- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 1w
- Edited
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 4d
- Reply
- 4d
- Reply
- 2d
- Edited
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 1w
- Edited
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 1w
- Edited
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 4d
- Reply
- 4d
- Edited
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 1w
- Reply
- 5d
- Reply
- 5d
- Reply
- 5d
- Reply
- 5d
- Edited
- Reply
- 5d
- Reply
- 4d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 4d
- Reply
- 4d
- Edited
- Reply
- 4d
- Reply
- 4d
- Edited
- Reply
- 4d
- Reply
- 4d
- Edited
- Reply
- 4d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 4d
- Reply
- 4d
- Reply
- 4d
- [6:07 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Oic... right now for me there doesn’t seem to be solid objects.. like you say just radiance clarity but not in an undifferentiated oneness sense
[6:08 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Just now driving around singapore, city seems like I’m experiencing singapore for the first time
[6:08 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Now I’m meditating at Bedok reservoir
[6:08 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: 🤣
[6:09 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Good open space like Australia
[6:11 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Like pure open awareness
[6:11 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Lol
[6:11 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Without center without boundaries
[6:12 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Lol
[6:12 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: However it is often misinterpreted as always...something behind
[6:12 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Yeah..
[6:14 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Don't hold on to any experience, not the radiance. Allow the knowledge of emptiness to seemlessly integrate into radiance clarity.
[6:15 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Let the radiance be as light as feather but immense like universe.
[6:15 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Don't be intense.
[6:19 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Oic...
[6:19 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Today the sense of tightness seems loosening and yet the radiance is still as clear.. I had headache two days ago dunno why
[6:19 PM, 3/24/2019] Soh Wei Yu: Maybe some tenseness
[6:19 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Yes
[6:19 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Because u don't know how to relax
[6:20 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: U have wrong understanding attempting to focus on intensity unknownly, wanted to feel more
[6:21 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: Therefore I kept telling u relax, don't hold, be as light as feather and as immense as universe.
[6:21 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: With practice Awareness will stand out, more braman than braman...lol.
[6:22 PM, 3/24/2019] John Tan: However that is an emergence effect due to evenness of pristine empty clarity. - Reply
- 4d
- Reply
- 4d
- Reply
- 4d
- Reply
- 4d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 4d
Aditya Prasad shared a link.
Conversation Starter
I was just reading this article by Abhaya Devi: https://www.wayofbodhi.org/sahaja-yoga-of-saraha/
And realized that I may have been misinterpreting these kinds of instructions for a while. For example:
- "Awakening has nothing to do with where you are. Wherever you may be, just turn back and recognize your own mind."
Why turn "back" if phenomena are (or rather, appear to be) all around us? For me this strengthens the sense of a background.
- "Free from all conceptuality, leaving the mind in its natural stainless state, bodhi dawns effortlessly."
This inspires me to search for something stainless. Again, I relax back into the stainless background.
- "The way we live in Samsara is like looking into a mirror and seeing many forms without seeing the mirror itself."
But of course there is no such mirror.
The reason this surprises me is that Abhaya Devi is one of the few Dzogchen teachers that
Soh
says has right view. So I'm not sure how to interpret these instructions.48 Comments
Comments
Depends. Even Malcolm talked about distinguishing mirror from reflections to realise I AM. But he is also clear about no mirror.
They are clear about the different phases of realisations.
Could be but i need to read more
Why not you message her
Im sure both of them [Prabodha and Abhaya Devi] realised anatta. I have read many article from them
1
Jenny Jennings Foerst
Aditya Prasad
,
you cannot via intellectualizing them skip over those "steps" in
practice. Or let's just say very, very few people have been able to skip
over them without deluding themselves. Moreover, poetry is method in pointing-out transmission. You are supposed to feel the metaphors, not analyze them.
This is important.
Author
Jenny
Jennings Foerst Yes, I agree. That's not what's happening here. Each
metaphor is useful at a particular stage in practice, but can actually
drag one backward if used at the wrong time.
Jenny Jennings Foerst
Aditya Prasad
Why would they be "used" at the wrong time? I'm talking about
mahamudra. The metaphors cannot drag someone backward if they are
related to as poetry.Author
Jenny Jennings Foerst Well, I've always been overly literal and not very good with poetry .
The
instructions I am working with these days (largely thanks to our mutual
friend) emphasize the foreground. For me, right now, instructions to
"turn back" or identify something "stainless" reinforce a bad habit I've
picked up. I recognize that this may not be so for everyone.
Author
Regarding "stainless," I find this helpful:
Ven.
Jinmyo Renge osho Dainen-ji: "The stainlessness of this moment is not
only the fact that colours and forms are as they are or that sensations
are as they are; the fact is that this moment cannot be grasped. There
is no particular angle that you can take upon this moment because it is
too vast and it is constantly changing. You arise within it, I arise
within it, we all arise within it."
Thusness:
"The tata is very good. The Stainless is also good but just to be
picky... the 'it' must be eliminated... stainlessness is the ungraspable
of the arising and passing phenomena. Without essence and locality of
any arising... nothing 'within or without it'."
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Stainless
I
skimmed through, but it seems an interesting article. Make sure to
check the comment section, where the oneness issue, and the comparison
to Vedanta, seem to be addressed.
WAYOFBODHI.ORG
Oneness without oneness – On Mahasiddha Shavaripa
So
generally these instructions are given once one is stable in Shine.
Which is the stillness aspect of mind isolated from the movement. When
one is proficient then one does these instructions, then shine is
released.
1
when you practice shine you are isolating the stillness from movement. so you are watching the movement as if apart from you.
when that stillness is released then you become the motion itself. so there is no distinction between stillness and motion.
it's then that you are capturing what the instructions point to.
when you're isolating a background all you are doing is emphasizing the stillness aspect.
then
you have the issue of movement. movement is an issue. thoughts,
sensations, sense perceptions. all of it distracts from the stillness.
so there is an inherent duality.
nonetheless you have to be able to isolate stillness and motion as distinct experiences.
Dzogchen begins when you release that stillness or background witness.
4
Author
Albert Hong
Thanks. I've always understood it a little differently: at first, you
are isolating the background, and any movement is a distraction. Then at
some point the movement is no longer a distraction -- but you have not
exactly "become" the movement. I think of this like I AM, or baby rigpa.
Finally, you "become" the movement -- which sounds more like
nonduality, or AtR's stage 4, no?Looking
again, Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche does indeed say that Dzogchen only begins
with the "becoming" (released shiné). If so, then either he does not
consider "baby rigpa" to be Dzogchen, or else I am wrong about that
second phase being baby rigpa.
Soh
.1
Aditya Prasad
the movement doesn't distract because you're absorbed into a concept of
stillness. It's very much like putting one's finger over a faucet. the
issue of motion or movement becomes much more of an issue with Shine.
You become super aware of the most subtle currents of motion. Which all
distract and irritate.
One
has to release or let go of the focus on one aspect of experience. then
presence isn't a thing, but rather endlessly rolling without effort or
fixation.
I
don't know much about baby Rigpa to comment on it. From the teachings
of Lama Lena, she speaks about how one at first may objectify Rigpa then
gradually this deepens.
Author
Albert Hong
Are we talking about the same thing? I'm not saying that the thoughts
don't occur (like a finger over the faucet), but that they don't
distract. Movement is not an issue because "that which knows" can never
be distracted (in this model). It knows the stillness and movement
equally intimately.I apologize, we could be talking about something else.
what you're talking about just sounds like basic mindfulness.
Author
Albert Hong
I'm sure there's some overlap there, but when most people learn basic
mindfulness, I don't think they feel like they are (or even have) a
timeless, stainless, pure consciousness. At that point, perhaps "turning
back" or looking for something "stainless" may be counterproductive.
Dunno.the isolation of a consciousness to look back at is isolating a type of experience.
turning
back is to release that experience. not to create a new ground or space
or consciousness. but to end the foci, which always makes subtle or
gross objects.
1
the issue is always making an object and even making Rigpa an object.
1
Aditya Prasad
You're right, in Mahamudra they work more or less this way. The advices cited are from different stages1
Jenny Jennings Foerst
Yes,
Albert Hong
puts is well. @Aditya Prasad
,
you attempt to look back and be interested in "what" is looking. But
this emptiness practice is not to establish a background--quite the
opposite. The earnest attempt reveals the false polarity of shine and
vipassana, so that polarity collapses, deconstructs, which is quite an
experience, quite a realization.In
Mahamudra, one cannot just intellectually bypass the earnest attempt at
reflexive "looking." You see, there must be experiential recognition of
the impossibility of "background."
Timelessness
is the stillness, silence, and space. Yet the "world" keeps changing.
The first is "mind perspective" and the second is "event perspective."
When they are integrated, the view is called "simultaneous mind," which
is third yoga in Mahamudra.
Later, there is an end to perspective-taking altogether. But that is after more rounds of deconstruction.
Author
Jenny
Jennings Foerst Mixing paths is tricky business (and I probably
wouldn't have done it but for the opening I had with Advaita when
young). Using your language, once one has mixed the mind and event
perspectives, it feels unhelpful to continue to "look back" and try to
identify something stainless. There isn't anything stainless (in the
sense of being permanent but untouchable) -- and for someone who's been
stuck believing so for a long time, using that language can cause its
own problems. Luckily I'm getting those instructions (from someone we
both know), but I'm "supplementing" with these kinds of teachings, and
trying to work out which are relevant at which stages.
Jenny Jennings Foerst
Aditya Prasad
Have you stabilized simultaneous mind? Is that what you are saying (among other things)?Author
Jenny
Jennings Foerst Maybe trying to "use your language" wasn't such a good
idea after all! To be honest, none of the language or metaphors from the
POW retreat connected with me in any way, so I don't want to attempt an
answer. Luckily our mutual friend is talented and able to find language
that I can relate to. Suffice it to say that "looking back" is not part
of my practice right now.
"I crossed over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place."[1]
"But how, dear sir, did you cross over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place?"
"When
I pushed forward, I was whirled about. When I stayed in place, I sank.
And so I crossed over the flood without pushing forward, without staying
in place."
Right Effort
DHAMMATALKS.ORG
SN 1:1 Ogha-taraṇa Sutta | Crossing over the Flood
2
Interesting website
Sahaja
yoga is Mahamudra, not Dzogchen. And cited Saraha. He is a Mahamudra
father. The instructioons are right, the subtleties that confuse you may
originate on the translation. They're right Mahamudra advices. But bear
in mind that Mahamudra is a progressive path, and every of the four
yogas has different instructions.
2
I
have found that by introverting very intensely, one finds a phenomenon
that is ontologically "different" from a physical or psychological inner
which directly triggers the realization of transpersonal being.
This is a very fair experiential start for exploring these things having actually got a taste of it.
It
is not about "world-denying". It is simply a pragmatic phenomenological
fact that people whose focus and attention entrainment is on the
physical in a very limited sense of awareness will not benefit from such
ideal things as "the meditation of non-meditation" etc etc.
Author
Adrian Brown
Yes, I can see it being helpful to reach I AM. I'm mostly curious about whether it is helpful beyond that.Good question, my current position is to say mixed use.
By "turning inward" you see the roots of how things reify themselves within your own mind for example.
But
that only works if you have the right pointers beforehand or are very
conscientious in your exploration and not just rapt away.
1
Turning back from the senses is not helpful to realise anatta. It is for I AM, tracing radiance to the source.
Bahiya sutta is more useful for anatta.
1
Author
Soh Wei Yu
Thanks. That's why I love AtR and what you do. I never considered
before how following even "very high teachings" might actually hold one
back.1
Abhaya devi is clear about anatta but is pointing people to the I AM first. Just like malcolm and many other zen teachers, etc
WAYOFBODHI.ORG
Breaking the Silence – The Teachings of Bodhidharma
Both of them (abhaya devi and prabodha) are clear about the thusness seven stages.
You
notice that these teachers who have gone through these phases
themselves are open to what john tan wrote. Prabodha even said the seven
stages represents essence of buddhism
Those who do not understand it or gone through it themselves may not resonate
Author
Soh Wei Yu
Thanks, I'll read it. Right off the bat, though, it's strengthening the I AM for me: "He showed how the perception and the perceived never harm the silence of the basic space."
Aditya Prasad
yes. Also it says ordinary people are seeing reflections without seeing the mirror.The emphasis here is realise the Mind (I AM)
Author
Soh Wei Yu
I thought you said the emphasis in this article (the one you just linked about Bodhidharma) was anatta?then the basic space here is not a background:
“In
resting like a mountain, gazing at the empty wall of mind’s nature, he
showed how the mind of dualities and conceptual proliferations comes to
rest in the basic space of the perception and the perceived1. In moving
like a wild goose spreading its wings, he showed how the perception and
the perceived never harm the silence of the basic space.”
Thusness, 2013:
"there
is a very intense and much deeper state i assure u...but there is clear
understanding that the manifestation is it....however awareness is like
an unbounded and limitless expanse field
the luminosity is intensely clear
the experience is like Non-Dual Awareness broke lose and exist as a unbounded FIELD
there is a difference in seeing sound and a hearer and realizing sound as awareness itself
u cannot focus and there cannot be any sense of effort
there cannot be any sense of boundaries
just itself
u must be very very stable and mature in the anatta state
and u cannot be in an enclosed room...
it is the effortlessness and crystal clear transparency and intensity of luminosity...
but
duality must no more trouble the practitioner, phenomena is clearly
understood as the radiance...so nothing is obscuring then in total
effortless and emanation arises and the expanse just continues"
On how this differs from one mind:
"one mind is subsuming
therefore there is a sense of dual
in this case there isn't
it
is like a drop of water landed on the surface of a clear ocean. the
nature of water and ocean are one and the same...nothing containing
anything
when sounds and music arise...they are like water and waves in ocean...everything is it"
.......................
Jackson
Peterson wrote about Transparency, the experience and intensity of
transparency is important (even though Jax is holding one mind view
rather than anatta):
Transparency
When sitting, fully relaxed, with no mental topics in mind; consciousness will become ever more clear and sharp.
At
some point the material substance of your head will seem to become
clear and transparent, leaving no sense of boundary to awareness.
Suddenly
a shift can happen, such that instead of feeling like a located
physical entity, your cognitive nature becomes crystal clear, empty
space: a space that co-exists with phenomena, but is timeless and
changeless, pervasive presence.
It’s
like being a material entity located within a physical body, in which
that localized entity suddenly transforms into space. It’s like
consciousness as space had contracted into being a localized contraction
of aware space, that suddenly reverted to its status as being empty,
borderless space.
In Dzogchen, this is called “zangtal” or penetrating transparency.
In
this moment it feels like you are the empty space of the universe
instead of being a localized “thing” in the universe. All material
identifications and psychological self images vanish.
Imagine
there is an infinite ocean of transparent, Clear Light Awareness; which
can contract into ice-cube like spheres of localized consciousness.
But that contracted consciousness of Clear Light Awareness can suddenly
revert to its uncontracted state, its “natural state”.
Only then do the intrinsic wisdoms of the Clear Light, Natural State, fully unfold.
-----------------
Daniel M. Ingram:
"So
you have these two extremes - both of which I find pretty annoying
(laughs) - and uhm, not that they are not making interesting points that
counterbalance each other. And then, from an experiential point of
view, the whole field seems to be happening on its own in a luminous
way, the intelligence or awareness seems to be intrinsic in the
phenomena, the phenomena do appear to be totally transient, totally
ephemeral. So I would reject from an experiential point of view,
something in the harshness of the dogma of the rigid no-selfists that
can't recognise the intrinsic nature of awareness that is the field. If
that makes sense. Cos they tend to feel there's something about that's
sort of (cut off?)..."
Interviewer: "And not only awareness..."
Daniel:
"Intelligence. Right, and I also reject from an experiential point of
view the people who would make this permanent, something separate from,
something different from just the manifestation itself. I don't like the
permanence aspect because from a Buddhist technical point of view I do
not find anything that stands up as permanent in experience. I find that
quality always there *while there is experience.* Because it's
something in the nature of experience. But it's not quite the same thing
as permanence, if that makes sense. So while there is experience, there
is experience. So that means there is awareness, from a certain point
of view, manifestation - awareness being intrinsically the same thing,
intrinsic to each other. So while there is experience, I would claim
that element (awareness) is there - it has to be for there to be
experience. And I would claim that the system seems to function very
lawfully and it's very easy to feel that there's a sort of intelligence,
ok, cool... ...the feeling of profundity, the feeling of
miraculousness, the wondrous component. So as the Tibetans would say,
amazing! It all happens by itself! So, there is intrinsically amazing
about this. It's very refreshingly amazing that the thing happens, and
that things cognize themselves or are aware where they are,
manifestation is truly amazing and tuning into that amazingness has
something valuable about it from a pragmatic point of view."
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Awakening to Reality
1
5/24/2012 8:05 PM: John: But experientially same but just the degree of right understanding
5/24/2012 8:07 PM: John: Not exactly one mind
5/24/2012 8:07 PM: John: Do u feel everything as Self now?
5/24/2012 8:08 PM: John: As in that experience of I M powerfully present at this moment
5/24/2012 8:09 PM: Soh Wei Yu: yes presence, but as change
5/24/2012 8:11 PM: John: As if like Awareness clear and open like space, without meditation yet powerfully present and non-dual
5/24/2012 8:12 PM: John: Where the 4 Aspects of I M r fully experienced in this moment
5/24/2012 8:14 PM: Soh Wei Yu: Yeah
5/24/2012
8:14 PM: Soh Wei Yu: I think the four aspects is only fully experienced
after nondual and anatta, especially effortlessness and no need to
abide
5/24/2012 8:15 PM: John: This experience will become more and more powerful later yet effortless and uncontrieved
5/24/2012
8:17 PM: John: How so? If it is not correct insights and practice, how
is it possible for such complete and total experience of effortless and
uncontrieved Presence be possible?
5/24/2012 8:18 PM: Soh Wei Yu: I do not see it is possible without the proper insights and practice
5/24/2012 8:20 PM: Soh Wei Yu: In anatta every activity is it, is buddha nature, so no contrivance at all
5/24/2012 8:21 PM: Soh Wei Yu: No need to meditate to get anywhere
5/24/2012 8:21 PM: Soh Wei Yu: But meditation is still important to cultivate certain aspects like tranquility
5/24/2012
8:22 PM: John: Indeed and this is being authenticated by the immediate
moment of experience. How could there be doubt abt it. The last trace of
Presence must be released with seeing through the emptiness nature of
whatever arises.
5/24/2012 8:22 PM: Soh Wei Yu: I see..
5/24/2012
8:25 PM: John: After maturing and integrating ur insights into
practice, there must be no effort and action.... The entire whole is
doing the work and arises as this vivid moment of shimmering appearance,
this has always been what we always called Presence.
...
Thusness, 2012:
"Has
awareness stood out? There is no concentration needed. When six entries
and exits are pure and primordial, the unconditioned stands shining,
relaxed and uncontrived, luminous yet empty. The purpose of going
through the 7 phases of perception shift is for this... Whatever arises
is free and uncontrived, that is the supreme path. Whatever arises has
never left their nirvanic state... ... your current mode of practice
[after those experiential insights] should be as direct and uncontrived
as possible. When you see nothing behind and magical appearances are too
empty, awareness is naturally lucid and free. Views and all
elaborations dissolved, mind-body forgotten... just unobstructed
awareness. Awareness natural and uncontrived is supreme goal. Relax and
do nothing, Open and boundless, Spontaneous and free, Whatever arises is
fine and liberated, This is the supreme path. Top/bottom,
inside/outside, Always without center and empty (2-fold emptiness), Then
view is fully actualized and all experiences are great liberation."
Yogi Prabodha Jnana wrote in http://www.wayofbodhi.org/knowing-one-thing-liberates-all/:
Dear Atul,
It
is not only about recognizing the reflections as reflections, but also
recognizing that there is no mirror (no mind)! Knowing that everything
is a projection of mind, is just part of the hundreds and thousands of
explanations that lead the disciple. Further, when you directly see and
understand (recognize) the nature of yourself, the nature of your own
mind, only then you see and truly understand the meaning of even the
statement, “everything is projection of mind”.
Regards,
Prabodha
WAYOFBODHI.ORG
Knowing One Thing Liberates All
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Edited
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 3d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Edited
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Edited
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Edited
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 3d
- Edited
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Edited
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 3d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 3d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Edited
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 2d
- Edited
- Reply
- 2d
- Edited
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 2d
- Edited
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Edited
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 2d
- Edited
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 2d
- Edited
- Reply
- 2d
What's so new about what Richard talks in Actual Freedom?
I have seen
Soh Wei Yu
mentioning AF off and on in different places. So I decided to check out his website at http://www.actualfreedom.com.au/
. First, there was a lot of bashing of all traditional spiritual paths
as if they have missed the point that he is talking about, and then he
mentions how spiritual paths have not been able to rectify the sorry
state of affairs in the world. And then he winds up saying that there is
no sorry state of affairs in the world after all, here:"The day finally dawns where the definitive moment of being here, right now, conclusively arrives; something irrevocable takes place and every thing and every body and every event is different, somehow, although the same physically; something immutable occurs and every thing and every body and every event is all-of-a-sudden undeniably actual, in and of itself, as a fact; something irreversible happens and an immaculate perfection and a pristine purity permeates every thing and every body and every event; something has changed forever, although it is as if nothing has happened, except that the entire world is a magical fairytale-like playground full of incredible gladness and a delight which is never-ending."
How is it different from what Nagarjuna says as "Nirvana is Samsara"? or what Gaudapada says, " All Jīvas are, by their very nature illumined from the very beginning" as the final realizations.
His final realization is put in these words:
"Thus the search for meaning amidst the debris of the much-vaunted human hopes and dreams and schemes has come to its timely end. With the end of both ‘I’ and ‘me’, the distance or separation between both ‘I’ and ‘me’ and these sense organs – and thus the external world – disappears. To be living as the senses is to live a clear and clean awareness – apperception – a pure consciousness experience of the world as-it-is. Because there is no ‘I’ as a thinker (a little person inside one’s head) or a ‘me’ as a feeler (a little person in one’s heart) – to have sensations happen to them, I am the sensations. The entire affective faculty vanishes ... blind nature’s software package of instinctual passions is deleted. There is nothing except the series of sensations which happen ... not happening to an ‘I’ or a ‘me’ but just happening ... moment by moment ... one after another. To live life as these sensations, as distinct from having them, engenders the most astonishing sense of freedom and magic. Consequently, I am living in peace and tranquillity; a meaningful peace and tranquillity. Life is intrinsically purposeful, the reason for existence lies openly all around. Being this very air I live in, I am constantly aware of it as I breathe it in and out; I see it, I hear it, I taste it, I smell it, I touch it, all of the time. It never goes away – nor has it ever been away – it was just that ‘I’/‘me’ was standing in the way of the meaning of life being apparent."
I fail to understand how traditional non-dual paths, taken to their end, are talking any different.
Any thoughts?
131 Comments
Comments
I
believe it is merely refinement of the view. Whereas the non dual
direct experience of presence is the same. It is a matter of deeply
hidden views which obscure and trap the presence.
And various methods and views work their way to meet such obscurations.
In the end you suffer or you don't. And that is something you in your unique personal mind stream have to come to terms with.
I would say that not all paths and views lead to the same arenas.
But certainly specific practitioners within their respective lineages definitely meet in similar arenas.
But all of it is imho not really relevant.
Either you are uncontrived and totally free from suffering, or you are not.
1
If
I recall, Actualism is just the emphasis on constant PCE or pure
consciousness experience, which is non duality. It is also what is
considered no mind, because one is thrown completely into the foreground
of appearances.
There
is no particular insight into Anatta in the way Atr frames it. Hence
such experiential states come and go, where with Anatta realization, no
mind is the natural situation without contriving it.
It's
much different than one mind where everything is the taste or flavor of
luminosity. That is an emphasis on wholeness rather than unique,
diverse manifestations as the texture, which is more no mind.
We refine the view constantly but we keep the direct, immediate, undeniable experience of presence.
3
actualism is the repeated letting go (“seeing the silliness”) of conditionings and obscurations obscuring anatta
So
when there no thinker or feeler or seer or hearer, etc. then foreground
is the presence. each sound, each sensation, each thought is exactly
the texture as presence. it's not one whole presence but each single,
unique experiencing as presencing.
then
the foreground is further deconstructed. we can still be obstructed by
this inherent view. we may take the phenomena world to be actual. the
sounds, the sensations.
because
it is HD or more real then real. But that is where mutuality and
interdependence is very useful. To understand seeing-seen as conditioned
arising ends the solidity of a seer or seen or seeing. All of it just
conventions that have no where to land.
again further refining and freeing the presencing as forms leading to ease and naturalness.
2
agree, seeing transience and emptiness of view itself is
Now why would one need to refine the view?
in
a sense not all views are equal and it is views that orientate and
clarify non duality in substantial forms or non substantial forms.
it
is safe to assume we already come with views of all kinds. views that
generally desire a Monistic view or any other inherency kink we desire.
And those are practically impossible to see because they are so
habitually imprinted on the being.
that
is where applying an intellectual view is very useful. since we have
the intellectual faculty. it is wise to use a view, learn a view, and
apply a view that clarifies what exactly presence is.
that
is useful for some people or it isn't. some are inclined and can intuit
the value of that. for most it is irrelevant and they will treat
whatever said here as irrelevant conceptual nonsense.
1
but
these aren't just ideas of course. they are lived. they inform the
whole subtle body to our seemingly coarse physical body. the holding of
any inherent view is an imaginary stain on our being, our whole
energetic field. and that knot will not go away until we recognize
emptiness.
5
Author
Albert Hong
what about Richard's view that other traditional paths do not have what he is saying? Yeah
it’s strange his criticisms are based on a complete misunderstanding of
Buddhism, and after all these years he still hasn’t corrected that
view.
4
Good
points....very informative site but I also see lots of contradictions
...also he is very into clear stages as per traditional (patriarchal)
Buddhism......men like to systematize everything..... the more recent
iterations of non duality awakening I find to be non-hierarchical (not
always of course)......and feminine insofar as they incorporate
physicality...
1
Actualism
is nothing special. Just anatta and not yet into twofold emptiness.
Usually my point is something else and not exactly to promote AF
1
June 2009:
(2:38 AM) AEN: http://actualfreedom.com.au/richard/default.htm
(2:38
AM) AEN: Thus the search for meaning amidst the debris of the
much-vaunted human hopes and dreams and schemes comes to its timely end.
With the end of both ‘I’ and ‘me’, the distance or separation between
both ‘I’ and ‘me’ and the sense organs – and thus the external world –
disappears. To be living as the senses is to live a clean and clear and
pure awareness –
apperception
– a pure consciousness experience of the world as-it-is. Because there
is no ‘I’ as a thinker (a little person inside one’s head) or a ‘me’ as a
feeler (a little person in one’s heart) – to have sensations happen to
them, one is the sensations. The entire affective faculty vanishes ...
blind nature’s software package of instinctual passions is deleted.
(2:39
AM) AEN: Then there is nothing except the series of sensations which
happen ... not happening to an ‘I’ or a ‘me’ but just happening ...
moment by moment ... one after another. To live life as these
sensations, as distinct from having them, engenders the most astonishing
sense of freedom and magic. One is living in peace and tranquillity; a
meaningful peace and tranquillity.
(2:39
AM) AEN: Life is intrinsically purposeful, the reason for existence
lies openly all around. It never goes away – nor has it ever been away –
it was just that ‘I’/‘me’ was standing in the way of the meaning of
life being apparent. Now the universe is experiencing itself in all its
magnificence as an apperceptive human being. Life is not
a
vale of tears; peace-on-earth is an actual freedom from the human
condition; it is indeed possible to be actually free, here on earth, as
this body, in this life-time.
To seek and to find; to explore and uncover; to investigate and discover ... these actions are the very stuff of life!
(2:44 AM) AEN: his story of moving from I AM to no self http://actualfreedom.com.au/.../abriefpersonalhistory.htm
(1:14
PM) AEN: 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)
i tink actualism is v sectarian
(1:14 PM) AEN: they tink that throughout history, they are the first to realise no self, not even buddha
(1:15 PM) AEN: and they started this whole new movement like religion but not really a religion called 'Actualism'
lol
(6:09 PM) Thusness: who is geis?
(6:09 PM) AEN: i also dunnu
someone in sgforums
(6:11 PM) Thusness: This is very good...this is anatta
(6:11 PM) AEN: u're talking about geis or tHe website
not the same leh
(6:12 PM) Thusness: the website
(6:12 PM) AEN: icic..
ya i posted on their forum
(6:13 PM) Thusness: posted what?
(6:13 PM) AEN: some of my experiences and asked for advise. i also mentioned ur link.. lol
(6:15
PM) AEN: funny thing is they think even alan watts, bernadette roberts,
u.g.krishnamurti, buddha, etc haven realised what they realised
(6:16 PM) Thusness: coz they dun really understand buddhism...they thought it is new.
(6:16 PM) AEN: lol ya
(6:16 PM) Thusness: there are also differing degree to it.
(6:16 PM) AEN: icic..
(6:18
PM) Thusness: there is also a problem when one cannot fully penetrate
the depth of anatta experientially, at the beginning phase, one may turn
to become nihilistic...
(6:18 PM) Thusness: but since he experienced "I AM", it is unlikely
(6:19 PM) AEN: oic
what do u mean by nihilistic
(6:19 PM) Thusness: means the depth of directly experiencing this sensation
(6:19
PM) Thusness: or sensate reality without thoroughly no-self
experientially...though insight arises...but the sense of self is still
there...there is this problem...
(6:20 PM) AEN: oic..
but how is it nihilistic
u mean
not experiencing the luminosity thoroughly?
(6:21 PM) Thusness: it is difficult to tell u because u have not come to that struggle yet.
(6:22 PM) AEN: icic..
(6:22
PM) Thusness: a struggle when the tendency is still there yet one
becomes extremely physical due to the direct experience of
sensations...unable to get beyond the sense of self.
(6:22 PM) Thusness: it is very difficult to tell u.
(6:23 PM) Thusness: by the way how u come to know about the site?
(6:23
PM) AEN: extremely physical as in? richard said there is no greater
reality only "the universe experiencing itself as this flesh and blood
body"
from DhO... someone posted
(6:23 PM) Thusness: ic
(6:24 PM) AEN: apparently theprisonergreco frequent that site last time
(6:24 PM) Thusness: where is the place u posted the blog
(6:24 PM) AEN: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/actualfreedom/message/6100
(6:24 PM) Thusness: now are u clearer the difference between stage 4 and 5?
(6:25 PM) AEN: dunno leh
so u mean richard is stage 4 or 5
(6:25 PM) Thusness: i don't mean that lah
how come u always like to map
(6:25 PM) AEN: lol
(6:26 PM) Thusness: i only want u to have a clear insight the difference
(6:26 PM) Thusness: at least u have a clearer picture of 4, 5 and 6.
(6:27 PM) AEN: icic..
(6:27 PM) Thusness: hari and rob burbea and this richard will help u understand further.
it is difficult to have one to have that clear insight of the distinction.
especially between 4 and 5.
(6:27 PM) AEN: oic..
(6:28 PM) Thusness: i got to go makan.
(6:28
PM) AEN: btw richard doesnt seem to be at stage 4 bcos he clearly
mentioned that his understanding isnt subject/object union... i tink
oic
(6:28 PM) Thusness: at least now i can c u showing me sites that have clearer experience of the distinction.
(6:28 PM) AEN: ok
icic
(6:28 PM) Thusness: he is already beyond that
(6:28 PM) AEN: oic
(6:29 PM) Thusness: his is like dharma dan
(6:29 PM) AEN: icic..
(6:29 PM) Thusness: i got to read what he wrote later
(6:29 PM) AEN: ok
(9:34 PM) Thusness: what is the url again?
(9:34 PM) AEN: http://actualfreedom.com.au/
(1:40 AM) AEN: jonls commented http://buddhism.sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/368699
.....
ACTUALFREEDOM.COM.AU
The Third Alternative
Session Start: Tuesday, July 21, 2009
(10:27 PM) AEN: dunnu why but chanting a particular mantra a few times brought me into a state of presence. powerful meditation
(10:28 PM) Thusness: what mantra?
(10:28 PM) AEN: http://www.meditationexpert.com/.../z_usnisa_vijaya...
(10:29 PM) AEN: i read that its a v powerful mantra... supposedly anyone who hears it wont fall into 3 lower realms
if i understand correctly
(10:29
PM) AEN: the website author said 'I won’t tell you about the two
supernatural things that happened when I chanted this dharani ' haha
i din experience anything supernatural but i still find it quite powerful
(10:30 PM) Thusness: i never do chanting b4.
(10:30 PM) AEN: oic..
(10:30 PM) AEN: i also seldom do
(10:58 PM) AEN: haha
(10:58
PM) AEN: im realising richard took many parts of his website from other
sources including alan watts, and now i'm seeing bhante gunaratana
stuff frm mindfulness in plain english
and rephased a bit himself
(10:58 PM) AEN: and he still say only he's enlightened lol
(11:02 PM) AEN: he's taking the whole of the 'mindfulness' chapter by bhante gunaratana http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma4/mpe13.html , edit a bit, and put into http://actualfreedom.com.au/.../attentivenesssensuousness...
(11:03 PM) Thusness: edit with permission or not?
(11:03 PM) AEN: no la... hahaha
for example
bhante gunaratana:
When
you first become aware of something, there is a fleeting instant of
pure awareness just before you conceptualize the thing, before you
identify it. That is a stage of Mindfulness.
richard:
(11:04
PM) AEN: When one first becomes aware of something, there is a fleeting
instant of the clean perception of sensum just before one recognises
the percept (the mental product or result of perception) and also before
one identifies with all the feeling memories associated with its qualia
(the qualities pertaining to the properties of the form) and this ‘raw
sense-datum’ stage of sensational perception is a direct experience of
the actual.
use his own terminology only
(11:05 PM) Thusness: the whole chapter?
(11:05 PM) AEN: yep
whole chapter
(11:05 PM) Thusness: and he din mention it?
(11:05 PM) AEN: nope
(11:06
PM) AEN: but he did admit he used alan watts books, and edited only
here and there. but he still claims alan watts not his realisation
(11:06 PM) Thusness: i don't like the way he is presenting it though his experience is there
(11:06 PM) AEN: oic
(11:06 PM) Thusness: yeah alan is more advaita
(11:06 PM) AEN: oic
(11:06 PM) Thusness: and zen
his is more vipassana and anatta
(11:07 PM) AEN: icic..
(11:07 PM) Thusness: but discrediting Buddha's achievement and said that is his own is no good
and stealing others work for oneself is also bad
(11:08 PM) AEN: yeah..
the alan watts one he also din say
only when ppl question him saying its from alan watts
and after much debating
(11:08 PM) AEN: he admit maybe he took it from there a long ago
(11:08 PM) Thusness: ic
(11:08 PM) Thusness: and the one on emptiness?
(11:08 PM) AEN: which one
(11:09 PM) Thusness: i mean the one on mindfulness
(11:09 PM) AEN: yeah thats from bhante gunaratana
i can see its just rephrasing the mindfulness chapter
(11:10 PM) Thusness: u found out urself?
(11:10 PM) AEN: yes i found myself
(11:10 PM) Thusness: ahhaha...icic
(11:10 PM) AEN: what he called 'apperceptiveness' is gunaratana 'mindfulness'
as far as i understand
(11:10 PM) Thusness: no good no good
(11:11 PM) AEN: oic is different?
(11:11 PM) Thusness: hopefully he din steal all those that he wrote from someone else
no wonder it sounded so enlightening
lol
(11:12 PM) AEN: lol
(11:18 PM) AEN: richard also talked about the 3 characteristics but is based on gunaratana.
(11:19
PM) AEN: It is really very simple: attentiveness actually sees the
illusory nature of everything that is felt. It sees the transitory and
delusory nature of every ideal and dream and scheme and – seeing the
inherently unsatisfactory nature of all feeling beings – it sees that
there is no sense grabbing onto any of these passing
feelings
as peace and harmony cannot be found that way. Attentiveness sees the
inherent selfishness of all ‘being’ in that it sees the way that human
beings have arbitrarily selected a certain bundle of tender feelings,
chopped them off from the rest of the surging flow of savage feelings
and then realised themselves as unitive and enduring entities swimming
in the ‘Ocean Of Oneness’
--- richard
(11:19 PM) AEN: gunaratana:
(11:19
PM) AEN: Mindfulness works like and electron microscope. That is, it
operates on so fine a level that one can actually see directly those
realities which are at best theoretical constructs to the conscious
thought process. Mindfulness actually sees the impermanent character of
every perception. It sees the transitory and passing
nature
of everything that is perceived. It also sees the inherently
unsatisfactory nature of all conditioned things. It sees that there is
no sense grabbing onto any of these passing shows. Peace and happiness
cannot be found that way. And finally, Mindfulness sees the inherent
selflessness of all phenomena. It sees the
way
that we have arbitrarily selected a certain bundle of perceptions,
chopped them off from the rest of the surging flow of experience and
then conceptualized them as separate, enduring, entities. Mindfulness
actually sees these things. It does not think about them, it sees them
directly.
(11:20 PM) AEN: ya i tink richard more towards vipassana
(11:20
PM) AEN: but he mistaken that vipassana is a way to watch phenomena to
dissociate oneself from phenomena and experience the transcendence of I
AM
(11:21 PM) Thusness: yes..
(11:21 PM) Thusness: even most vipassana teacher taught and thought it is that too
MEDITATIONEXPERT.COM
Usnisa Vijaya Dharani
1
Session Start: Saturday, 5 September, 2009
(10:44 PM) AEN: hi.. how to experience nonduality effortlessly?
(10:44 PM) Thusness: only through deep insight of anatta and dependent origination
that is my experience
(10:46 PM) Thusness: however with the arising insight of anatta, with practice of vipassana, it will turn effortless.
the insight of anatta is most important
(10:46 PM) Thusness: one will only realise the true meaning of bare attention after the arising insight of anatta
(10:46 PM) AEN: oic..
but before that also can experience bare attention rite
(10:47 PM) Thusness: yeah but the essence of it will not be known without the insight of anatta
(10:48 PM) AEN: oic..
(10:51
PM) Thusness: it will come a time when the tendency to dualify
dissolves due to deep insight (not just meditative stage), it will turn
effortless, vivid and powerfully present.
(10:51 PM) AEN: icic..
(10:53
PM) Thusness: it almost feel like a natural state of absorption yet
vivid present because there is no sense of observer, agent, self just
luminous manifestation.
(10:54 PM) AEN: oic..
(10:55 PM) Thusness: actually the site on actual freedom is about there.
....
Session Start: Sunday, 13 September, 2009
(12:46 AM) Thusness: actual freedom is okie if not all those nonsense blasphemies (not a good term for Buddhism ). The experience is there, the insight is there but there are too much plagiarism. .
1
Richard
misinterpreted Buddha's nirvana and 'death-free' (amata) to imply some
sort of metaphysical essence or Self. This is not what Buddha meant.
This is explained in http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../the-deathless-in...
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
The Deathless in Buddhadharma?
“Yes
and very good. There is a very big difference between substantialist
non-dual of One-Mind and what you said. In this experience, there is no
background reality. It is not about the background Awareness but
rather the foreground aggregates that you are talking about - A thought.
There is just aggregates that are like foams, bubbles, ethereal having
all the same taste without substantiality and implicitly non-dual. No
sense of body, mind and the world, nothing actual or truly there.
Before,
when insight of anatta first arose, you still risk the danger of seeing
the physical as inherent and truly existing. Therefore there is a
period that you are lost, unsure and AF (Actual Freedom) seems appealing
- a sign that you have not extended the insight of emptiness to
phenomena though you kept saying twofold emptiness.
At present you focus on the following:
1. When there is no cold or heat (Soh: See glossary at the bottom of the article)
2. Total exertion
For
1, it is not difficult to understand now but for 2, you have not
directly or adequately replace the 'Self/self' with the interdependence
of whatever arises.” - John Tan, 06/12/2011 E-mail
“André,
to me anatta is a very specific and definite phase of seeing through
the background self/Self quite thoroughly at least in the waking state
but there is a tendency that experience can somehow turn very "physical,
sense-based and causal" for me.
Every
experience is direct, gapless, non-dual, non-conceptual and radiance
even total exertion is present, just not empty. Almost equivalent to
Actual Freedom as narrated by Richard. In fact I find Richard's
description very much my version of arahat .
For
Kyle, due to his view in emptiness, the experiential insight of anatta
not only pierce through the self/Self but also triggered the arising
insight of emptiness. However this may not be true (imo) in most cases
if one's view isn't firmly established. For me when I first encountered
the chariot analogy, there is an immediate and intuitive recognition
that it is referring to anatta but I am unable to grasp the essence of
the phrase "emptiness and non-arisen" there and then.
In
other words, in addition to self immolation, a specific insight must
arise, it is the prajna that clearly sees through the referent is empty
and non-arisen. So anatta I would say is about severing the self/Self
whereas phase 6 is the blossoming of this specific insight. Extending
this insight from self to phenomena, from conventions to magical
appearances is then a natural progression.
As
for first bhumi (Soh: related: [insight] [buddhism] A reconsideration
of the meaning of "Stream-Entry" considering the data points of both
pragmatic Dharma and traditional Buddhism , Definition of First Bhumi) I
am seriously not sure and never thought of it.
I
can only say if we practice long enough, there is a frequent occurrence
of a clear, clean and pure spring of joy that emerges from nowhere,
floating like cloud. A very helpful antidote for negative emotions.
Even
the experience of drinking water is like experiencing a clean and pure
stream of luminous sensations in zero dimension similar to a mirage
flowing spring water floating in the air.” - John Tan in the Awakening
to Reality Discussion Group, 2019, John wrote this maybe a month or two
before a breakthrough that Soh had which led to the writing “The Magical
Fairytale-like Wonderland and Paradise of this Verdant Earth Free from
Affective Emotions, Reactions and Sufferings”
“Soh:
as Richard said, the out of control experience can happen even before
anatta (the complete dissolution of self/Self), that is why the "doer"
dissolves but the "be-er" is still there, but in actual freedom both
dissolves
John Tan: Quite acute insight and thorough for the state no mind. Means "being" is also deconstructed.”
(Soh: For those wondering what Actual Freedom is referring to:
See
A Brief Personal History (of Richard Maynard of Actual Freedom) and
Peace on this Earth: Actual Freedom and Actual Freedom and Buddhism)
John Tan wrote on 24 March 2019 to me,
“Not
going back. If you want to write a guide, write with sincerity. If you
write with a sincere heart, I am sure people will benefit as those are
genuine insights leading to effortlessness of instant presence. However,
never claim or even suggest the phases of insight are end of journey,
that is very naive, untrue and misleading.
As
for powerful vivid radiance, they are normal if you have spent quality
time post your anatta insight. When the center is gone, externally you
will feel like a ball of radiance appearing as the world. Internally,
energetic radiance will beam through your body cells, vibrating on your
crown, your face, dancing as pulsation of your flowing blood, that is
the time you should seriously look into energy practice. If you are not
interested in energy practice, just learn deep rhythmic abdominal
breathing until a state of no mind into deep release, it will help to
contain and regulate and the powerful energetic radiance.
As
for AF, the immolation of Self/self is simply the deconstruction of
mental construct of self as a center background. Richard has carried it
far enough to reach total exertion which he called "realizing one's
destiny" if I remember correctly. However the same cause reifying the
background is now manifesting in the foreground as the "actual world",
therefore there is no thorough liberation. Imo from the perspective of
self immolation, he has carried it further than you and his essays can
definitely help to guide you. It does seems final in a pseudo sense.
For
you, it will be difficult to find a teacher but if you humble yourself,
everyone, every event is your teacher. When I tell you to differentiate
experience from realization and established firmly on the view as your
guide, the purpose is not for you to go around stereotyping people, it
is strictly for your own development.
Lastly
due to the Awakening to Reality group and your relentless
advertisement, I have been receiving messages. I do not want to mislead
people and I am not a spiritual teacher and I do not wish to develop it
into a cultic group.
As for me, practice is ongoing and there is no finality. So I will
continue my never ending journey. You can WhatsApp me just don't message
me who is at what stage… lol.”
After
writing to me, in the following months my total exertion deepened and
stabilized. I experienced the 'destiny' of infinite space and time that
Richard always talked about, which became a natural state.
3
Richard is clear in distinguishing his realisation and experience from those of Stage 1~4.
"RICHARD: You must be referring to this:
•
[Richard]: ‘I never advise or encourage anyone to use psychotropic
substances (for obvious reasons). If, however, someone already has done
so, and intends to do so again of their own accord and volition anyway,
then I would counsel their very careful and considered use as it is
all-too-easy for an altered state of consciousness (ASC) to emerge
rather than a pure consciousness experience (PCE) ... there are many
accounts available on the internet and 4 or 5 years ago I browsed
through several web pages and never found any description that resembled
a PCE’.
A quick search
of the internet showed that the quote you provided comes from an essay,
in ‘This is It and Other Essays on Zen and Spiritual Experience’,
entitled ‘The New Alchemy’ and goes on to say, immediately after where
you ended it, the following:
•
[quote] ‘For it implies that experience is not something in which one
is trapped or by which one is pushed around, or against which one must
fight. The conventional duality of subject and object, knower and known,
feeler and feeling, is changed into a polarity: the knower and the
known become the poles, terms, or phases of a single event which
happens, not to me or from me, but of itself. The experiencer and the
experience become a single, ever-changing self-forming process, complete
and fulfilled at every moment of its unfolding, and of infinite
complexity and subtlety’. [endquote].
That
polarity of subject/ object, knower/ known, feeler/ feeling,
experiencer/ experience is an unmistakable description of mystical
experiencing wherein the polar opposites unite (aka non-duality) – known
in some mystical literature as ‘complexio oppositorum’ (union of
opposites) ‘or coincidentia oppositorum’ (coincidence of opposites) –
and thus shows that my counselling of very careful and considered use of
psychotropic substances is a well-advised monition.
Here in this actual world neither duality nor non-duality have any existence.
....
RICHARD: Here is the full version (with the sections you selected highlighted for convenience):
•
[Mr. Alan Watts]: ‘I can say only that the awareness of grain or
structure in the senses seemed to be awareness of awareness, of myself
from inside myself. Because of this, it followed that *the distance or
separation between myself and my senses, on the one hand, and the
external world, on the other, seemed to disappear*. [emphasis added].
•
[Richard]: ‘With the end of both ‘I’ and ‘me’, *the distance or
separation between both ‘I’ and ‘me’ and these sense organs – and thus
the external world – disappears*. [emphasis added].
And
the reason why I provide the full version is because Mr. Alan Watts
clearly reports that it is [quote] ‘because’ [endquote] of the awareness
of himself, from inside himself, that the distance or separation
(between himself and his senses, on the one hand, and the external
world, on the other) seemed to disappear ... as contrasted my report
that it is [quote] ‘with’ [endquote] the end of both ‘I’ and ‘me’ that
the distance or separation (between both ‘I’ and ‘me’ and these sense
organs and thus the external world) disappears.
In
other words, with no identity whatsoever there is no-one to be either
in a state of separation (aka duality) or in a state of union (aka
non-duality).
RESPONDENT: [Let’s compare]:
Alan Watts: ‘I was no longer a detached observer, a little man inside my own head ...’
Richard:
‘Because there is no ‘I’ as a thinker (a little person inside one’s
head) or a ‘me’ as a feeler (a little person in one’s heart)’
RICHARD: Again here is my full version (with the section you selected highlighted for convenience):
•
[Richard]: ‘To be living as the senses is to live a clear and clean
awareness – apperception – a pure consciousness experience of the world
as-it-is. *Because there is no ‘I’ as a thinker (a little person inside
one’s head) or a ‘me’ as a feeler (a little person in one’s heart)*
...’. [emphasis added].
Again
the reason why I provide the full version is because to be living *as*
the senses (as a flesh and blood body only) is a vast cry from a
remaining, and non-detached observer, having *become* the sensations (as
in having identified with and/or having arrogated them).
RESPONDENT: [Let’s compare]:
Alan Watts: ‘ ... /having/ sensations. I was the sensations’
Richard: ‘to have sensations happen to them, I am the sensations’
RICHARD: And again here is the full version (with the sections you selected highlighted for convenience):
•
[Mr. Alan Watts]: ‘I was no longer a detached observer, a little man
inside my own head */having/ sensations. I was the sensations* ...’.
[emphasis added].
•
[Richard]: ‘Because there is no ‘I’ as a thinker (a little person inside
one’s head) or a ‘me’ as a feeler (a little person in one’s heart) *to
have sensations happen to them, I am the sensations*’.[emphasis added].
And
again the reason why I provide the full version is because of the
marked distinction between an egoless observer/ feeler/ experiencer (aka
identity) having become the sensations and a flesh and blood body only
being the very senses.
RESPONDENT: [Let’s compare]:
Alan
Watts: ‘[I was the sensations], so much so that there was nothing left
of me, the observing ego, except the series of sensations which happened
– not to me, but just happened – moment by moment, one after another’
Richard:
‘There is nothing except the series of sensations which happen ... not
happening to an ‘I’ or a ‘me’ but just happening ... moment by moment
... one after another’
RICHARD: And yet again here is my full version (with the section you selected highlighted for convenience):
•
[Richard]: ‘The entire affective faculty vanishes ... blind nature’s
software package of instinctual passions is deleted. *There is nothing
except the series of sensations which happen ... not happening to an ‘I’
or a ‘me’ but just happening ... moment by moment ... one after
another*’. [emphasis added].
And
yet again the reason why I provide the full version is because of the
remarkable difference betwixt a flesh and blood body sans the entire
affective faculty (and thus identity in toto) and an identity, replete
with the full suite of emotions/ passions/ calentures it is comprised
of, having identified with and/or having arrogated bodily sensations.
1
RESPONDENT: [Let’s compare]:
Alan
Watts: ‘To become the sensations, as distinct from having them,
engenders the most astonishing sense of freedom and release’
Richard:
‘To live life as these sensations, as distinct from having them,
engenders the most astonishing sense of freedom and magic’
RICHARD: Here is what I go on to say immediately following:
•
[Richard]: ‘Consequently, I am living in peace and tranquillity; a
meaningful peace and tranquillity. Life is intrinsically purposeful, the
reason for existence lies openly all around. Being this very air I live
in, I am constantly aware of it as I breathe it in and out; I see it, I
hear it, I taste it, I smell it, I touch it, all of the time. It never
goes away – nor has it ever been away – it was just that ‘I’/ ‘me’ was
standing in the way of the meaning of life being apparent’ [endquote].
And here is what Mr. Alan Watts goes on to say immediately following:
•
[quote] ‘For it implies that experience is not something in which one
is trapped or by which one is pushed around, or against which one must
fight. The conventional duality of subject and object, knower and known,
feeler and feeling, is changed into a polarity: the knower and the
known become the poles, terms, or phases of a single event which
happens, not to me or from me, but of itself. The experiencer and the
experience become a single, ever-changing self-forming process, complete
and fulfilled at every moment of its unfolding, and of infinite
complexity and subtlety’. [endquote].
(...)
RICHARD:
That polarity of subject/ object, knower/ known, feeler/ feeling,
experiencer/ experience is an unmistakable description of mystical
experiencing wherein the polar opposites unite (aka non-duality) – known
in some mystical literature as ‘complexio oppositorum’ (union of
opposites) ‘or coincidentia oppositorum’ (coincidence of opposites) –
and thus shows that my counselling of very careful and considered use of
psychotropic substances is a well-advised monition. Here in this actual
world neither duality nor non-duality have any existence."
I think perhaps it is important is it to distinguish view and depth of realization?
So
for eg. One can have "right view" or perhaps even experiential glimpse
into emptiness. But without fully refining gross and subtle experience
and abiding in emptiness.
And
perhaps someone else can have a deep abiding realization of Annata like
Richard seems to have with a view that perhaps served him to get over
'spiritualism' but is obscuring further realization.
Not
sure what the trad. Buddhist view on this would be with regards to
rebirth. But in terms of present experience Richards experience could be
more free of suffering than that of someone with a glimpse of
non-abiding emptiness.
So i dont like getting too caught up in the stages.
1
I
think a good thing about Richard is that about 30 months after his
basic freedom (anatta) breakthrough, he transitioned into abiding total
exertion (fully free). Other than Vineeto, so far none of the other
actually free individuals made that transition.
Anurag Jain
he made up his mind about Buddhism and other spiritual paths before he
embarked on his journey. He also was 'thrilled to the nth degree' to go
and discover something no one has ever discovered.These
two things have stayed throughout his journey and he doesn't seem to
have the psychological capacity to step back from these points of view.
Everything
he will come across that suggests he isn't the first one will be
dismissed because of his lack of psychological majority. (psychological
maturity doesn't necessarily come from spiritual maturity, ppl can stay
psychological immature dispute profound insight into spirituality)
3
I think its also not as simple as that.
AF people are looking specifically at the physicalist subphase of anatta to be in their criteria of AF.
This
is why when I described my experience to Vineeto, she dismissed it,
saying her experience of universe is physical and inherently existing.
(I do not, because I underwent twofold emptiness).
Likewise
Richard said a few times that U.G. Krishnamurti could be experiencing
an actual freedom. U G is in the physicalist subphase of anatta. But
after some years he recanted that position, saying there is some
dissimilarities, although maintaining that U G is the closest to his
experience by far.
3
I
am sure these things play a role in it as well. However, there's a
distinct difference between John Tan and his capabilities to look at
various teachers and traditions and Richards. Richard simply lacks this
capacity and in my view, that is rooted in the two reasons I have
outlined above.
4
Yes
Although
i would add, anatta is truly rare. Most people out there only realise I
AM and up to one mind. It is quite rare as a matter of fact.. so it is
not easy to find convincing descriptions of anatta and total exertion.
Even John Tan said it is rare*. But that being said, there is truly a difference between John and Richard’s ability to discern.
“Though
buddha nature is plainness and most direct, these are still the steps.
If one does not know the process and said ‘yes this is it’… then it is
extremely misleading. For 99 percent [of ‘realized’/’enlightened’
persons] what one is talking about is "I AMness", and has not gone
beyond permanence, still thinking [of] permanence, formless… ...all and
almost all will think of it along the line of "I AMness", all are like
the grandchildren of "AMness", and that is the root cause of duality.” -
John Tan, 2007
1
AF
belief is that they are their bodies, according to AF spirituality is
to believe that one is awareness. Probably a criticism of Advaita
Vedanta, not so much Buddhism.
I think Richard cherry picks his conclusions, it could have gone unnoticed 10 years ago, not so much anymore.
His personality suffers from megalomania which he himself cannot see.
Despite reading his descriptions on PCEs they never triggered an experience of them in my system.
HAIETMOBA for me seems to be a suppression tactic rather than a relaxing into experience.
1
A criticism of AF from the Dzogchen perspective.
DHARMAOVERGROUND.ORG
Imitating Freedom, a Buddhist critique of "Actual Freedom" - Discussion - www.dharmaoverground.org
2
The
unawareness that is spoken of here is similar to my impression of
suppression in using HAIETMOBA. Basically one pushes a certain
experience in place with force. Rigpa / Dzogchen is a release of the
force.
I
find self-inquiry here in my system doing the same thing, so I am not
sure one should go for I AM ness rather than anatta. But then I am more
into transmission based systems than sutra / manual ones.
1
Actually
all Dzogchen teachers I have come across leads students to I AM. At
least initially. And that is indeed the (initial, not fully matured)
rigpa of Dzogchen.
This
is so even for Arcaya Malcolm, as his long time student Kyle Dixon
himself said to me and showed me a post by Malcolm in his Zangthal
forum. I AM first, then anatta/emptiness later.
Unfortunately I cannot share that text outside, unless you are a member of that Zangthal forum
ZANGTHAL.COM
Forum Signup — Zangthal
Also
my experience of self enquiry wasn’t exactly very forceful. But yes one
should complement it with “dropping” as i wrote in atr guide
But i can share John Tan’s comments about Malcolm’s post:
JT: "This is like what I tell u and essentially emphasizing 明心非见性. 先明心, 后见性.
First is directly authenticating mind/consciousness 明心. There is the direct path like zen sudden enlightenment of one's original mind or mahamudra or dzogchen direct introduction of rigpa or even self enquiry of advaita -- the direct, immediate, perception of "consciousness" without intermediaries. They r the same.
However that is not realization of emptiness. Realization of emptiness is 见性. Imo there is direct path to 明心 but I have not seen any direct path to 见性 yet. If u go through the depth and nuances of our mental constructs, u will understand how deep and subtle the blind spots r.
Therefore emptiness or 空性 is the main difference between buddhism and other religions. Although anatta is the direct experiential taste of emptiness, there is still a difference between buddhist's anatta and selflessness of other religions -- whether it is anatta by experiential taste of the dissolution of self alone or the experiential taste is triggered by wisdom of emptiness.
The former focused on selflessness and whole path of practice is all about doing away with self whereas the later is abt living in the wisdom of emptiness and applying that insight and wisdom of emptiness to all phenomena.
As for emptiness there is the fine line of seeing through inherentness of Tsongkhapa and there is the emptiness free from extremes by Gorampa. Both r equally profound so do not talk nonsense and engaged in profane speech as in terms of result, ultimately they r the same (imo)."
JT: "This is like what I tell u and essentially emphasizing 明心非见性. 先明心, 后见性.
First is directly authenticating mind/consciousness 明心. There is the direct path like zen sudden enlightenment of one's original mind or mahamudra or dzogchen direct introduction of rigpa or even self enquiry of advaita -- the direct, immediate, perception of "consciousness" without intermediaries. They r the same.
However that is not realization of emptiness. Realization of emptiness is 见性. Imo there is direct path to 明心 but I have not seen any direct path to 见性 yet. If u go through the depth and nuances of our mental constructs, u will understand how deep and subtle the blind spots r.
Therefore emptiness or 空性 is the main difference between buddhism and other religions. Although anatta is the direct experiential taste of emptiness, there is still a difference between buddhist's anatta and selflessness of other religions -- whether it is anatta by experiential taste of the dissolution of self alone or the experiential taste is triggered by wisdom of emptiness.
The former focused on selflessness and whole path of practice is all about doing away with self whereas the later is abt living in the wisdom of emptiness and applying that insight and wisdom of emptiness to all phenomena.
As for emptiness there is the fine line of seeing through inherentness of Tsongkhapa and there is the emptiness free from extremes by Gorampa. Both r equally profound so do not talk nonsense and engaged in profane speech as in terms of result, ultimately they r the same (imo)."
明心非见性. 先明心, 后见性.
Means “Apprehending the mind is not realising its nature. First apprehend Mind, later realise its nature.”
Nature as in emptiness
ChNN
never stated that anywhere as far as I can tell from reading his
material or from his teachings I participated in online so I think that
is a personal interpretation.
The
only place I found something similar to an identity like I AM is where
he says you find out you are Vajrasattva so impurities fall away
naturally. Everywhere ChNN emphasizes looking into 'who' is having the
experience. This looks like self-inquiry from the outside but actually
is different experientially because one is in clarity.
Regarding
my take on self-inquiry I am just reporting on how it feels here, not
saying it objectively is something to avoid. I think it is something
specific to my system due to strong analysis capabilities of the brain.
So the self-inquiry might trigger unconscious processing of sensory
input.
Soh Wei Yu
I find the comparison of rigpa to I AM a bit confusing. For example in
the guide you mention that abiding in the I AM is a trap and won’t lead
to anatta, but this is exactly what is practiced in Dzogchen. I trust
you and Malcolm on this point though as you clearly have more experience
with these states than I do.One
does not abide in I AM in Dzogchen. In ChNN guru yoga one abides in the
same state as ChNN, how it works in other Dzogchen systems I don't
know. However Lama Lena transmissions feel a bit different from what I
can pickup on YouTube.
I
AM is missing on the emptiness part, this is true though. I didn't see
that until recently where it clicked that I AM practioners describing it
as something permanent that emptiness pierces through.
Chris Pedersen
I meant abiding in and stabilising rigpa, not I AM, though obviously
that’s an oversimplification. But if we’re equating rigpa and I AM, then
it would be the same thing.I
wasn't having ChNN particularly in mind, but really, all Dzogchen
teachers I've seen and come across lead students to I AM. (not
necessarily as a final stage)
But
yes, ChNN is included. It isn't even controversial. Kyle Dixon would
agree with me, in fact, he told me himself that Malcolm Smith points to I
AM as initial rigpa and is the said instant presence.
There's
an important aspect to the guru yoga taught by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
which brings out the aspect of I AMness or Pure Presence.
I wrote previously, quoting a text from ChNN:
"...We
sound another A and from that moment we are no longer working with
visualization, thinking, or judging, but are only being in that
presence. In particular, we notice who is doing this visualization, who
is being in this white A at the center of the gakhyil. We are not
looking at something in a dualistic way; we are being in that state, and
that is instant presence and our real condition."
--
this is a self-enquiry instruction pointing to the same realization,
exactly the same, even if you do not want to call it by those name.
ChNN pointing out the I AM (note that I am not suggesting that I AM is the limit of his insight):
5/12/2012
6:29 AM: Soh Wei Yu: "If you are in the state of instant presence, and
compare this sensation with the experience of emptiness, or clarity, or
in a different way you compare one with another, you discover that
presence is unique, that it always remains the same. But before we are
able to be in the state of presence, experiences are all different. So
that is the meaning of tsed la pheb:
5/12/2012
6:30 AM: Soh Wei Yu: Maturing: you discover really that the state of
instant presence or rigpa is unique. In our lives everything is an
experience, and there are not only three experiences."
5/12/2012 8:54 AM: John: What does he meant by not only three experiences
5/12/2012
9:43 AM: Soh Wei Yu: Emptiness (in the gap between thoughts that is
emptiness but there is nonetheless someone noticing that, a presence,
sounds like I AM), clarity (like movement, manifestation) and sensation
(sensation of pleasure incl sexual contact)
5/12/2012 9:45 AM: Soh Wei Yu: He said
5/12/2012
9:47 AM: Soh Wei Yu: "...when we are dissolving everything into
emptiness, in that moment we are discovering instant presence because we
are not only lost in emptiness, there is also someone noticing that,
there is a presence. So this is called instant presence. And you can
also have this instant presence with the experience of clarity and with
the experience of sensation, even with a strong sensation like sexual
contact. Of course, at this moment you can feel a very strong sensation
of pleasure and maybe you are generally distracted by it, but
?5/12/2012
9:48 AM: Soh Wei Yu: If you are a good practitioner you also notice the
instant presence. That is, you are not only enjoying the strong
sensation but at the same time
5/12/2012 9:48 AM: Soh Wei Yu: you are in instant presence.
5/12/2012
9:48 AM: Soh Wei Yu: Then followed by the ""If you are in the state of
instant presence, and compare this sensation with the experience of
emptiness... Etc
.....
ChNN also said before,
"Ranxin
minis means one does not simply remain in the condition of the
experience, but uses the experience as a method to find oneself in the
state of contemplation. In these experiences there is a presence. It is
not as if one has fainted or lost consciousness. There is somebody who
remains in it. There is no difference whatsoever whether this presence
is found in the experience of the person who is smiling or in the
experience of the person who is frightened, even though the experiences
are completely different. Minis does not mean that two things are
united, or that we think that they are the same. If we just say that the
nature of those things is not real, thus they are the same, then it
will remain as a mental construction. But if one goes through the
diverse experiences and hence finds that the true state of presence has
no difference, then the real state of nacog is one, and the presence is
called rigba (rig.pa.) If we say different experiences are not equal,
this is what we mean.
"Whether
it is calm, movement, or any one of hundreds of experiences, the
important thing is to know the difference between experience and
presence. When we know what is meant by rigba, we ought to know how to
integrate with all these aspects in our presence."
"So,
ugly or beautiful, positive or negative conditions, heavens or hells or
transmigration do not in any way affect the underlying nature of the
consciousness that is the state of the mirror itself." "that which is
noticing thoughts and that which is noticing no thoughts, that which
notices both conditions is Rigpa"
And
I can refer to you that Malcolm Smith post pointing to the distinction
between initial rigpa as I AMness and subsequent emptiness realisation,
if you guys are in the Zangthal forum.
As for some excerpts from other Dzogchen teachers besides ChNN pointing to I AMness:
Tenzin Wangyal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNK7g5xZu7w
Sogyal
Rinpoche: “Sometimes when I meditate, I don't use any particular
method. I just allow my mind to rest, and find, especially when I am
inspired, that I can bring my mind home and relax very quickly. I sit
quietly and rest in the nature of mind; I don't question or doubt
whether I am in the "cor-rect" state or not. There is no effort, only
rich understanding, wakefulness, and unshakable certainty. When I am in
the nature of mind, the ordinary mind is no longer there. There is no
need to sustain or confirm a sense of being: I simply am. A fundamental
trust is present. There is nothing in par-ticular to do… …If meditation
is simply to continue the flow of Rigpa after the introduction, how do
we know when it is Rigpa and when it is not? I asked Dilgo Khyentse
Rinpoche this ques-tion, and he replied with his characteristic
simplicity: "If you are in an unaltered state, it is Rigpa." If we are
not contriving or manipulating the mind in any way, but simply resting
in an unaltered state of pure and pristine awareness, then that is
Rigpa. If there is any contriving on our part or any kind of
manipulating or grasping, it is not. Rigpa is a state in which there is
no longer any doubt; there is not really a mind to doubt: You see
directly. If you are in this state, a complete, natural certainty and
confidence surge up with the Rigpa itself, and that is how you know.”
Lopon
Tenzin Namdak: "To clarify the Dzogchen view: "We are just what we are,
the Natural State which is like a mirror. It is clear and empty, and
yet it reflects everything, all possible existences and all possible
lifetimes. But it never changes and it does not depend on anything
else."
etc etc.. too many to list but you get the hang of it
....
Update: here's a description by Dzogchen teacher James Low
"I am a non-entity English
I am a non-entity French
I am a non-entity German
I am a non-entity Spanish
The
basic ground of my presence is undefinable, never constrained,
restricted or contaminated. I am open, ungraspable, naked, ever fresh –
the always already integrated empty presence.
Without
change or effort this state is also the infinite richness of all
possible appearances. Open and empty is not other than rich and full.
This is the open field within which gestures arise: gestures of
identity, of connection, of control, of limitation, of welcome, of
conflict. All of samsara and nirvana is just the play of possibilities
of this field of becoming.
When
fear, attachment and self-cherishing arise, they are the empty radiance
of the ungraspable nature. Relax and see that they go free by
themselves. Identity, intention, hope, fear, lostness, despair, all are
moments devoid of enduring essence. Without trying to change the
experience be present as the experiencer, the source; presence
inseparable from space.
I
am open, I am everything, I am just this, I am nothing. Whatever is
said or thought is mere play; nothing is nothing, everything is nothing,
nothing is everything.
I
am a non-entity. Our presence, this amazing, ungraspable facticity of
awareness is also an illusion. Nothing, something, everything, anything,
just this thing, nothing – these moments are not separate and other,
they are the non-dual ungraspable richness of the open ground.
I
am, a non-entity. I am a non-entity. I, am a non-entity. Problems are
mere parsing and punctuation. Start with ‘I am’, awaken to ‘I am’, relax
as ‘I am’."
YOUTUBE.COM
Being the Mirror, Not the Reflection
1
Also,
the direct introduction of Dzogchen also can lead to I AM realization.
For example, Tinh Panh realised the I AM during Malcolm Smith's direct
introduction. He kinda thanked me for introducing him to Malcolm as I
was kind of an influence for leading him to Malcolm Smith.
Those who don't get it yet can do self-introduction practices like rushan and semzins.
Kyle Dixon also said,
badge icon
"I’ve
never met anyone who gained any insight into emptiness at direct
introduction. Plenty who recognized rigpa kechigma though.
I
don’t presume to know better than luminaries like Longchenpa and Khenpo
Ngachung who state emptiness isn’t actually known until third vision
and so on. You may presume otherwise and in that case we can agree to
disagree."
- Kyle Dixon
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
The Degrees of Rigpa
Soh yes then you are right.
You could call it abiding in I AM as it is your own presence, what ChNN calls instant presence.
Doing this without a master is different though. Like doing self-inquiry with Ramana Maharshi and without.
I
think I had compartmentalized I AM as something different (presence,
but zero thoughts) because of the relationship with Hinduism. But yes
this is your own presence, the feeling that you exist etc.
Whether
you realize I AM with or without a master, it is exactly the same
realization. Just that without a very realised teacher, it's hard to
advance from there, and tendency is to get stuck. Unfortunately even
lineage teachers are often stuck at the I AM/one mind phases. (I have
personal experiences like that as well) John Tan also met many lineage
masters, but they all couldn't lead him to anatta and emptiness, he had
to figure it all out by himself by contemplating on the Buddha's
teachings. Having known John Tan, I can tell you his wisdom faculty is
incredibly sharp, so most of us dull ones like myself will never hope to
figure it all out without a teacher, or someone like John Tan who
pointed out to me. Well he is not teaching others formally but by his
and AtR sharing many have come to progress from I AM to realise anatta
as well (40+)
Likewise
if you are studying under someone who is very clear, like Malcolm, it
is safe, because you are pointed to the right view, etc.
As
Malcolm himself said, due to the current degeneration of Buddhadharma,
it is the case that in all traditions of Buddhism it is very rare to
find someone who realise emptiness.
(Although I would argue that this may be the case even back in olden days:
'Introduction to the Middle Way: Chandrakirti's Madhyamakavatara with Commentary by Jamgon Mipham',
"There
is a story that once when Atisha was in Tibet, he received news of the
death of the master Maitripa. He was deeply grieved, and on being
questioned about the reasons for his sorrow, he replied that Buddhism
was in decline in India and that everywhere there was syncretism and
confusion. Until then, Atisha continued, there had been only two masters
in the whole of India, Maitripa and himself, capable of discerning the
correct teaching from the doctrines and practices of the reviving Hindu
schools. The time is sure to come, Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche commented,
and perhaps it is already here, when there will be an analogous
situation in the West. Only the correct establishment of the view will
enable one to find one's way through the religious confusion of the
modern West and to distinguish authentic Buddhism from the New Age
"self-help" versions that are already taking hold.”
)
John Tan also reiterated recently that all the traditions are talking about the same authentication:
William Lam: It's non conceptual.
John
Tan: It’s non conceptual. Yup. Okay. Presence is not conceptual
experience, it has to be direct. And you just feel pure sense of
existence. Means people ask you, before birth, who are you? You just
authenticate the I, that is yourself, directly. So when you first
authenticate that I, you are damn happy, of course. When young, that
time, wah… I authenticate this I… so you thought that you’re
enlightened, but then the journey continues. So this is the first time
you taste something that is different. It is… It is before thoughts,
there is no thoughts. Your mind is completely still. You feel still, you
feel presence, and you know yourself. Before birth it is Me, after
birth, it is also Me, 10,000 years it’s still this Me, 10,000 year
before, it’s still this Me. So you authenticate that, your mind is just
that and authenticate your own true being, so you don't doubt that. In
later phase…
Kenneth Bok: Presence is this I AM?
John
Tan: Presence is the same as I AM. Presence is the same as… of course,
other people may disagree, but actually they're referring to the same
thing. The same authentication, the same what... even in Zen is still
the same.
But
in later phase, I conceive that as just the thought realm. Means, in
the six, I always call the six entries and six exits, so there is the
sound and there’s all these… During that time, you always say I’m not
sound, I’m not the appearance, I AM the Self that is behind all these
appearances, alright? So, sounds, sensations, all these come and go,
your thoughts come and go, those are not me, correct? This is the
ultimate Me. The Self is the ultimate Me. Correct?
William Lam: So, is that nondual? The I AM stage. It’s non-conceptual, was it nondual?
John
Tan: It’s nonconceptual. Yes, it is nondual. Why is it nondual? At that
moment, there is no duality at all, at that moment when you experience
the Self, you cannot have duality, because you are authenticated
directly as IT, as this pure sense of Being. So, it’s completely I,
there’s nothing else, just I. There’s nothing else, just the Self. I
think, many of you have experienced this, the I AM. So, you probably
will go and visit all the Hinduism, sing song with them, meditate with
them, sleep with them, correct? Those are the young days. I meditate
with them, hours after hours, meditate, sit with them, eat with them,
sing song with them, drum with them. Because this is what they preach,
and you find these group of people, all talking about the same language.
So
this experience is not a normal experience, correct? I mean, within the
probably 15 years of my life or 17 years of my life, my first... when I
was 17, when you first experienced that, wah, what is that? So, it is
something different, it is non conceptual, it is non dual, and all
these. But it is very difficult to get back the experience. Very, very
difficult, unless you're in when you're in meditation, because you
reject the relative, the appearances. So, it is, although they may say
no, no, it is always with me, because it's Self, correct? But you don't
actually get back the authentication, just pure sense of existence, just
me, because you reject the rest of that appearances, but you do not
know during that time. Only after anatta, then you realize that this,
when you when you hear sound without the background, that experience is
exactly the same, the taste is exactly the same as the presence. The I
AM Presence. So, only after anatta, when the background is gone, then
you realize eh, this has the exact same taste as the I AM experience.
When you are not hearing, you are just in the vivid appearances, the
obvious appearances now, correct. That experience is also the I AM
experience. When you are even now feeling your sensation without the
sense of self directly. That experience is exactly the same as I AM
taste. It is nondual. Then you realize, I call, actually, everything is
Mind. Correct? Everything. So, so before that, there is an ultimate
Self, a background, and you reject all those transient appearances.
After that, that background is gone, you know? And then you are just all
these appearances.
William Lam: You are the appearance? You are the sound? You are the…
John
Tan: Yes. So, so, that is an experience. That is an experience. So
after that, you realize something. What did you realise? You realise all
along it is the what, that is obscuring you. So… in a person, for a
person that is in I AM experience, the pure presence experience, they
will always have a dream. They will say that I hope I can 24 by 7 always
in that state, correct? So when I was young, 17. But then after 10
years you are still thinking. Then after 20 years, you say how come I
need to always meditate? You always find time to meditate, maybe I don't
study also meditate, you give me a cave last time I will just meditate
inside.
So,
the the thing that you always dream that you can one day be pure
consciousness, just as pure consciousness, live as pure consciousness,
but you never get it. And even if you meditate, occasionally probably
you can have that oceanic experience. Only when you after anatta, when
that self behind is gone, you are not 24 by 7, maybe most of your day,
waking state, not so much of 24 by 7, you dream that time still very
karmic depending on what you engage, doing business, all these. (John
mimics dreaming) How come ah, the business…
So,
so, in normal waking state, you are effortless. Probably that is the,
during I AM phase, what you think you are going to achieve, you achieve
after the insight of anatta. So you become clear, you are probably in
the right path. But there are further insights you have to go through.
When you try to penetrate the… one of them is, I feel that I become very
physical. I am just narrating, going through my experience. Maybe that
time… because you experience the relative, the appearances directly. So
everything becomes very physical. So that is how you come to understand
the meaning, how concepts actually affect you. Then what exactly is
physical? How does the idea of physical come about, correct? That time I
still do not know about emptiness, and all these kind of things, to me
it is not so important.
So,
I start going into what exactly is physical, what exactly is being
physical? Sensation. But why is sensation known as physical, and what is
being physical? How did I get the idea of being physical? So, I began
to enquire into this thing. That, eh, actually on top of that, there is
still further things to deconstruct, that is the meaning… that, just
like self, I’m attached to the meaning of self, and you create a
construct, it becomes a reification. Same thing, physicality also. So,
you deconstruct the concepts surrounding physicality. Correct? So, when
you deconstruct that, then I began to realize that all along, we try to
understand, even after the experience of let’s say, anatta and all
these… when we analyze, and when we think and try to understand
something, we are using existing scientific concepts, logic, common day
to day logic and all these to understand something. And it is always
excluding consciousness. Even if you experience, you can lead a
spiritual path you know, but when you think and analyze something,
somehow you always exclude consciousness from the equation of
understanding something. Your concept is always very materialistic. We
always exclude consciousness from the whole equation.
DOCS.GOOGLE.COM
ATR Meeting 28 October 2020
1
Soh Wei Yu
Thanks for the clarification. So to summarise, in Dzogchen you are
initially pointed to rigpa/I AM and through continued practice (with the
right guidance) you see through the “I”ness of it similar to the AtR
contemplations. Hence you arrive at the same point. I hadn’t thought of
it this way.The writings, discussions help even though I already have the Dzogchen transmissions.
I
think you need right conceptual understanding as well because otherwise
you will difficulty communicating with others, internal
misunderstanding etc.
But
I probably put less emphasis on it than you. I think the degeneration
of Buddhism is partly caused by the obsession and cultivation of the
intellect. ChNN's teacher had a simple mind, wasn't a big intellectual.
But sometimes intellectual descriptions are necessary when describing Hinduism vs Buddhism.
Chris Pedersen
Yes, I agree that making progress on the path isn’t about conceptual
understanding. But without it, it’s easy to follow a wrong teaching and
get stuck for many years (I’ve experienced this personally). Even if you
have a teacher they could have no idea what they’re talking about, so I
don’t just blindly follow someone. That’s why I’m very grateful for
discovering AtR which presents everything in a pragmatic way.You could take part in a Dzogchen transmission if you are interested. I am grateful for having mine as a backup.
I don't follow cults anymore, I just do my own thing.
1
In
instant presence there is no duality according to ChNN. So merely just
feeling you exist, you know the I AM and there is still duality, then
you are not in instant presence.
1
Chris Pedersen
Yeah, I‘ll be receiving a transmission in the near future. I don’t
currently practice Dzogchen or claim to be a Dzogchen practitioner. I
see this as more of a discussion on an intellectual level based on my
understanding.It
is important after discovering instant presence to eventually realised
anatta. This is the key to make instant presence effortless, full-blown,
non-dual in all sense gates.
According
to Kyle Dixon, Dzogchen practice is resting in moment of unfabricated
consciousness in sense gates, with mindfulness and awareness that
directly hit thought as it arises and then is not distracted by thought.
Then also direct perception of vidyā. The first will lead to anatta
realization, the second two fold emptiness. It is now subject and object
are recognized as empty. But also the semdzins can expedite insight.
Seeing through thought is how anatta occurred for Kyle. The Rig Pa Rang
Shar says, as thought arise (shar grol) then as one gets more familiar
in the practice thought arise by themselves (rang grol) and finally in
realization as if they never arose in the first place (ye grol).
Non-arising of thought is what led to insight of no background for Kyle
and then whole intense realization. Time is held together by thought and
substratum delusion of background knower
Also,
Kyle Dixon
’s description of his anatta realization: https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../advise-from...AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Advice from Kyle Dixon
1
1
Chris Pedersen
The authentication of instant presence as pure sense of existence is
nondual, nonconceptual, etc. But do you have the same taste in all
senses and manifestations effortlessly? That is important and anatta
leads to that. http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/.../thusnesss-six...AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment
Same taste almost 100%, mind very silent. Winning or losing, no difference. Everything is rolling on, nobody doing it.
However suffering a bit from energy imbalances due to prior energy practice. So I don't do much, it is more of a letting go.
3
This
all makes sense to me. But what it leaves me wondering is, does this
mean Dzogchen teachers are all wrong in emphasizing the critical
importance of direct introduction given live as being vital to the
recognition of rigpa?
If
the initial realization of rigpa is the same as I AM, then it's clear
there are many ways to enter this realization, books and recordings
could work perfectly well.
As far as I know even Malcolm emphasizes that this point is vital.
Direct
pointing in various ways is used not only in Dzogchen, but even in Zen
it is used - "directly pointing to the human Mind" 直指人心. As Yuan Yin Lao
Ren said, in earliest Zen, the Zen Master mostly just pointed out
people's Mind, it is only later that koans developed to help
practitioners. Many people awaken through that, not only Tinh Panh.
In
Advaita too, direct pointing may be used. For example John Wheeler
awakened to the I AM after meeting his teacher Sailor Bob Adamson, and
for this reason he always encourage people to meet a live teacher to be
directly pointed out, and said reading from book is much less potent (or
something like that) - https://awakeningclaritynow.com/awakening-to-the-natural.../
AWAKENINGCLARITYNOW.COM
Awakening to the Natural State: Guest Teaching by John Wheeler – Awakening Clarity Now by Fred Davis
Direct introduction is not merely with words, there is non conceptual knowing when the teacher does it.
This is why Jax is not teaching correct Dzogchen but more like sutra style pointing out.
A lot of people say the non conceptual pointing out doesn't matter and they are all wrong. In my opinion.
Zen is not exactly using sutras for its direct introduction either.
A
key Zen story, shared by all the schools: Once, the Buddha was giving a
talk on Vulture Peak. In the middle of the talk he paused and held up a
flower. Everyone was silent. Only Mahakasyapa broke into a smile.
Buddha then said, “I have the Treasury of the True Dharma Eye, the
ineffable mind of Nirvana, the real form of No Form, the flawless gate
of the Teaching. Not dependent on words, it is a special transmission
outside tradition. I now entrust it to Mahakasyapa.”
LIONSROAR.COM
What Is Zen Buddhism and How Do You Practice It?
1
Try this Zen video https://youtu.be/APjXpUnHw20
YOUTUBE.COM
A Teaching From Zen Master Jinen
Yes “I AM” as it is understood in AtR is the first step in Dzogchen practice, and then insight is refined from there.
2
Chris Pedersen
if you have any of ChNN’s Longsal texts, there are a couple instances
where he makes it quite explicit that “instant presence” is synonymous
with what we would understand I AM to be in this AtR model. Instant
presence is like an unripened form of rig pa in that way, used as a
support for all practices, but not yet refined through insight. 1
"Everything is rolling on, nobody doing it. "
For many, no-self is more towards no doership rather then pellucid luminosity.
Have you read this, you went through all phases (or rather, aspects)? http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../different...
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Different Degress of No-Self: Non-Doership, Non-dual, Anatta, Total Exertion and Dealing with Pitfalls
Definitely
number 1 + God realization happened funnily enough through Dzogchen.
Later on it seems the God belief purged away on its own.
There is still a subtle belief of self that is seen through from time to time but I am not so concerned with it right now.
I can't predict whether I practice or not, it is more a happening on its own.
Sometimes
shifts happen by reading something, like there was someone writing in
this group that the sense of self was just sensations in the head
coupled with thoughts.
That invoked some fears and cleaned some deeper beliefs.
The other day I was reading an article about British military history and the sense of self disappeared temporarily.
Then I sensed into the writer of the article and felt he had no self.
Kyle Dixon, are the Longsal books necessary?
I only have Guru Yoga, Precious Vase, Supreme Source and Cycle of Day and Night.
I
never met ChNN in real life. Yesterday I was lying in bed contemplating
how fortunate I was to meet him, since he really was unique and nobody
has come forward with the same level of clarity and simplicity in his
teachings.
Oh
I was just saying if you have those texts there are more detailed
statements in them that pertain to this topic, but no, they are not
necessary to possess.
1
Chris Pederson
I
see. In that case the next major breakthrough for you will be full
blown anatta realisation. It will be your most major breakthrough yet
when you realise it.
There are a number of ways to go about it.
Contemplating the two stanzas of anatta was how John Tan realised it and recommend:
Malcolm Smith also wrote and explained anatta here:
Kyle Dixon also had some good advice here and an account of how he realised: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../advise-from-kyle_10...
Mr. RD wrote how he broke through to anatta here: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../robert-dominiks...
As for myself, the two nondual contemplations especially Bahiya Sutta has been crucial for my own breakthrough: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../two-types-of...
Mentioning
Malcolm, Kyle, Robert as they are all also students of ChNN, also
Malcolm was asked by Kunzang Dechen Lingpa to teach Dzogchen. I can also
recommend Malcolm’s teachings.
Besides
the impersonality and I AMness you are experiencing, it is also
important to practice the other “four aspects of I AM” like the
intensity of luminosity of the foreground (bring the taste of Presence
and luminosity from the background into the five senses) which is very
much part of trekchod practice, as I wrote above:
“According
to Kyle Dixon, Dzogchen practice is resting in moment of unfabricated
consciousness in sense gates, with mindfulness and awareness that
directly hit thought as it arises and then is not distracted by thought.
Then also direct perception of vidyā. The first will lead to anatta
realization, the second two fold emptiness. It is now subject and object
are recognized as empty. But also the semdzins can expedite insight.
Seeing through thought is how anatta occurred for Kyle. The Rig Pa Rang
Shar says, as thought arise (shar grol) then as one gets more familiar
in the practice thought arise by themselves (rang grol) and finally in
realization as if they never arose in the first place (ye grol).
Non-arising of thought is what led to insight of no background for Kyle
and then whole intense realization. Time is held together by thought and
substratum delusion of background knower”
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
On Anatta (No-Self), Emptiness, Maha and Ordinariness, and Spontaneous Perfection
Thanks, I will read what you have written and the links etc and contemplate. Maybe a breakthrough will come soon.
It
seems there is a dismissal of instant presence / I AM related to the
belief 'I am the body' which ties into a belly knot. This knot has been
lessened in time.
The
burning desire you wrote about in getting to I AM realization seems for
me not to be related to a specific desire for realization but more of a
union / love for the guru. I will see if I can dive into that.
2