buddha. All the core teachings of Buddhism are to be found here, now and this moment, it is not else where, not even a moment of thought away. We will be convinced by this ‘touch’ even it is not proven objectively by science. Resting in our pristine awareness and being authenticated by everything without gap, doubt cannot arise and by this, we remain undisturbed. My 2 cents, happy journey to all.


Thusness:


Thusness:

Hi Bohiruci,

I am not familiar with the Culavedalla Sutta so I will just share what is in my mind after reading it.

First, I think it is unlikely that Visakha, who has attained the stage of Anagami, is confused with what Buddha meant by the term "self". I will take it that Visakha is seeking for the deepest level of understanding on the doctrine of ‘no-self’ from sravaka viewpoint -- progressing from a third stage of holiness to the final stage of Arahatship that Dhammadinna has attained.

If we were to ask what is ‘self’? A series of questions may follow like the case of Visakha. This form of enquiries will continue without end like a never ending samsaric cycle. It is analogous to rebirth where the previous question serves as the cause and the answer serves as condition for the next question to arise. We witness old mental tendencies in action, replacing one fragment of thought with another fragment where every fragment is unsatisfactory during the process of enquiry. How is it that we can't even know who we really are? What exactly is lacking? If we were to replace the question to “without using any languages, any symbols to represent ‘I’, how is ‘I’ experienced?” To answer such a question, the old chain-cycle habit of answering must come to a halt. To answer, the mind cannot continue its chats. The mind must be silent, raw, undefined, direct and attentive –- it must be mindful. A question arises, the answer isn'’t made up of words but rather a raw direct naked experience of what it is, i.e., using mindfulness as the way of knowing.

The entire teaching of Buddha is very much alive. When Buddha taught us ‘impermanence’ and ‘interdependence’, he does not only teach us the analytical and logical mode of knowing the seals but also the direct mode of knowing -- being participative and experiential in all moments. He taught us the four foundation of mindfulness that brings about clear knowing that eventually leads to nirvana. It is amazing to realise the immense clarity that arises in mindfulness, knowing that arises not out measurement and comparison. Apply mindfulness as the mode of knowing in all that can be experienced -– body, feeling, perception, mental formation and consciousness. Leave nothing out. It is through this sort of concentrated mindfulness of phenomena that can give rise to the flow of clear knowingness that comes only with the absence of words, labels and perceptions. This signless clear knowingness is release, it is bliss, it is what that leads to the other side of unbinding:

"What lies on the other side of ignorance?"

"Clear knowing lies on the other side of ignorance."

"What lies on the other side of clear knowing?"

"Release lies on the other side of clear knowing."

"What lies on the other side of release?"

"Unbinding lies on the other side of release."

"What lies on the other side of Unbinding?"

-- Cula-vedalla Sutta


Thusness:From a conventional point of view, it is. If we feel, see, hear and think in terms of ‘entity’, then it seems that there is a ‘self’ leaving the body. This is because all along, we experience all phenomenon appearances as ‘solid things’ existing independently. Such conventional mode of comprehending our meditative experiences masked the true character of these experiences.

If we treat consciousness to be an atomic-like-particle residing in our body somewhere, then we are making it as a self too. Do not do that. The true character of Consciousness is not a thing, it does not enter, leave, reside within or outside the body. Clear Luminosity is bonded by karmic propensities, causes and conditions. There is no need for a place ‘within’. Yes, there is a ‘mental phenomenon’ arising but the sensation of ‘entering’ and ‘leaving’ is the result of associating it with a ‘self’. Just like it is illusionary to see a ‘self’ succeeding from moment to moment, an ‘entrance’ and ‘exit’ is equally illusionary.

Mystical experiences are extremely crucial during the journey of enlightenment. Do not discard them unwisely but assign them correct places. These experiences loosen karmic bonds that latent deep down in our consciousness where it is almost impossible to break through ordinary means. It is an essential condition for the awakening of penetrating insight. The main different between non Buddhist and Buddhist practitioners is that transcendental and mystical experiences are not molded into a ‘self’ but correctly understood and purified with the wisdom of emptiness. This applies true to the Luminous Clarity Knowingness that is non-dual, it is not wrongly personified into Brahman. In perfect clarity, there are no praises for radiance bright, only the Dharma is in sight. The wisdom of emptiness is so deep and profound that even if one has entered the realm of non-dual, he/she will still not be able to grasp its essence in full. This is the wisdom of the Blessed One. The second level of Presence.


Thusness:

Originally posted by longchen:

You see, ... at the Base all is meaningless. A face cannot see itself. The face can see itself only when there is a mirror to reflect. The reflections are karma.
Actually, base and reflection are not separated at all...it a matter of perception.

Yes Longchen,

All is meaningless because it is not in terms words, labels and symbols. These are for the 'herds' but that Presence is all. An unintented urge can arise as a result of karmic propensities but it is before the formation of perception.

The result of certain situations can be altered with powerful thought forms, however the karmic propensities if being suppressed is not lost, if possible, let it arise naturally. Try not to over use it. Happy journey.


Thusness:

Thusness:



Thusness:A deep joy arises when reading this message.

Just to add an additional point:

No watcher needed, the process itself knows and rolls as Venerable Buddhaghosa writes in the Visuddhi Magga.



Thusness:

Originally posted by longchen:

I see. Thanks Thusness.

I will like to describe the karmic pattern sensing that I use and can you comment on it. Thanks.

There is actually no effort to actively seek the pattern recognition. The process is spontaneous as if the feeling suddenly know itself. With that intuitive knowing, the mind can at time momentarily still. This is as if thought acknowledge itself. At that moment, it loses its power of symbolism and meaning. Usually after this, the mind is calm and have very little content...After a while, breathe arises and awareness of it follows.

Actually, I do not allocate session saying that I want to do karmic pattern sensing now. This kind of activity can happen at any time of the day.

Thanks again

Hi LongChen,

Yes what you described is right. Without symbols and labels, the 'self' has no place to rest. The experience loosen the karmic propensities that bond, you will experience the sudden breaking loose if the 'self' dissolved.

Also, in the intuitive mode, it will not be right to treat the message to be conveyed as a single bit of information. It contains all information that are yet to be manifested. That single bit may contain our entire past histories. It is the intensity and concentrated penetration of that mode that makes the difference. The “AMness” experience when intensified might lead us to another path without knowing our ultimate emptiness nature. It is most crucial to study thoroughly what the Buddha taught about the doctrine of no-self and Emptiness even if the teachings challenge the most profound transcendental experiences we have. We may continue our path but at least let the teachings imprint deep into our consciousness. It is truly rare, do not waste the opportunity.


Thusness:




Thusness:

Originally posted by longchen:
Is Reality like quantum physics?
In Quantum physics, subatomic particles can be immaterial waves as well.

Hi Longchen,

You may want to grab the book ‘The Spiritual Universe’ by Fred Alan Wolf, it is a good read. He is a Ph.D in theoretical physics and described matter as follows:

“…Matter seemingly solid when observed on a scale of inches and seconds, was mostly empty space with tiny bits of something call probability clouds filling that space. These clouds are fundamental particles’ ‘tendencies to exist’ to somehow pop out of nothing and become coherent matter…”

If quantum reality is as what he described, then yes. In terms of reality as a “flux”, “tendencies to exist”, “non-locality” and collapsing of quantum waves, it is in line with Buddhist thought. One additional point I need to stress, the process itself knows. This point is missing.


Thusness:

Originally posted by longchen:

Likewise, form/thought/perception is pure awareness/presence. Form/thought is pure awareness in its 'manifestation stage'. Pure awareness is 'essense stage'. There is this continuous change from manifestion to essense and so on so forth. Continuous stream of moment and change. There is no separation, but this very everchanging-ness.

Yes Longchen,

All is the emptiness nature of this luminous everchanging-ness at work. From manifestation to manifestation, essence isn’'t lost. The manifestation itself knows; no knower needed. In both doingness and beingness, in activity or at rest, all is Presence with differing causes and conditions; but none is more superior to the other. When we impute no extra layer of abstraction and not label any states of experience as “purest”, then one truly enters the stream. The manifested and the un-manifest are one and inseparable, take out one and the other subsides. Analyze one without the other, and both are distorted. When the ‘self’ dissolves, outside and inside fuse, the mysterious connection of things is seen. How does the Presence arises? This is, that is. Experience the arising and the ceasing, zoom into the very heart of taste, smell, sight, touch, sound and thought and extend it beyond the six foot body, the trees, the sun, the light, the humming birds…. All is and are the IS that never remains. Still the experience of “Thou are That” but this time with an Empty nature.
My two cents.


Thusness:



Thusness:Hi Longchen,

While meditating, something came to my mind and I think it is necessary to just drop by to jot down some points to note when a practitioner is moving from an 'AMness' experience to the experience of No-Self. As the experience becomes more subtle, it gets more challenging to detail out the fine differences in terms of one's experience. I might not be the correct person to comment anything but just for the purpose of sharing.

The experience of the mirror bright flow is not an exchange between the divine and symbolic realm; not a divine play between the divine and symbols. For in this realm, thought already exists. The experience of no-self as the flux is taking place in a space without symbols. It is like widening the gap between 2 moments of thought and experiencing the moment to moment of transformation in this bardo gap. Here the practitioner moves into Presence forgetting Presence. When smell arises, there is no symbol at all. The odour is the experience of the air, nose, flower... It is the entire interaction, entire flow, entire 'sense', it is one whole unfathomable experience. It is not understanding the impermanence, not understanding interaction, it is the interaction, the impermanence itself telling what it is. This is the direct experience of anatta but due to defilement, it can still be mistaken as the Big Self. However when correctly understood it is also the experience that provides a practitioner the condition to understand the profound meaning of Emptiness before experiencing the Dharmakaya.


Thusness:Struggles, confusions, sufferings…. There is no escape. Before the arisen of unarisen factor of enlightenment, progress will not be stable. After that, wonder, bliss, and clarity will springs from nowhere to everywhere -- the fruition of simplicity and ordinariness.
…
The essence, the Presence can be hardly termed ‘Self’. The degree of clarity is the inverse function of Self:
Clarity = (1/Self).
…
Practice no-self and mindfulness, it is safest. It is difficult not to be egoistic when one attains.
…
Originally so, nothing attained nothing gained.
…
Don’t move, nothing within, nothing without, spontaneity everywhere.
…
Mysterious gate opens, valley spirit seen.
…
Self So.
…
Ant bites, ouch!


Thusness:


Thusness:

Originally posted by longchen:

Emmm... am not so sure about describing it as a person. The function of existence is impersonal and without self.

Uncreated and no beginning, yes. No beginning because Nowness has no past and no future. Past and future are our memory...manifested realm. But, i think, we may not be able to categorise them as manifested or uncreated. Because the categorisation/labeling itself is a thought manifestation.

This is an interesting topic and since it is allowed to discuss more about God in a Buddhism forum, I would like to talk a little more about the experience of 'AMness" in all things.

Like a river flowing into the ocean, the self dissolves into nothingness. When a practitioner becomes thoroughly clear about the illusionary nature of the individuality, subject-object division does not take place. A person experiencing “AMness” will find “AMness in everything”. What is it like?

Being free individuality -- coming and going, life and death, all phenomenon merely pop in and out from the background of the AMness. The AMness is not experienced as an ‘entity’ residing anywhere, neither within nor without; rather it is experienced as the ground reality for all phenomenon to take place. Even the moment of subsiding (death), the yogi is thoroughly authenticated with that reality; experiencing the ‘Real’ as clear as it can be. We cannot lose that AMness; rather all things can only dissolve and re-emerges from it. The AMness has not moved, there is no coming and going. This "AMness" is “God”.


Thusness:

Thusness: When in a quiet place where there is no disturbance, when all senses come to rest. Settle the mind and let it be utterly quiet. The mind enters into a thoughtless state, tranquil, pre-symbolic, touching itself as itself; experienced without any intermediary, the pure sense of existence, the only Real. Since it is pre-symbolic, painfully I named it “IT”.

When the mind is in activity, where is that IT? Only in analysis by subtly relating it back to that experience of “I AM”, extrapolating IT to the rest of all things, it is found. Sometimes in a flash of illumination, it is understood and experienced, but most of the time it is the mere product of memories. There is still this need of falling back to the silencing of the mind to experience the Presence. Seems there but in actuality it is lost in activities. Here the Reality is experienced, but still not experienced as a background for phenomenon to pop in and out.

Can the same experience take place in activity?

Listen! Be there. Be the process, be pre-symbolic, the flow, the SOUND - …no listener... the immense presence. IT is still IT but utterly different. What is its nature?

Look! Be there, no seer, the SCENERY, all, the presence, all the details that is, still IT but completely different, what is its nature?

Extend it to the rest of all the six senses and completely dissolved… - the nature is empty.

…
Thusness:
Hi Isis,

Feel deeply the full power of the bond, the strong frustrations, the block, the inability to know even our true identity, inability to fuse into everything, the helplessness. Feel the bond in the blood, the cell..etc.

Sense deeply the strength of the unseen and intangible.

Understand ‘karma’ and ‘defilement’ not in words, but with our entire being. This is the ‘Eye’ that will understand the teachings.

My 2 cents.


Thusness:Hi Casino_King,

There could not be change unless something changes. There must be someone there to think before thinking takes place. Most of us have molded ourselves to perceive Reality in accordance to the grammatical structure and tenses of languages. This takes place unknowingly and seems natural. So much so that when there is this illumination of Consciousness as a ceaseless stream, effort to describe consciousness correctly becomes a problem. Descriptions are presented in a manner that nouns become verbs; it becomes confusing and complex at times. This I believe, is not a problem peculiar to you alone but in fact to any serious seekers when they first came into contact with the profound teaching of the doctrine of No-Self and Emptiness.

Why all the fuss? Is No-Self and Emptiness that important? What that is most problematic is how consciousness works and what happened when we identify and get attached. The immense power of identification, I cannot help but to emphasize and re-emphasized. A mere “identification” has such amazing power. Fusing into all aspect of our experiences, mental, spiritual and physical - …The weight, the burden and the suffering, like holding on to a charcoal and unwilling to drop. How true is that? Again it is not in words, we have to experience the magical effect of identification and attachment ourselves.

Confusions can be quite frustrating and the degree of frustration differs according to one’s causes and conditions. For you, I think the frustration is understandable but I believe it is nothing compared to some that have undergone certain transcendental experiences like “I AMness” or disassociation of consciousness from body, this doctrine can be really difficult for them to swallow. Rare are those that have such experiences and still take patience to understand the profound teaching of the Blessed One. The karmic affinity is strong. I seriously do not want to make it a topic of argument; I do not have the capacity to do so. I hope that you can put sincere effort into understanding the meaning it and make discussion fruitful. May patience be with us always.


Thusness:I do not think that being ambitious is wrong. It can horn us and serves as a form of self-actualization that matures ourselves along the way. But sad to say, ambitions do cloud our mind (even though it is acceptable morally) and is a form of hindrance for clarity to arise. For me I think life is too precious to get ourselves lost in endless materialistic pursuits; at some point in time, if we are able to put things in place, it will be good to brush aside external concerns and devote more time towards cultivation and perfection of mental clarity.


Thusness:
Yes I do agree with most of what you said.

Originally posted by paperflower:

when we don't have an ambition or goal, it is like an aimless journey, where one is not sure where one is going. when one has ambition, one has focus in where one wish to go.

When in business, set our goals and go for it! We can’t afford to be flickered minded in business. I agree that the business world can serves as a good practice ground; just that it is easy to enter, difficult to get out when it grows.

There is this latent tendency of the mind to identify in a very subtle way that goes undetected until we are forced to confront our identifications and attachments. I always thought I have achieved certain level of detachment but Singapore’s past 3 major recessions revealed otherwise. Never in the past 3 recessions when attempting to save my businesses had I able to remain pure, calm and stable. In fact many evil and unwholesome thoughts surfaced (too shame to list them all). I am fortunate that I managed to survive these crises, they are nightmares but I do not want to roll in it till my last day; however settling these businesses can take many years. Like karma that rolls on, we never know whether we can stop it at the correct time.

In my opinion, spirituality is more than just being healthy psychologically and having a good life in the here and now. There is a deeper sense to it; a deeper conviction that this life is but a spark in a never ending stream. I would not call it an ambition but it definitely starts from a deep call within to understand who we truly are. Do leave some years for the bliss you mentioned, I wish you success.

Thusness:




Thusness:

Interesting site...

In most religions and mystical path, the dissolving of the 'Self' is necessary for the experience of the divine. The 'self' is always experienced as the ultimate block that prevents one from experiencing the transcendental. Glimpses of the beyond arise when we are able to go beyond labels and concepts.

I respect her experience but would just like to add some comments:

On the experience of “AMness”:
The key when the ‘I’ drops away lies in “fusing into everything”. Without this experience, it is still resting in “I AM”, there is no breakthrough. Even with the experience of “fusing into all things”, it remains as a stage having an entry and exit point. To experience pathless that is without entry and exit point is where the doctrine of anatta and emptiness steps in.

On the unchanging self:

It is strange that when people want to know their real self, they start looking at relative bunches of ever changing concepts. Reality is that which underlies relativity. Reality is unchanging.
We must ask ourselves: “What is the only unchanging reality of our life? What is the only phenomenon that has never changed since we were born?”
The answer can readily be experienced when we close our eyes and go introspective. It is our sense of BEING. Our I AM-ness. Everybody can always experience the sense that they exist. That inner sense never changes and is there if we are happy, angry, sad, drunk,- whatever. Further, it cannot be localized within any part of the body. It is limitless and experienced by everyone the same way. It is infinite REALITY!

When observing moment to moment changes, it is almost natural to conclude this way. There must be an unchanging observer observing change is a logical deduction. It is the result of the lightning flash changes, logical deduction and memories that create the impression of an unchanging entity. There is continuity, but continuity with an unchanging entity is not necessary.

On feeling lightness and experiencing ‘astral traveling’:

My own experience is that the density of the body seems to change. Years ago I experienced the phenomena of ‘astral traveling.’ During this experience you have the feeling of leaving the coarser body and floating. At some stage you have to return to the body, and the feeling is not very pleasant. You are going from a feeling of freedom and ‘lightness’ back into what feels like cold, dense, clay. This ‘clay’ is the collective emotions, experiences, and holding of the body. After some AMness has fallen away, the body feels lighter and less dense. You just keep feeling lighter and freer.

The “density” and “lightness” is the weight of “losing her identification with certain aspect of the self”. The power of this “identification” cannot be underestimated.
Next is her experience of ‘astral traveling’, if she is in a stage of absorption and then out of a sudden awareness, the eyes of awareness may allow her to witness something that is altogether different from the physical place but this does not necessary mean that ‘consciousness’ has left and re-enter the body. Consciousness is propelled by causes and conditions. According to her conditions of absorption and clarity, just IS.

But then everyone has their own experiences. Just my 2 cents.


Thusness:

Originally posted by longchen:

This is a really an interesting question. It is something that I will like to hear from others as well.
from my understanding, ..
everything is in a constant state of change. Our thoughts, emotions, body are manifestation of essence (presence). However, presence and the manifestations are not 2 thing. They are the same thing, just in different states. The various states of consciousness are all different states of Presence.
The world that we perceive is an illusionary world(insubstantial) that is thought construct. Our 'sense of self' is also thought construct. The impression of a 'self' perceiving and interacting with the world and others is also a thought construct. However, this does not mean that others do not exist. Perhaps we can say that all that we perceive are various manifestation of Presence... your true 'self' so to speak.
I do not really understand 'emptiness'... but my take is that it is referring to the lack of object and solidity of reality. When we talk about objects we are defining something that is contained and with boundaries. Like a cup is the shape of a cup. However, in reality, boundary is a concept of the mind that say that this 'shape' is a cup. This is conceptual, in actuality the thinking mind defined this shape as cup. IMO, this conceptuality is also a though construct.
just my opinion. nothing definitive

Hi longchen,

What you said is one aspect of emptiness -- the emptiness of self, you may want to explore into another aspect of emptiness, arising without a point of origination, without a point of centricity. However without certain stability in the experience of no-self (anatta) in all entry and exit points (sight, sound, smell, taste, touch, mind), this aspect of Emptiness can only be appreciated conceptually; it will not be understood intuitively.

Happy Journey.


Thusness:

Thusness:

Originally posted by longchen:

Still got some way to go before Emptiness and Dharmakaya in full can be experienced.

Must thank you for all the help, Thusness

Just this happening is the Unmanifest. Be Mr. nobody and spend not even a thought moment for the source, just the manifestation that is empty. The arising and the ceasing have no point of origin, no where to be found, no a thing, nothing attained.


Thusness:





Thusness:

Originally posted by la lapine blanche:

I recently posted the post below but it's quite hard to get answers because everyone keeps getting distracted by CK's arguments ...
Nothing against CK at all, hope I'm not being rude, just hoping someone could answer my query
Thanks
Lapine

_____________________________________________________________
Thank-you all for taking the time to post replies.

To some extent I understand the whole "flow" thing of a mental continuum, how I am a different self every moment, etc. At one level that makes sense.

But at another level it doesn't fit with what I have been telling myself in order to encourage myself to practise the 5 precepts. When I am tempted to do stupid things like speak unkindly I tell myself "That's just my ego or whatever wanting to show off, whereas my mental continuum is the real, important bit, the bit I will carry over into the next life ... so it is more important to avoid accumulating negative karma". I have found this way of thinking helpful ... but am I ultimately wrong to think this way then?

I really still don't think I understand it because surely even if my self is just flow and ever-changing, it is still true that if what I do in one moment affects the subsequent moments/even lives then there is some permanency in that ... like for example if I accumulate some positive karma it is like a permanent investment because it increases the future likelihood of more positive karma/good rebirth/even Enlightenment eventually?

Hi la lapine blanche,

I might not be able to provide you the answer you want but I hope the aspect on the luminosity and the emptiness nature of consciousness can help.

The clear knowingness that creates the deeply rooted sense of ‘Self’, the agent before birth and after death, the sense of permanency will first be experienced. When a practitioner first experienced this ‘Self’, it is not uncommon to get overwhelmed by this/ experience and conclude this ‘Self as the ultimate core of our Beingness. The result of this experience is partly due to the luminous nature of consciousness and partly the habitual tendencies of our current mode of enquiry. First we must understand that Consciousness need not fit in nicely into the structure of “what, who, where, why and how” which is merely one particular system of enquiry that assumes reality is made up of isolated objects. Although this is currently the ruling mode of knowing the phenomenon world; it is by no means the only way or the best way. Imagine what if consciousness is not an object of anything and cannot be bounded within a space-time continuum? Will such mode of enquiry that is strictly based on grouping, categorization, measurement and comparison understand the essence consciousness? If not what other modes of knowing are available? In Buddhism, mindfulness is a preferred mode of experiencing reality as it is. It goes beyond symbols, labels, thoughts and ‘see’ reality in a raw and undefined mode. By going beyond this layer of abstraction, one is able to perceive without any in between intermediary leading to the gradual dissolving of illusionary categorization and division. ‘Self’ dissolves too as it can only lives in symbols. Only then we are equipped with the condition to understand more about our true nature. This is a pre-requisite.

Next, if we merely think that the flow is only a chain of thoughts, emotions, mental states in a series of self1, self2, self3 changing from moment to moment, we still missed something valuable. It is not just so.

When a mind reaches certain level of clarity, thoughts subsides and before perception arises, what happened to the series again? Does it cease to interact and stop becoming a flow, a flux of becoming or a stream of moments? Has each of the moment of the self series (self1, self2…, selfN) ever appear to us that it is the light of the sun, the blue color of the sky, the taste of the food?

The purpose of all teachings and all sutras are provisional means to bring us to the intuitive insight of the immediate moment. In lightning flash moment, the vividness, the color, the sound, the texture and the fabric of reality are manifested and instantaneously it is gone. All karmic propensities and the entire mystery of life and death are in this instantaneous moment of arising and ceasing. It is not else where, it is the depth of clarity that matters. It takes the perfect mental clarity of the Blessed One to penetrate to the deepest depth of this moment. Do not overlook it.

My 2 cents.


Thusness:

Originally posted by longchen:

me 2 cents...
Time is illusory. We are like waves on a ocean. The waves are on the surface and it has lot of reflection(phenomonality). Attention clings onto reflection... believing them to be permanent at each moment...this causes the impression of time.

Ai yoo...why sink back to "Apparent in Real"....but anyway time to take a break….

You may want to take leisure read on the 5 degree of Tozan. http://buddhism.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=198803

The doctrine of no-self cuts through everything and bring us face to face with emotion, impression, sensation, thoughts… and all mental states, directly ‘seeing’ no one there, just it!

Next one must go beyond the subtle imprints of words and labels and sees the essence of these sensations, impressions and all mental states. Just like laying a book on a patch of grass leaving a temporary imprint, words and labels create these subtle imprints that confuse the mind. It will take 2-3 years before the experience of “Real in the Apparent’ is stabilized. Dissolve completely (self and all views including your scientific views) into the incredible realness and vividness of the Apparent.

If we spend even a thought moment sinking back to the source, we immediately fall prey to the habitual energy and descend back to the “Apparent in the Real”. This makes no-self a dead “AMness”.

From the experience of the “Real in Apparent”, everything is the One Mind; there is nothing else. The non-inherent nature creates all manifestations in lightning flash moments and the Apparent becomes the ‘otherness’. Great mystics though experienced the ‘Apparent in the Real’ knows not the emptiness nature seek the invisible from the visible, hold tightly to the formless. Not knowing that neither the form nor formless are both notions of the marvelous activities of emptiness nature. Get used to this experience and don’'t waste your experience.....but it will take some years...happy journey...


Thusness:

Originally posted by la lapine blanche:

Just want to clarify this. Generally I understand the concept of living in the present moment, feeling current sensations and feelings, being aware of thoughts, etc. But there are a few examples that confuse me:
1. I am a teacher and I spend a large amount of my working time planning tomorrow's lessons or next week's lessons. This is necessary for my job. Does this mean I am not living in the present?
2. If you are an academic and your career involves researching abstract concepts, thinking about them, writing research on them, does this mean you are escaping from the present by doing this?
3. If you enter the "flow state" (popular term in American psychology, meaning losing all sense of time because you are so absorbed in what you're doing) would that be bad in Buddhism because you lost track of time passing and therefore the present reality? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)
thanks
LB

Hi LB,

You may want to look more deeply into ‘non-action’, i.e., plan but not be attached to outcome. When engaging with conceptual models, just work within the laws and conditions of the model. This is analogous to our ‘buddha nature’ working day in and day out within the conditions of our five senses yet not limited by it.

Before stabilization of our experience of Presence, there will be confusion. No-self is a very distinct phase of our practices; without going through this phase, we will not be able to replace our conceptual mode of knowing with intuitiveness and directness. This is known as the ‘turning point’. From intuitive workings into spontaneity will take some time.

Thusness:

Originally posted by la lapine blanche:

Thusness,
Thanks for the post, I'm really interested in what you said but not sure I've fully understood.
"Stabilization of our experience of Presence" - at the moment I only feel "present" sometimes, like when I can be bothered to meditate or when I remind myself to climb the stairs mindfully, etc. So I guess what you mean by "stabilization of experience of Presence" is when I come to feel this all the time?
You're quite right that I don't really go beyond conceptual thinking at all yet. I think that's why I'm struggling to understand a lot of things. Like emptiness - I kind of see the concept of "no inherent self" like I am just a collection of genes, cells, influences on my past, experiences, environment, etc. but I haven't really deeply grasped it because I still feel a strong sense of "me"!

Hi LB,

Not exactly. Continuous sustainability of Presence all the time is the result of the awakening of our prajna wisdom that will lead to the experience of all phenomenon manifestation as unconditional spontaneous arising. It is not the result of effort or the strength of habitual energy.

The beginning of clarity and stabilization starts when we begin to break loose a deeply held 'bond' in our consciousness -- A hypnotic bond that is like a magical spell bonding us to our thoughts, body and self. Feel the power of this bond. It is just a form of identification and nothing else yet it has such power over us. Realizing this will help loosen the power of symbols over us, thus bringing us one step closer to the natural state. We will realize that we are in the right track when we notice an acute sharpening of all our senses. We feel very clear, light and bright and thoughts will lessen naturally. Thought at this level begins to play a secondary role. We gather strength when Presence beams and radiates.

Lastly be thorough in no-self. We need not worry too much. The Presence experienced from the practice of mindfulness will prevent the over-negation. Instead, it will refine the understanding of our true nature.

PS: 'Mindfulness in Plain English' is a good guide. You may want to grab it.



Thusness:

Originally posted by longchen:

Hmm... Thusness very 'chim'... dunno whether he meant i got it right or wrong. Heheh...

Anyway... no.. i am not referring to the intellect. what i propose is that..
awareness/knowingness is there...but we think that this awareness is a 'self, I or person'. We think that it is 'I' that knows... but it is really consciousness that knows. No person knowing... but just knowing. Because there is knowingness, the belief of 'a self' comes about.

Yes. There is a great difference between 'self' and our pristine awareness. One is an agent housing emotions, feelings, thinking...and so on and so forth...the other is the experience of empty phenomenon rolling on as described by Buddhaghosa. There is never a doer doing anything from start, a point of centricity and locality is not the way to understand this knowingness. We are molded and led to this idea of 'self' by our entire cultural, language and the manifold of phenomonal world. When we experience phenomenal world in raw, we find delight in no-self and dependent origination.

Next, going beyond symbols and labels, one experiences manifestation directly as the luminous presence of knowingness. Phenomenal arising is the result of emptiness nature manifesting from moment to moment. There is no one experiencing and therefore sinking back to a source is a subtle attachment and the result of our symbolic habitual energy. But this experience of presence can become an object of attachment that we must let go. The letting go must be very thorough in terms of mental detachment. We don't have to worry about Presence. What we have to worry is our attachment.

GTG...Makan time...



Thusness:

Originally posted by longchen:

Awareness is not behind the mind. The mystics who describe this thinks that there is an observer(self) watching the mind(thoughts)... This is I AM. I also thought so too in the past... until Thusness probed me to re-investigate the dynamics in deep meditation again.

Truth is, there is no observer. Awareness and knowingness is in-built in Mind. There is no division...

my 2 cents

Yes Longchen,

With "I", knowing is always conceptual and thought bound. When we realised that there is really no one there from beginning, knowingness is one clear Presence that is really everything.

Spiritual journey begins when one first experienced the pure sense of existence. However when we are unable to fully understand the experience and the implication of dependent origination, we misinterpreted the experience as the “I AM”. The rest of our journey is the unfolding and the further refinement of our understanding of this “I AM”. It will take many years of practice and right conditions for one to come to this realization that the ‘I AM” is really a mistaken identity. In fact it is the ultimate block that prevents us from knowing our true nature.

When ‘I’ persists, reality is thought-like and conceptual. When the 'I' subsides, everything is realised as the one Reality. There is no crystal clear mirror reflecting anything, the manifestation itself is sufficient. Sinking back into an 'I', to a 'Witness' is problem of all problems. All along the clear mirror doesn't exist, all along there is just one hand clapping, there second hand doesn'’t exist.

Do put in all effort into mastering the art of letting go. If we can let go of the body, it will help lessen our thought. Let the body and thought die of their own nature, …just let go until a deep tranquil calm arise. This ‘tranquil calmness’ is the ‘strength’ for the sustained experience of total transparency.

Happy Journey.


Thusness:Hi Jon,

The Presence you experienced is the deepest essence of your being. There is nothing wrong calling it energy. The experience of tremendous Presence as manifestation of abundant life, as total vitality is not uncommon.

Any form of blockage for the free flow of this energy is due to identification. Any form of identification will result in the creation of a Witness sensing something. The Witness is a misidentification that never existed; this will be become clear as one progresses further.

The pain you suffer is due to a switch between ‘I’ and ‘Presence’ that resulted in a split. The constant switching is due to a very subtle bond that prevents you from seeing your true nature. It is like a hypnotic spell, it is not easy to break this ‘spell’. You must master the art of going beyond symbols to loosen this bond. You may want to look into insight meditation (mindfulness) for this. The purpose of going beyond symbols, labels and concepts is to experience the imageless reality and the veil that prevents us from experiencing this Presence is the layer after layers of conceptualization. The ‘key’ is to loosen the habitual propensities that bond us into seeing things with a layer symbols, it is karmic (Karmic in the sense that it is pre-conscious and sustained by the seed of attachment. It goes undetected at the conscious level). Once this bond is loosen, clarity and energy will flow more freely. Before that, division will cause pain.

When longchen said there is no observer apart from the observed, this is truth and all problems lie in not understanding this. But the experience must be direct and intuitive.

May you experience total Presence.


Thusness:I mean there is a clear transition from “I AM” to the experience of No-Self. Dissolving to a background, to the Silence that is the crystal clear mirror is close, but it is not quite there. True non-duality is the experience of Anatta. There is absolutely no-one there from beginning. This is a dharma seal. As for Pratyekabuddhahood, it is beyond me to comment.


Thusness:


Thusness:

Thusness:

Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

From glimpses, there are times where it feels like the sense of 'distance' and 'seperation' dissolves, and as I have said before... it seems that I am not looking anymore, it feels as if I become the "looking", that there is just the scenery and no looker. Am I right to say that this 'bond' is then temporarily dissolved?

Yes...the dualistic mode of perception is temporary suspended.

But for one that experience the Eternal Witness, there is a constant problem of switching.

The problem lies in on one hand we attempt to live as pure awareness and on the other hand, we are employing a dualistic mode of thought to experience the phenomenon existence. It is habitual and hypnotic. There are spiritual teachers that assume it is not necessary and that all habitual tendencies come to a complete stand still and cease. In whatever case, this is definitely not what I experience.

Instead what I learnt overtime is we must do away with this dualistic mode of thought and experience reality directly. Living as pure awareness is to live and speak its language. Mindfulness replace dualistic mode of knowing and enable us to experience directly. Emptiness is the language of not needing to have a ‘who’, ‘where’ and ‘when’. It is the language of the One Reality. Lastly I believe if we start right, it can reduce a lot of unnecessary pains and sufferings.



JonLS:"Mindfulness replaces dualistic mode of knowing"

What does that mean?

How can you live and speak the language of pure awareness when interacting with individuals in the dualistic world???

Sorry for all the questions!


Thusness:
Hi JonLS,

I will try...
It will take some time to detail those stages that I deem crucial and the mistakes I made.

Thusness:



Thusness:


Thusness:


Thusness:

Originally posted by JonLS:

Hi Thusness,
I'm sorry to bother you again but I just thought of something else.
As I was rereading your experiences and it occured to me that all the teachings I have read have said that experience is not "it".
That experience is just part of the story of becoming , it is part of ego, of appearance.
We are the clear radiant present moment awareness, that is completely free and unfettered NOW.
In your description of your beautiful experiences were you fully identified with the experiences?
I sense there is a point that you have arrived at where what I have just written above is not true. Such as when you mention no more witnessing presence.
So it seems to me that the experience of no "I" would be no experience at all, but just "being".
Could you clarify please?

Hi JonLS,

Whatever you experienced and whatever you said is right. It is the degree of clarity. Do not have doubt about these experiences. The way Presence is unfolding in you is amazing. …Perhaps your life experiences has helped in the rapid unfolding. It is the thoroughness of being nobody.

For the purpose of discussion, I would like to introduce you one concept, it is the "seed of pre-conscious propensities". It is a layer of ‘bond’ that prevents us from ‘seeing’ something…it is very subtle, very thin, very fine… - it goes almost undetected. What this ‘bond’ does is it prevents us from ‘seeing’ what “WITNESS” really is and makes us constantly fall back to the Witness, to the Source, to the Center. Every moment we want to sink back to Witness, to the Center, to this Beingness, this is an illusion. It is habitual and almost hypnotic.

But what exactly is this “witness” we are talking about? It is the manifestation itself! It is the appearance itself! There is no Source to fall back, the Appearance is the Source! Including the moment to moment of thoughts. The problem is we choose, but all is really it. There is nothing to choose.

There is no mirror reflecting
Manifestation alone IS.
There is no invisible witness hiding anywhere. Whenever we attempt to fall back to this “an invisible transparent image“, it is again the mind game of thought. It is the ‘bond’ at work. I wonder this make sense to you.


Thusness:

Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

on one hand, it is true as spiritual development unfolds, one becomes less caught up by thoughts. But the bondage that binds us - like a hypnotic bond - is subtle and pre-conscious (meaning it is there whether we think or not). In fact in john's stage one experience, the sense of 'i am' is a sense of self that is beyond thoughts. It is very subtle, like i said, 7th consciousness is pre-conscious. The rest of the journey is deepening the realisation, loosening the bond.

Not exactly so. For explanation sake, I will call it a ‘bond’ (7th consciousness).

That moment, that experience, that pure sense of existence is not 'Self', there is no 'Self'. That 'bond' is temporary suspended, it is not in operation for a while. Then very quickly recognition came, the act of recognition due to the subtle bond makes us think that it is a 'self'. It becomes "I AM".

It is pre-conscious but it is not unbreakable, it only blinds. It is just a seed. You can also plant other seeds through visualization, concentration...and so forth.

Don't have to worry too much about naturalness first. When the 'bond' loosens, it naturally shines. 'I' is the root cause of all artificialities.

The 'bond' operates through symbols and labels. Mindfulness is the technique of going beyond this layer.


Thusness:

Someone has translated some of my writings to Spanish:

http://petitcalfred.wordpress.com/tag/traduccion/

Hi AEN,

Greg commented on Stian's A raw note on emptiness yesterday.  I like Stian's note and Greg's comments very much, they are all very insightful.   So just posted it here to share with readers.

Do go through it and share your thoughts.  Relate your experiences and insights about it.   Happy reading!
  

A raw note on emptiness:
Emptiness is not the way things are, because things are not any way at all. And that is emptiness.

The emptiness doctrine *do* explain the way things are, meaning the ontological status and essential nature of everything, but instead of asserting—as one might have expected—an actual way that things are, the doctrine questions being any which way.

A thing's 'being' is what it is regardless of anything else. It is what one would eventually find if one stripped something down to its bare minimum—the atomic (indivisible) core which ultimately identifies the thing.  The emptiness doctrine is a completely uncompromising critique of regarding 'being' like this—as intrinsic, inherent self-identity.

So, according to the emptiness doctrine, the way things really are is that they are not, in their final, inner-most nature or being, any which way. But this does not preclude things from being any particular way, only that they cannot *be* in a static, fixed, unchangeable or indivisible way.

Since we can not know the ultimate nature or being of something—because it has no such final identity—we can only know the thing in its ordinary, conventional appearance to us, and that IS what the thing "is".

Emptiness, while posing as some sort of ultimate nature or being or identity, is actually the dissolving of the notion of ultimate nature or being (noun), leaving only the functional, interpenetrating 'going-on' or 'verbing' of the universe.


Greg's comments:
I agree with a lot of the OP. But I also agree with some the others here that your "raw note" allows ultimacy in the door. Ultimacy and true nature are exactly what the emptiness teachings should critique.

Here is a close, logical look at it. From your OP:

"So, according to the emptiness doctrine, the way things really are is that they are not, in their final, inner-most nature or being, any which way."

The placement of the "NOT" turns out to be very important!

There is a subtle logical issue here that seems obscure, but which makes a big difference. The issue is between "external" or "verbally-bound" or non-presuppositional versus "internal," or "nominally-bound" or presuppositional negation.

Let's use an example. There are two ways (at least) of negating a simple sentence.

Let's say the sentence is:

X is f.

One way to negate it is:

X is -f.

The other way is:

-(X is f).  Or, "It's not the case that X is f."

A more concrete example:

(S1) "The number seven is yellow."

 How can we negate S1? There are several ways.

So here is one kind of negation. It is an internal, nominally bound, pressuppositional negation.  The "NOT" is _inside_ the sentence, modifying the noun or adjective:

(Internal negation of S1) "The number seven is NOT yellow (it is blue)."

Notice that this kind of negation maintains the assumption that the number seven has a color.

Here is the other kind of negation. It is external, verbally bound, non-presuppositional. The "NOT" modifies the overall verb of the sentence:

(External negation of S1) "It's not the case that the number seven is yellow (colors don't apply to it at all)."

OK, so back to Stian's OP:

(Sop) "So, according to the emptiness doctrine, the way things really are is that they are not, in their final, inner-most nature or being, any which way."

Stian's statement (Sop) should be an external negation. It should cancel our presuppostions about things having natures at all. Instead (Sop) is an internal negation. It maintains the presupposition that things have a final, inner-most nature - it just says that the final nature is not what we thought. But in the emptiness teaching, this is what needs to go. What needs to get critiqued is the VERY IDEA of a final, inner-most nature. The very idea makes no sense.

Here is one possible "external" rephrasing of Stian's sentence, which cancels what should be cancelled:

(Gop) "So, according to the emptiness teachings, there is no way that things really are. The very idea of a final, innher-most nature is incoherent." Of course we need both kinds of negation. But we should be careful about where we are retaining presuppositions that we want to refute.....

Harry Rice:

"The Indra's Net metaphor is often misinterpreted to suggest that each jewel in the net reflects all of the other jewels in the net. Nice, but not right. Each jewel is ONLY the reflection of all of the other jewels. It has no inherent essence. It is empty."

Karmic propensity is the whole of one's experiential reality. If one feels like a changeless witness, that experience of feeling like a changeless witness IS that propensity in action, in experience... if one is seeing fully that there's only transience (the radiant flow of sights/sounds/smells/taste/touch/thoughts), that is the actualization of wisdom (of anatta).

If one sees manifestation but appears solid, that's also the view of latent tendency, that view of inherent existence in action. That very feeling of concreteness IS karmic tendency. If one sees this very presence (of any experience - sight, sound, smell, etc) is empty of any it-ness, concreteness, solidity, apparent yet empty, that very vision itself is the actualization of wisdom, it is the total exertion of wisdom, it IS wisdom. Or as Dzogchen puts it - those very five elements (space, wind, fire, water, earth) are wisdoms by nature, so experienced in its actual state, is that actualization of wisdom.

In a way, the view is the experience... every samsaric experience is the total exertion of ignorance along with the 12 links in a single moment. Occasionally ignorant view is forgotten in a peak experience, such a cessation is however non-analytical and merely a passing state, as the conditions for the re-emergence of ignorance and afflictions have not been cut off from its roots. Only the analytical cessation resulting from penetrative prajna wisdom of twofold emptiness can lead to a permanent and quantum shift of perception away from ignorance, what Lankavatara Sutra calls the "turning-about" in the deepest seat of consciousness (but again this deepest seat is not somewhere else but fully manifesting!).

So the karmic tendency, and wisdom, you've been searching for has never been elsewhere but is staring right in your face as your experiential reality all along! Funny how one doesn't see that. That very activity that is mentally fabricated but appearing real as one's only experiential reality at that given moment, just that is the spell of karmic tendency. That activity that is (experienced/seen as) luminous and empty as one's only experiential reality at that given moment is the wisdom.

I remember when Ciaran (of Ruthless Truth) saw the real fiction of self (a process of creative imagination brought into real life, a real creation based on an imaginary character) he wrote that it was a "zen on drugs" moment. Yeah, I can see why he said that!

Thusness commented, "Very good, so the dreams in dreams (http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/buddha-dharma-dream-in-dream.html). Otherwise you are seeing clarity as empty and tendencies as inherent... hiding somewhere."

Also see:

The Tendency to Extrapolate a Universal Consciousness

No Universal Mind

No Universal Mind, Part 2

Wrote in Facebook:

Yes... as for collective consciousness, no Buddhist (including Tibetan Buddhism) teachings accept the notion of a collective consciousness. A cosmic, universal, collective, over-arching consciousness is a Hindu teaching, not a Buddhist one. In Buddhism, all notions of 'universals' are pure abstractions.

Loppon Namdrol/Malcolm: "Buddhism is all its forms is strictly nominalist, and rejects all universals (samanya-artha) as being unreal abstractions."

When we investigate "consciousness" in the same way as the "weather" analogy, we completely deconstruct any notion of a consciousness in and of itself - be it universal or individual (though conventionally we can accept that consciousness is always individual and unique), but most of all, an 'inherently existing' consciousness. We do not treat 'consciousness' as any sort of a thing in the same way we do not treat 'weather' as a 'thing' - when the word 'weather' comes to mind it is immediately understood to be an imputation for the wind blowing, sun shining, clouds flowing etc. Likewise the word "consciousness" is immediately penetrated (instead of reified into an entity) and directly apprehended in immediate, direct experience as the suchness of seeing/seen-consciousness, hearing/sound-consciousness, and so forth, all of which are directly, immediately and gaplessly apprehended in its total luminous clarity.

Or as Alex Weith says in his third step,

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com.au/...

"This also means that the first step is to disembed from impermanent phenomena until the only thing that feels real is this all pervading uncreated all pervading awareness that feels like the source and substance of phenomena. Holding on to it after this realization can hower become a subtle form of grasping diguised as letting go.

The second step is therefore to realize that this brightness, awakeness or luminosity is there very nature of phenomena and then only does the duality between the True Self and the appearences arising and passing within the Self dissolve, revealing the suchness of what is.

The next step that I found very practical is to push the process of deconstruction a step further, realizing that all that is experienced is one of the six consciousness. In other words, there is neither a super Awareness beyond phenomena, not solid material objects, but only six streams of sensory experiences. The seen, the heard, the sensed, the tasted, the smelled and the cognized (including thoughts, emotions, and subtle thougths like absorbtion states, jhanas).

At this point it is not difficult to see how relevent the Bahiya Sutta can become."


...........The fact that all notions of universals are pure abstractions is not a notion, it is a truth that can be realized in direct experience. Universals cannot be found in direct experience, ever. It is related to the truth of anatta. Universals are either abstractions born out of delusions, or abstractions spoken merely for convenience/conventional parlance/communications.

How can you appreciate "sensate facts" or the particulars/specifics of "in the seen just the seen/in the heard just the heard" if you are obscured by abstractions (including the abstraction of a universal soul, etc)? Even if you have a PCE but back in the mind you hold the view of a universal soul, i.e. an abstraction, the PCE will come and go and one will continue to rest in the view and sense of Self.

Hence, one needs to investigate, challenge, realize and penetrate all of our false views - self/Self/objects/here/now etc. By the manifestation of prajna wisdom, the veil of ignorance is released.

Only then can there be any true "intelligence" to speak of

...........

Both "self", "it" and so on are imputations. It is just like the imputation, "weather".

Thusness:

28/3/13 10:35:30 PM: Thusness: A table is just color, shapes, line, hardness, texture in touch, the sound when u hit it and being labelled
28/3/13 10:36:51 PM: Thusness: When deconstructed r just these
28/3/13 10:37:07 PM: Thusness: In direct experience

14/4/13 7:35:01 PM: Thusness: When u say "weather", does weather exist?
14/4/13 7:35:20 PM: AEN: No
14/4/13 7:35:42 PM: AEN: It's a convention imputed on a seamless activity
14/4/13 7:35:54 PM: AEN: Existence and non existence don't apply
14/4/13 7:36:02 PM: Thusness: What is the basis where this label rely on
14/4/13 7:36:16 PM: AEN: Rain clouds wind etc
14/4/13 7:36:25 PM: Thusness: Don't talk prasanga
14/4/13 7:36:36 PM: Thusness: Directly see
14/4/13 7:38:11 PM: Thusness: Rain too is a label
14/4/13 7:39:10 PM: Thusness: But in direct experience, there is no issue but when probed, u realized how one is confused abt the reification from language
14/4/13 7:39:52 PM: Thusness: And from there life/death/creation/cessation arise
14/4/13 7:40:06 PM: Thusness: And whole lots of attachment
14/4/13 7:40:25 PM: Thusness: But it does not mean there is no basis...get it?
14/4/13 7:40:45 PM: AEN: The basis is just the experience right
14/4/13 7:41:15 PM: Thusness: Yes which is plain and simple
14/4/13 7:41:50 PM: Thusness: When we say the weather is windy
14/4/13 7:42:04 PM: Thusness: Feel the wind, the blowing...
14/4/13 7:43:04 PM: Thusness: But when we look at language and mistaken verb for nouns there r big issues
14/4/13 7:43:22 PM: Thusness: So before we talk abt this and that
14/4/13 7:43:40 PM: Thusness: Understand what consciousness is and awareness is
14/4/13 7:43:45 PM: Thusness: Get it?
14/4/13 7:44:40 PM: Thusness: When we say weather, feel the sunshine, the wind, the rain
14/4/13 7:44:58 PM: Thusness: U do not search for weather
14/4/13 7:45:04 PM: Thusness: Get it?
14/4/13 7:45:57 PM: Thusness: Similarly, when we say awareness, look into scenery, sound, tactile sensations, scents and thoughts

01/04/2011

U must understand that pure vivid luminous experiences of transient manifestion r very important for both non-dual and anatta. It is key in fact. The unsupported, disjoint springing out non dually is a test on ur degree of "no self". Without the support of the second stanza, there is no true realization of anatta.

When we say "no agent", what does that mean?

It implies a practitioner has penetrate reification of whatever arises and everything is in fact presenting itself in gapless and plain simplicity. If u realized that there is "no agent" that awareness/super awareness is simply a label much like the word "weather" to denote the changing aggregates, then this insight must be also applied to "body", "mind", "weather".... How is it possible to say one has realized anatta in realizing that there is no-self yet see "weather" as having inherent existence?

Because there r certain clear experience relating to the initial arising insight of anatta, I have expressed it out in writing. If you r attached to the "words" and not see the essence, then u have missed the point.

Therefore maturing implies the clarity of insight to see "anatta" in whatever arises.

So first integrate stanza 1 and 2 and apply this insight of "anatta" to whatever arises. It is then the condition for stable maha experience of suchness.