Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Actually I should just mention one thing. Unconscious Thought. The average person who has never practiced is continuously engaged in unconscious thinking. To have unconscious thought is to be absorbed completely in the thought. To be completely identified with the thought, so that you are looking out at the world from the thought. That is unconscious thought. " I hate Julie" is an unconscious thought, there is no awarenes of the presence of this thought, only Julie and your hate for her, The thought is in the drivers seat.
"it is the one (and only)" is another example.... ok ok never mind.
X: What you are talking about, the awareness and sense of being is simply the luminosity aspect. It is not the empty aspect I am talking about.
S9: Could you please explain your ideas about the difference between luminosity and emptiness aspects to me, right here and now? I’m not sure that jumping around and explaining multiple phases is helping me very much. I believe if we address a topic at a time in some detail, it might be more useful to me.
Respectfully,
S9
The luminous, clear, vivid, cognizant and aware nature is the relative nature of mind. And all that we experience is Mind, it is not that Mind is something other than everything we experience. That Mind (the individual mindstream, stream of luminous-manifestations) is in fact empty, dependently originated, essenceless nature of Awareness is its ultimate nature. Meaning, not an Atman-Brahman, for the Mind (individual mindstream) is empty of any permanent independent or ultimate ontological essence. Just vivid self-luminous appearances, which are empty and dependently originated. We must first have clear non-dual experience (All is Mind) then attempt to see the non-inherent and dependently originated nature of all arisings.
Anyway the Dalai Lama explained quite clearly:
Through the gates of the five sense organs a being sees, hears, smells, tastes and comes into contact with a host of external forms, objects and impressions. Let the form, sound, smell, taste, touch and mental events which are the relations of the six senses be shut off. When this is done the recollection of past events on which the mind tends to dwell will be completely discontinued and the flow of memory cut off. Similarly, plans for the future and contemplation of future action must not be allowed to arise. It is necessary to create a space in place of all such processes of thought if one is to empty the mind of all such processes of thought. Freed from all these processes there will remain a pure, clean, distinct and quiescent mind. Now let us examine what sort of characteristics constitute the mind when it has attained this stage. We surely do possess some thing called mind, but how are we to recognize its existence? The real and essential mind is what is to be found when the entire load of gross obstructions and aberrations (i.e. sense impressions, memories, etc.) has been cleared away. Discerning this aspect of real mind, we shall discover that, unlike external objects, its true nature is devoid of form or color; nor can we find any basis of truth for such false and deceptive notions as that mind originated from this or that, or that it will move from here to there, or that it is located in such-and-such a place. When it comes into contact with no object mind is like a vast, boundless void, or like a serene, illimitable ocean. When it encounters an object it at once has cognizance of it, like a mirror instantly reflecting a person who stands in front of it. The true nature of mind consists not only in taking clear cognizance of the object but also in communicating a concrete experience of that object to the one experiencing it.* Normally, our forms of sense cognition, such as eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, etc., perform their functions on external phenomena in a manner involving gross distortion. Knowledge resulting from sense cognition, being based on gross external phenomena, is also of a gross nature. When this type of gross stimulation is shut out, and when concrete experiences and clear cognizance arise from within, mind assumes the characteristics of infinite void similar to the infinitude of space. But this void is not to be taken as the true nature of mind. We have become so habituated to consciousness of the form and color of gross objects that, when we make concentrated introspection into the nature of mind, it is, as I have said, found to be a vast, limitless void free from any gross obscurity or other hindrances. Nevertheless, this does not mean that we have discerned the subtle, true nature of the mind. What has been explained above concerns the state of mind in relation to the concrete experience and clear cognizance by the mind which are its function, but it describes only the relative nature of mind.
There are in addition several other aspects and states of mind. In other words, taking mind as the supreme basis, there are many attributes related to it. Just as an onion consists of layer upon layer that can be peeled away, so does every sort of object have a number of layers; and this is no less true of the nature of mind as explained here; it, too, has layer within layer, slate within state.
All compounded things are subject to disintegration. Since experience and knowledge are impermanent and subject to disintegration, the mind, of which they are functions (nature), is not something that remains constant and eternal. From moment to moment it undergoes change and disintegration. This transience of mind is one aspect of its nature. However, as we have observed, its true nature has many aspects, including consciousness of concrete experience and cognizance of objects. Now let us make a further examination in order to grasp the meaning of the subtle essence of such a mind. Mind came into existence because of its own cause. To deny that the origination of mind is dependent on a cause, or to say that it is a designation given as a means of recognizing the nature of mind aggregates, is not correct. With our superficial observance, mind, which has concrete experience and clear cognizance as its nature, appears to be a powerful, independent, subjective, completely ruling entity. However, deeper analysis will reveal that this mind, possessing as it does the function of experience and cognizance, is not a self-created entity but Is dependent on other factors for its existence. Hence it depends on something other than itself. This non-independent quality of the mind substance is its true nature which in turn is the ultimate reality of the self.
Of these two aspects, viz. the ultimate true nature of mind and a knowledge of that ultimate true nature, the former is the base, the latter an attribute. Mind (self) is the basis and all its different states are attributes. However, the basis and its attributes have from the first pertained to the same single essence. The non-self-created (depending on a cause other than itself) mind entity (basis) and its essence, sunyata, have unceasingly existed as the one, same, inseparable essence from beginningless beginning. The nature of sunyata pervades all elements. As we are now and since we cannot grasp or comprehend the indestructible, natural, ultimate reality (sunyata) of our own minds, we continue to commit errors and our defects persist.
There is a Classic Zen Koan that goes like this.....
A monk goes to the zen master to express his understanding. He says "All dharmas resolve into only One Mind". The master replies "What does One Mind resolve into?"
No words here, only practice.
This is Buddha Dharma, not personal truth. Take this matter to any teacher/sangha in lineage, Vajrayana, Theravada, or Zen.
I see this as very simple. There is only the luminosity of Awareness, all else is a temporary dream, coming and going. But the dream is none other than luminosity temporarily allowing mental forms.
Because these mental forms/thoughts are temporary, they are in no way equal to the constant luminosity of Awareness. One thing is constant however. Awareness is aware of Awareness.
Everything else, which includes aspects, is merely detail. The descriptions of this dreaming mind are endless. Where do you differ in this?
I see this as very simple. There is only the luminosity of Awareness, all else is a temporary dream, coming and going. But the dream is none other than luminosity temporarily allowing mental forms.
Because these mental forms/thoughts are temporary, they are in no way equal to the constant luminosity of Awareness. One thing is constant however. Awareness is aware of Awareness.
Everything else, which includes aspects, is merely detail. The descriptions of this dreaming mind are endless. Where do you differ in this?
Warm Regards,
S9
What you described is still dualistic. Since there is 'luminosity' and 'all else'. When one realises nondual, one sees the one as many, the observer and the observed are one and the same.
As Rupert Spira, who is an Advaita teacher, says -
there is a further aspect of the investigation which involves a
deep exploration of the body and the world which culminates in the
experiential understanding that Knowing Presence is not just 'behind and
allowing all states and experiences' but is actually the substance out of
which all states and appearances are made.
But even this is still not the Emptiness spoken in Buddhism.
In Buddhism we do not talk about an unchanging substance in which phenomena pop in and out.
In short,
Although there is non-duality in Advaita Vedanta, and no-self in Buddhism, Advaita Vedanta rest in an “Ultimate Background” (making it dualistic), whereas Buddhism eliminates the background completely and rest in the emptiness nature of phenomena; arising and ceasing is where pristine awareness is. In Buddhism, there is no eternality, only timeless continuity (timeless as in vividness in present moment but change and continue like a wave pattern). There is no changing thing, only change. - Thusness
What you described is still dualistic. Since there is 'luminosity' and 'all else'. When one realises nondual, one sees the one as many, the observer and the observed are one and the same.
As Rupert Spira, who is an Advaita teacher, says -
there is a further aspect of the investigation which involves a deep exploration of the body and the world which culminates in the experiential understanding that Knowing Presence is not just 'behind and allowing all states and experiences' but is actually the substance out of which all states and appearances are made.
But even this is still not the Emptiness spoken in Buddhism.
In Buddhism we do not talk about an unchanging substance in which phenomena pop in and out.
In short,
Although there is non-duality in Advaita Vedanta, and no-self in Buddhism, Advaita Vedanta rest in an “Ultimate Background” (making it dualistic), whereas Buddhism eliminates the background completely and rest in the emptiness nature of phenomena; arising and ceasing is where pristine awareness is. In Buddhism, there is no eternality, only timeless continuity (timeless as in vividness in present moment but change and continue like a wave pattern). There is no changing thing, only change. - Thusness
Yes, it is the absolute "elimination of the background" without remainder. It is the affirmation of multiplicity, not dispersion, but multiplicity. The world references nothing but the world. Each thing is radiant expression of itself. There is no support, no ground. No awareness. No awareness.
"All dharmas are resolved in One Mind. One Mind resolves into...."
There is the radiant world. just the radiant world. No awareness.
That is the Abbott slapping floor with his hand. The red floor is red. Spontaneous function.
Yes, it is the absolute "elimination of the background" without remainder. It is the affirmation of multiplicity, not dispersion, but multiplicity. The world references nothing but the world. Each thing is radiant expression of itself. There is no support, no ground. No awareness. No awareness.
"All dharmas are resolved in One Mind. One Mind resolves into...."
There is the radiant world. just the radiant world. No awareness.
That is the Abbott slapping floor with his hand. The red floor is red. Spontaneous function.
Very nice expression of No Mind... thanks.
First there is the one constant vs changing multiplicity... then all multiplicity is resolved into One Mind... then One Mind resolves into No Mind, just radiant world.
Multiplicity seen correctly is one function/process (Tao without separation), when seen deeper it is one mind (witnessing mind, which witnesses multiplicity, but seemingly apart from multiplicity, like the king over his kingdom), seen even more deeply it is no mind, whatsoever only Awareness. But even that last, Awareness is aware of itself. This is not a dead process with no awareness whatsoever. That my friend is an impossibilty.
Without Awareness, it would be as if nothing ever happened, not even this dreaming mind/world.
If I had run into what you are saying here to me, before I actually experiencing what I am saying here to you, I might have easily been impressed. Obviously you have put much thought into this conceptual layout of the facts.
But, I always look to experience directly, and what you are saying simply isn’t what I am witnessing. “Sorry.” I know that "I Am," and without that, nothing else is. We should above all trust direct experience over assembled facts.
It makes little difference to me how many agree on a mistaken view, it is still mistaken.
The best I can hope for you is, that you too will begin to look more directly, come upon actual Reality, and put away theories once and for all.
Richard Herman said 'Radiant world'. 'That is the Abbott slapping floor with his hand. The red floor is red.'
If the world is radiant, luminous, alive, it is nothing dead or nihilistic.
The world in its diversity is one seamless aliveness, but not a 'you' who witnesses it, there is no center of awareness. The watcher is what is dead, the world is what is alive.
Nondual when experienced is nothing close to dead. And this is not a theory or an assembled fact, but what I have witnessed myself.
It is as J Krishnamurti puts it:
You look at this magnificent tree and you wonder who is watching whom and presently there is no watcher at all. Everything is so intensely alive and there is only life, and the watcher is as dead as that leaf... Utterly still... listening without a moment of action, without recording, without experiencing, only seeing and listening... really the outside is the inside and the inside is the outside, and it is difficult, almost impossible to separate them. (p. 214)
........
So we are asking is there a holistic awareness of all the senses, therefore there is never asking for the 'more'. I wonder if you follow all this ?. Are we together in this even partially? And where there is this total - fully aware - of all the senses, awareness of it - not you are aware of it.... the awareness of the senses in themselves - then there is no centre - in which there is awareness of the wholeness. If you consider it, you will see that to suppress the senses... is contradictory, conflicting, sorrowful.... To understand the truth you must have complete sensitivity. Do you understand Sirs? Reality demands your whole being; you must come to it with your body, mind, and heart as a total human being..... Insight is complete total attention....
When this is a fact not an idea, then dualism and division between observer and observed comes to an end. The observer is the observed - they are not separate states. The observer and the observed are a joint phenomenon and when you experience that directly then you will find that the thing which you have dreaded as emptiness which makes you seek escape into various forms of sensation including religion - ceases and you are able to face it and be it.
- Collection of K teachings from the KFT CDROM
Lastly, Awareness is not aware of itself from a vantage point or a center in Non-Dual, rather, it is the senses, the radiant world itself, that is self-aware. Put poetically, the scenery sees, the sound hears, the thought thinks. As Kenneth Folk puts it:
(*Thitatto: "(for instance Kenneth referred to Krishnamurti saying something like the observed and the observer is one)."
Kenneth Folk: Thitatto, I'm glad you picked up on this apparent inconsistency. Krishnamurti would have done better to say that "observing (the sense of observation) and the observed are one." Although we must admit that Krishnamurti's phrase is much more elegant, it has serious problems as there is no observer to be found. There is, however, the sense of observation, and this is what he meant by "observer." By saying that the observer and the observed are one, he was saying that the universe is "one without a second," or "not-two." But, more than making a philosophical statement, he was pointing to a particular situation (experence?) in which duality does not arise.
A related matter is the no-dog. The experience of "Self" described by the advaitists can be seen as both a means and an end. It's an end in that it is a refuge, a trans-personal perspective that is prior to the arising of a separate self, and therefore upstream from suffering. The no-dog knows no suffering. But in the no-dog, there is still a tenuous thread of delusion; the small personal self has been superseded by the universal and impersonal Self. So the no-dog is also a means; by dwelling as the no-dog "Self," you are just one tiny step away from the simplest thing, aka primordial awareness, which has no reference point, either personal or transpersonal. There is no self, big, small or otherwise, from this simplest of all perspectives. It knows Itself. There is no localized sense of knowing standing apart from what is known.There's just the entire phenomenological world, which is self-aware.
I'm sorry if this seems convoluted. It's not nearly so confusing in real life. But you can see why so many have failed so miserably to speak clearly about it; it's just really hard to talk about.)
First of all, I want to thank you for all of the effort that you have put in answering me. I am truly sorry that we cannot agree on things. It would be so nice. : ^ )
Obviously, if Consciousness (AKA Awareness) is ‘One’ (and I think that we both agree on this), it is not tiny little consciousnesses split into pieces like the ego self would have us believe. But, this One Consciousness manifests in a subjective manner, feels everywhere center. This why even when my cat looks at me, he thinks "me" about himself, even if he doesn’t use words. I can see it in his eyes.
This feeling of ‘me’ is behind/before all definitions. This isn’t a mistake; the feeling of ‘me’ is just as real as the luminosity of consciousness.
The reason I call your definition of the world a dead thing is without this Awareness, nothing would be, nothing could be seen, could be heard, etc. It would be machine like. It would be like asking you computer, which is alive with electricity, and functioning, how its day was. Ridiculous. This is because it is a function without self-awareness, (AKA self reflective).
I am sensitive enough to feel the aliveness of nature. I fully realize that it is conscious in its own way. I don’t think it says that "I am struggling towards the sun" or "I am drinking up the rain," but I do believe that it feels/taps into awareness also.
I can’t be sure of what exactly a tree feels about consciousness. I don’t think anyone can. But, I know that more than likely it feels its tree self as not being say the grass growing beneath it. These vegetative brothers actually have chemical war against each other for preferred territory, nourishment and sunlight. Watch any weed. They have an individuality of sorts, and they know it. Life is not just a function.
It is true that we all dip into this ‘One’ consciousness. Yet, at the same time, this ‘One’ consciousness is the personal ‘I Am’ in every sngle one of us. It never manifests without this feeling. I believe this is because the 'One' says ‘I Am’ in everything, and it is not wrong. It is you. It is me. It is a tree. And at the same time it is 'One'.
I do not mean this as a Pantheist might. It remain All of the One in each thing.
It is true that we all dip into this ‘One’ consciousness. Yet, at the same time, this ‘One’ consciousness is the personal ‘I Am’ in every sngle one of us. It never manifests without this feeling. I believe this is because the 'One' says ‘I Am’ in everything, and it is not wrong. It is you. It is me. It is a tree. And at the same time it is 'One'.
The I AM will feel individual until after the maturation of the I AM experience till one experiences the 'I' not as an individual Self but as the infinite Self. Any sense of individuality dissolves like a drop of salt dissolves into the great ocean. When the lumps of salt ate dissolved in the ocean they merge in it indistinguishably. You can no longer distinguish or separate the individual I AM from the Cosmic Self, as the individual I dissolves away, leaving impersonal AMness. This is still the Centered Stage as Fred. J. Hanna puts it, but is an infinite, boundless, impersonal center. As Thusness told me many years before, there are 4 different phases of the I AM which he did not mention in his stages of enlightenment article, including what I mentioned about first the individual I AM and later the infinite I AM. It is also similar to what he mentioned about the 'impersonality' aspect of AMness recently.
I also found a similar article 1 to 2 years ago on the different phases of the Centered (I AM) Stage. Whereas the De-Centered stage is beginning to uncover about non-dual and anatta, it still has more to go and I do not agree with what he said completely as he seems to see no-self and non-dual as stage like rather than as dharma seal. Insight have not matured.
But anyway here is the summary from the interesting article:
The Precentered Stage begins with the first experience of being centered. It is only the beginning. Some persons have many transcendent experiences and never get past this stage. Continued practice in the Precentered Stage produces the insights that lead to becoming centered and the stability that comes with it.
Substage 1: Precenterednes begins with a glimpse of a transcendent reality beyond ordinary perception of hte world and mundane cognitive processes. The reality glimpsed is recognized as being beyond ordinary subject/object distinctions.
Substage 2: Merging with the transcendental reality to the point of full identification with it. Once again, this involves transcending the world of phenomena and moving beyond subject/object distinctions.
The Centered Stage
At this stage a person intuitively understands the meaning of the term "pure consciousness." Consciousness is understood as the center, focus, and origin of reality. It is seen as separate from mind and self, which serve only allow and debase its pure character and quality. Consciousness is established in itself, freed from psychopathology, and ultimately tied to transcendental reality.
Substage 1: Consciousness is established as the center, largely free of mind and reactions. This is not to say that reactions do not take place, only that consciousness is ever observant and aware of the tides, flows, and eddies of mental processes and emotions. Put a bit differently, it might be said that consciousness exists or is released to some degree from the "shell" of one's personality.
Substage 2: Consciousness becomes integrated, settled, and established in itself with no need for mental ideas or constructions as props and supports. It is liberated from being chronically absorbed or lost in mental processes, including personality issues and structures. Consciousness is seen as separate from mind, more primal than mind, and as absolute. It can also master and change any construction of mind, although not its total master.
Substage 3: The center expands outward and stabilizes as extended being. Consciousness is no longer and never again experienced as a central point confined to being within the skull. There is now a continuous sense of size or grand spaciousness that becomes a part of one's being.
The Decentered Stage
In the Decentered Stage the center beings to corrode or decompose as if from within. The self begins to literally disappear not only in transcendent experiences but in everyday life -- which begins to become more and more transcendent. The "I" becomes less pronounced.
Substage 1: Centeredness begins to break down as a result of the decomposition of confining self-structures. This process results in a not unpleasant lack of lack of a sense of center, which is now replaced by a sense of mildly pleasant disorganization.
Substage 2: The self is clearly seen as a defence against or a haven from the stark reality of the void, and as a wound in the fiber of one's being. The self fades in and out for short periods of time leaving a lack of category distinctions in everyday life. During times when the self is faded out, there is a recognition of a luminous, pervasive awareness of the void as primordial and what all things are.
Substage 3: The center ceases to exist, along with a sense of self. There is an almost palpable chasm or gap where once there was a self. Unlike fading in and fading out, this is a revolution at the center of awareness -- a metamorphosis. An essential core of the self is removed and is joyously replaced by the void.
Substage 4: Consciousness itself is seen, in and by the void, coming into being. For the first time, consciousness seems almost substantial and limited by comparison to the void. One is momentarily freed from consciousness.
Substage 5: No inkling, no clue. There remains much, much more to learn.
X: The I AM will feel individual until after the maturation of the I AM experience till one experiences the 'I' not as an individual Self but as the infinite Self. Any sense of individuality dissolves like a drop of salt dissolves into the great ocean.
S9: The ‘Infinite’ or ‘Eternal Self’ is an Eternal Individual Self, or said slightly differently an “Eternal Subjective Self.” That is my whole point here. Sure it doesn’t maintain the stink of S9, which is all imagination, or all a dream manufactured into a lesser ego self, temporarily. But the Eternal does not lose full Awareness of its Reality of Self.
Instead of being a mere salt doll that dissolves into the ocean, Self recalls Its Self as the whole Ocean Self, or I Am the Ocean.
X: When the lumps of salt ate dissolved in the ocean they merge in it indistinguishably. You can no longer distinguish or separate the individual I AM from the Cosmic Self, as the individual I dissolves away, leaving impersonal AM-ness.
S9: This Am-ness that you speak of, still retains its Awareness of Self, (as in I Am the Cosmic Self, and not in any way separate), simply because ‘Awareness is Am-ness’, and ‘Am-ness is Self.’ Although this ‘Am-ness’ doesn’t lay claim on any particular location (like an island) and call this island ‘I.’ Perhaps this is why ‘Self’ is often referred to as the ‘Non-abiding.’
(Incidentally, Cosmic Mind isn’t the best of words as it has so many connotations of being group mind.) But, I know what you were trying to say. : ^ )
The ‘I Am’ does, however, ‘Realize its Self’ as ‘Being’ or ‘Being Self.’ That is why it is said that ‘Self’ is “Everywhere Center, and nowhere peripheral,” because of this lack of a particular location, as it is everywhere ‘Present,’ as in omnipresence, and no where absent. Everywhere is Here and Now, and Presence. This lack of absence is better know as ‘Awareness.’
This lack of a particular center, or one above another, is where the particular personhood is lost/transcended. This is because we cannot limit Self to definitions, and so there is no story line. Whereas the ego is only a story line made up of temporary definitions. So one can easily see that the ‘I Am’ is not just more of the same.
It is the ‘Witness’ part of the mind that grabs center stage. ‘I Am’ is transcendent of this Witness. It is the ‘Witness’ that watches and keeps track of what is mentally going on within this dream world. Early on the ‘Witness’ may see itself as the ‘I Am,’ but this would be a mistake.
The Witness remains particular, (perhaps, what some have called the soul), although it is also very objective. (Objectivity having connotations of being separation, and requiring an object, still remains dualistic.) This objectivity may confuse the ‘Witness,’ and convince it into seeing a separation between itself from the mind. But the Witness still takes the mind as the prime mover, and honors it as the prime knower. The Witness still feels that what goes on in the mind is important (it is not) and that it needs to be corrected or improved (it does not). A dream is a dream, is a dream. And when we 'Wake Up,' we 'Realize' that NONE of it was important.
I will continue with other parts of your message, when time allows. : ^ )
[...] A unity of stillness and motion, [...] a single [...] continuum. "I" am merely the absence that is completely filled with [...] presence of the world. The world is [...], unobstructed [...] action.
This is most excellent and peculiar. I have a note in my journal from June 3, 1957, resembling my edited version of your quote above.
I also admire your tenacity for intellectual honesty, as you have surely dwelled in the ether of contemplative practice.
Let kind thoughts traverse the bridge of words, for those who would refuse to hear an angry shout may strain to hear a whisper.
1957? You have had plenty of time to clarify this matter. It would be interesting to hear your story.
Thanks for the kind word about intellectual honesty. Iv'e known my own dishonesty and its consequences too well.
My journey serves only to muddle the waters of open discourse, and from what I have come to seemingly understand from your postings you undoubtedly recognize the fodder it may create…
As a person who has studied 59 years of 91, it is the tribulations of weariness that takes a little more of me. Yet I have come to understand with great clarity that which instructs my efforts and purpose, as I have found treasures in that which others have found worthless, beauty without the hindrance of sight, love without the trappings of possession, and freedom outside the construct of perception. Thusly I have come to understand and live by the wisdom of compassion, forgiveness, mindfulness, and yet no more from where there is much, as I have nothing but merely sipped from the wellspring of ultimate wisdom.
During this turn that is the wheel of life, I have traveled to places both near and far, and stood witness of a great many things. I have listened to the spoken word of laymen and wise men alike, and have come to learn a great many things. Years passing by-and-by, I have come to contemplate a great many things tangibly phenomenal and philosophical yet, of all things I have come to witness, listen, consider, learn, and thusly understand, the vestige and cessation of life remains a winding road to absolute awe...
It is perhaps here that we are all as one, yet, as there are as many different worlds as minds, not the same.
Comments
"it is the one (and only)" is another example.... ok ok never mind.
Ps I dont think you hate julie:)
Anyway the Dalai Lama explained quite clearly:
Through the gates of the five sense organs a being sees, hears, smells, tastes and comes into contact with a host of external forms, objects and impressions. Let the form, sound, smell, taste, touch and mental events which are the relations of the six senses be shut off. When this is done the recollection of past events on which the mind tends to dwell will be completely discontinued and the flow of memory cut off. Similarly, plans for the future and contemplation of future action must not be allowed to arise. It is necessary to create a space in place of all such processes of thought if one is to empty the mind of all such processes of thought. Freed from all these processes there will remain a pure, clean, distinct and quiescent mind. Now let us examine what sort of characteristics constitute the mind when it has attained this stage. We surely do possess some thing called mind, but how are we to recognize its existence? The real and essential mind is what is to be found when the entire load of gross obstructions and aberrations (i.e. sense impressions, memories, etc.) has been cleared away. Discerning this aspect of real mind, we shall discover that, unlike external objects, its true nature is devoid of form or color; nor can we find any basis of truth for such false and deceptive notions as that mind originated from this or that, or that it will move from here to there, or that it is located in such-and-such a place. When it comes into contact with no object mind is like a vast, boundless void, or like a serene, illimitable ocean. When it encounters an object it at once has cognizance of it, like a mirror instantly reflecting a person who stands in front of it. The true nature of mind consists not only in taking clear cognizance of the object but also in communicating a concrete experience of that object to the one experiencing it.* Normally, our forms of sense cognition, such as eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, etc., perform their functions on external phenomena in a manner involving gross distortion. Knowledge resulting from sense cognition, being based on gross external phenomena, is also of a gross nature. When this type of gross stimulation is shut out, and when concrete experiences and clear cognizance arise from within, mind assumes the characteristics of infinite void similar to the infinitude of space. But this void is not to be taken as the true nature of mind. We have become so habituated to consciousness of the form and color of gross objects that, when we make concentrated introspection into the nature of mind, it is, as I have said, found to be a vast, limitless void free from any gross obscurity or other hindrances. Nevertheless, this does not mean that we have discerned the subtle, true nature of the mind. What has been explained above concerns the state of mind in relation to the concrete experience and clear cognizance by the mind which are its function, but it describes only the relative nature of mind.
There are in addition several other aspects and states of mind. In other words, taking mind as the supreme basis, there are many attributes related to it. Just as an onion consists of layer upon layer that can be peeled away, so does every sort of object have a number of layers; and this is no less true of the nature of mind as explained here; it, too, has layer within layer, slate within state.
All compounded things are subject to disintegration. Since experience and knowledge are impermanent and subject to disintegration, the mind, of which they are functions (nature), is not something that remains constant and eternal. From moment to moment it undergoes change and disintegration. This transience of mind is one aspect of its nature. However, as we have observed, its true nature has many aspects, including consciousness of concrete experience and cognizance of objects. Now let us make a further examination in order to grasp the meaning of the subtle essence of such a mind. Mind came into existence because of its own cause. To deny that the origination of mind is dependent on a cause, or to say that it is a designation given as a means of recognizing the nature of mind aggregates, is not correct. With our superficial observance, mind, which has concrete experience and clear cognizance as its nature, appears to be a powerful, independent, subjective, completely ruling entity. However, deeper analysis will reveal that this mind, possessing as it does the function of experience and cognizance, is not a self-created entity but Is dependent on other factors for its existence. Hence it depends on something other than itself. This non-independent quality of the mind substance is its true nature which in turn is the ultimate reality of the self.
Of these two aspects, viz. the ultimate true nature of mind and a knowledge of that ultimate true nature, the former is the base, the latter an attribute. Mind (self) is the basis and all its different states are attributes. However, the basis and its attributes have from the first pertained to the same single essence. The non-self-created (depending on a cause other than itself) mind entity (basis) and its essence, sunyata, have unceasingly existed as the one, same, inseparable essence from beginningless beginning. The nature of sunyata pervades all elements. As we are now and since we cannot grasp or comprehend the indestructible, natural, ultimate reality (sunyata) of our own minds, we continue to commit errors and our defects persist.
Thanks.
Get your head bandaged up, and take an aspirin, walls can be mighty hard on the head. ; ^ )
I think we about covered our differences, anyway. Thanks for taking the trouble to explain your personal truth to me, kind sir.
Whose Julie? Just kidding. : ^ )
Respectfully,
S9
Cute.
There is a Classic Zen Koan that goes like this.....
A monk goes to the zen master to express his understanding. He says "All dharmas resolve into only One Mind". The master replies "What does One Mind resolve into?"
No words here, only practice.
This is Buddha Dharma, not personal truth. Take this matter to any teacher/sangha in lineage, Vajrayana, Theravada, or Zen.
I see this as very simple. There is only the luminosity of Awareness, all else is a temporary dream, coming and going. But the dream is none other than luminosity temporarily allowing mental forms.
Because these mental forms/thoughts are temporary, they are in no way equal to the constant luminosity of Awareness. One thing is constant however. Awareness is aware of Awareness.
Everything else, which includes aspects, is merely detail. The descriptions of this dreaming mind are endless. Where do you differ in this?
Warm Regards,
S9
As Rupert Spira, who is an Advaita teacher, says -
there is a further aspect of the investigation which involves a
deep exploration of the body and the world which culminates in the
experiential understanding that Knowing Presence is not just 'behind and
allowing all states and experiences' but is actually the substance out of
which all states and appearances are made.
Also see http://non-duality.rupertspira.com/page.aspx?n=6b3ac48b-da7b-4c64-9c5c-7401e3600e12
But even this is still not the Emptiness spoken in Buddhism.
In Buddhism we do not talk about an unchanging substance in which phenomena pop in and out.
In short,
Although there is non-duality in Advaita Vedanta, and no-self in Buddhism, Advaita Vedanta rest in an “Ultimate Background” (making it dualistic), whereas Buddhism eliminates the background completely and rest in the emptiness nature of phenomena; arising and ceasing is where pristine awareness is. In Buddhism, there is no eternality, only timeless continuity (timeless as in vividness in present moment but change and continue like a wave pattern). There is no changing thing, only change. - Thusness
Yes, it is the absolute "elimination of the background" without remainder. It is the affirmation of multiplicity, not dispersion, but multiplicity. The world references nothing but the world. Each thing is radiant expression of itself. There is no support, no ground. No awareness. No awareness.
"All dharmas are resolved in One Mind. One Mind resolves into...."
There is the radiant world. just the radiant world. No awareness.
That is the Abbott slapping floor with his hand. The red floor is red. Spontaneous function.
First there is the one constant vs changing multiplicity... then all multiplicity is resolved into One Mind... then One Mind resolves into No Mind, just radiant world.
Multiplicity seen correctly is one function/process (Tao without separation), when seen deeper it is one mind (witnessing mind, which witnesses multiplicity, but seemingly apart from multiplicity, like the king over his kingdom), seen even more deeply it is no mind, whatsoever only Awareness. But even that last, Awareness is aware of itself. This is not a dead process with no awareness whatsoever. That my friend is an impossibilty.
Without Awareness, it would be as if nothing ever happened, not even this dreaming mind/world.
If I had run into what you are saying here to me, before I actually experiencing what I am saying here to you, I might have easily been impressed. Obviously you have put much thought into this conceptual layout of the facts.
But, I always look to experience directly, and what you are saying simply isn’t what I am witnessing. “Sorry.” I know that "I Am," and without that, nothing else is. We should above all trust direct experience over assembled facts.
It makes little difference to me how many agree on a mistaken view, it is still mistaken.
The best I can hope for you is, that you too will begin to look more directly, come upon actual Reality, and put away theories once and for all.
Is this where we agree to disagree? : ^ )
Warm Regards
S9
Richard Herman said 'Radiant world'. 'That is the Abbott slapping floor with his hand. The red floor is red.'
If the world is radiant, luminous, alive, it is nothing dead or nihilistic.
The world in its diversity is one seamless aliveness, but not a 'you' who witnesses it, there is no center of awareness. The watcher is what is dead, the world is what is alive.
Nondual when experienced is nothing close to dead. And this is not a theory or an assembled fact, but what I have witnessed myself.
It is as J Krishnamurti puts it:
You look at this magnificent tree and you wonder who is watching whom and presently there is no watcher at all. Everything is so intensely alive and there is only life, and the watcher is as dead as that leaf... Utterly still... listening without a moment of action, without recording, without experiencing, only seeing and listening... really the outside is the inside and the inside is the outside, and it is difficult, almost impossible to separate them. (p. 214)
........
So we are asking is there a holistic awareness of all the senses, therefore there is never asking for the 'more'. I wonder if you follow all this ?. Are we together in this even partially? And where there is this total - fully aware - of all the senses, awareness of it - not you are aware of it.... the awareness of the senses in themselves - then there is no centre - in which there is awareness of the wholeness. If you consider it, you will see that to suppress the senses... is contradictory, conflicting, sorrowful.... To understand the truth you must have complete sensitivity. Do you understand Sirs? Reality demands your whole being; you must come to it with your body, mind, and heart as a total human being..... Insight is complete total attention....
When this is a fact not an idea, then dualism and division between observer and observed comes to an end. The observer is the observed - they are not separate states. The observer and the observed are a joint phenomenon and when you experience that directly then you will find that the thing which you have dreaded as emptiness which makes you seek escape into various forms of sensation including religion - ceases and you are able to face it and be it.
- Collection of K teachings from the KFT CDROM
Lastly, Awareness is not aware of itself from a vantage point or a center in Non-Dual, rather, it is the senses, the radiant world itself, that is self-aware. Put poetically, the scenery sees, the sound hears, the thought thinks. As Kenneth Folk puts it:
(*Thitatto: "(for instance Kenneth referred to Krishnamurti saying something like the observed and the observer is one)."
Kenneth Folk: Thitatto, I'm glad you picked up on this apparent inconsistency. Krishnamurti would have done better to say that "observing (the sense of observation) and the observed are one." Although we must admit that Krishnamurti's phrase is much more elegant, it has serious problems as there is no observer to be found. There is, however, the sense of observation, and this is what he meant by "observer." By saying that the observer and the observed are one, he was saying that the universe is "one without a second," or "not-two." But, more than making a philosophical statement, he was pointing to a particular situation (experence?) in which duality does not arise.
A related matter is the no-dog. The experience of "Self" described by the advaitists can be seen as both a means and an end. It's an end in that it is a refuge, a trans-personal perspective that is prior to the arising of a separate self, and therefore upstream from suffering. The no-dog knows no suffering. But in the no-dog, there is still a tenuous thread of delusion; the small personal self has been superseded by the universal and impersonal Self. So the no-dog is also a means; by dwelling as the no-dog "Self," you are just one tiny step away from the simplest thing, aka primordial awareness, which has no reference point, either personal or transpersonal. There is no self, big, small or otherwise, from this simplest of all perspectives. It knows Itself. There is no localized sense of knowing standing apart from what is known.There's just the entire phenomenological world, which is self-aware.
I'm sorry if this seems convoluted. It's not nearly so confusing in real life. But you can see why so many have failed so miserably to speak clearly about it; it's just really hard to talk about.)
First of all, I want to thank you for all of the effort that you have put in answering me. I am truly sorry that we cannot agree on things. It would be so nice. : ^ )
Obviously, if Consciousness (AKA Awareness) is ‘One’ (and I think that we both agree on this), it is not tiny little consciousnesses split into pieces like the ego self would have us believe. But, this One Consciousness manifests in a subjective manner, feels everywhere center. This why even when my cat looks at me, he thinks "me" about himself, even if he doesn’t use words. I can see it in his eyes.
This feeling of ‘me’ is behind/before all definitions. This isn’t a mistake; the feeling of ‘me’ is just as real as the luminosity of consciousness.
The reason I call your definition of the world a dead thing is without this Awareness, nothing would be, nothing could be seen, could be heard, etc. It would be machine like. It would be like asking you computer, which is alive with electricity, and functioning, how its day was. Ridiculous. This is because it is a function without self-awareness, (AKA self reflective).
I am sensitive enough to feel the aliveness of nature. I fully realize that it is conscious in its own way. I don’t think it says that "I am struggling towards the sun" or "I am drinking up the rain," but I do believe that it feels/taps into awareness also.
I can’t be sure of what exactly a tree feels about consciousness. I don’t think anyone can. But, I know that more than likely it feels its tree self as not being say the grass growing beneath it. These vegetative brothers actually have chemical war against each other for preferred territory, nourishment and sunlight. Watch any weed. They have an individuality of sorts, and they know it. Life is not just a function.
It is true that we all dip into this ‘One’ consciousness. Yet, at the same time, this ‘One’ consciousness is the personal ‘I Am’ in every sngle one of us. It never manifests without this feeling. I believe this is because the 'One' says ‘I Am’ in everything, and it is not wrong. It is you. It is me. It is a tree. And at the same time it is 'One'.
I do not mean this as a Pantheist might. It remain All of the One in each thing.
Respectfully,
S9
I also found a similar article 1 to 2 years ago on the different phases of the Centered (I AM) Stage. Whereas the De-Centered stage is beginning to uncover about non-dual and anatta, it still has more to go and I do not agree with what he said completely as he seems to see no-self and non-dual as stage like rather than as dharma seal. Insight have not matured.
But anyway here is the summary from the interesting article:
http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=Wvj6sCeXi08C&pg=PA113&lpg=PA113&dq=transpersonal+knowing+precentered&source=bl&ots=vg4luv4wiQ&sig=XY6LYguT_44OJvUid6St0qwbu2Q&hl=en&ei=H9JpS9rNBNegkQWR1Y22DQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false
(Fred. J. Hanna, Dissolving the Center)
The Precentered Stage
The Precentered Stage begins with the first experience of being centered. It is only the beginning. Some persons have many transcendent experiences and never get past this stage. Continued practice in the Precentered Stage produces the insights that lead to becoming centered and the stability that comes with it.
Substage 1: Precenterednes begins with a glimpse of a transcendent reality beyond ordinary perception of hte world and mundane cognitive processes. The reality glimpsed is recognized as being beyond ordinary subject/object distinctions.
Substage 2: Merging with the transcendental reality to the point of full identification with it. Once again, this involves transcending the world of phenomena and moving beyond subject/object distinctions.
The Centered Stage
At this stage a person intuitively understands the meaning of the term "pure consciousness." Consciousness is understood as the center, focus, and origin of reality. It is seen as separate from mind and self, which serve only allow and debase its pure character and quality. Consciousness is established in itself, freed from psychopathology, and ultimately tied to transcendental reality.
Substage 1: Consciousness is established as the center, largely free of mind and reactions. This is not to say that reactions do not take place, only that consciousness is ever observant and aware of the tides, flows, and eddies of mental processes and emotions. Put a bit differently, it might be said that consciousness exists or is released to some degree from the "shell" of one's personality.
Substage 2: Consciousness becomes integrated, settled, and established in itself with no need for mental ideas or constructions as props and supports. It is liberated from being chronically absorbed or lost in mental processes, including personality issues and structures. Consciousness is seen as separate from mind, more primal than mind, and as absolute. It can also master and change any construction of mind, although not its total master.
Substage 3: The center expands outward and stabilizes as extended being. Consciousness is no longer and never again experienced as a central point confined to being within the skull. There is now a continuous sense of size or grand spaciousness that becomes a part of one's being.
The Decentered Stage
In the Decentered Stage the center beings to corrode or decompose as if from within. The self begins to literally disappear not only in transcendent experiences but in everyday life -- which begins to become more and more transcendent. The "I" becomes less pronounced.
Substage 1: Centeredness begins to break down as a result of the decomposition of confining self-structures. This process results in a not unpleasant lack of lack of a sense of center, which is now replaced by a sense of mildly pleasant disorganization.
Substage 2: The self is clearly seen as a defence against or a haven from the stark reality of the void, and as a wound in the fiber of one's being. The self fades in and out for short periods of time leaving a lack of category distinctions in everyday life. During times when the self is faded out, there is a recognition of a luminous, pervasive awareness of the void as primordial and what all things are.
Substage 3: The center ceases to exist, along with a sense of self. There is an almost palpable chasm or gap where once there was a self. Unlike fading in and fading out, this is a revolution at the center of awareness -- a metamorphosis. An essential core of the self is removed and is joyously replaced by the void.
Substage 4: Consciousness itself is seen, in and by the void, coming into being. For the first time, consciousness seems almost substantial and limited by comparison to the void. One is momentarily freed from consciousness.
Substage 5: No inkling, no clue. There remains much, much more to learn.
X: The I AM will feel individual until after the maturation of the I AM experience till one experiences the 'I' not as an individual Self but as the infinite Self. Any sense of individuality dissolves like a drop of salt dissolves into the great ocean.
S9: The ‘Infinite’ or ‘Eternal Self’ is an Eternal Individual Self, or said slightly differently an “Eternal Subjective Self.” That is my whole point here. Sure it doesn’t maintain the stink of S9, which is all imagination, or all a dream manufactured into a lesser ego self, temporarily. But the Eternal does not lose full Awareness of its Reality of Self.
Instead of being a mere salt doll that dissolves into the ocean, Self recalls Its Self as the whole Ocean Self, or I Am the Ocean.
X: When the lumps of salt ate dissolved in the ocean they merge in it indistinguishably. You can no longer distinguish or separate the individual I AM from the Cosmic Self, as the individual I dissolves away, leaving impersonal AM-ness.
S9: This Am-ness that you speak of, still retains its Awareness of Self, (as in I Am the Cosmic Self, and not in any way separate), simply because ‘Awareness is Am-ness’, and ‘Am-ness is Self.’ Although this ‘Am-ness’ doesn’t lay claim on any particular location (like an island) and call this island ‘I.’ Perhaps this is why ‘Self’ is often referred to as the ‘Non-abiding.’
(Incidentally, Cosmic Mind isn’t the best of words as it has so many connotations of being group mind.) But, I know what you were trying to say. : ^ )
The ‘I Am’ does, however, ‘Realize its Self’ as ‘Being’ or ‘Being Self.’ That is why it is said that ‘Self’ is “Everywhere Center, and nowhere peripheral,” because of this lack of a particular location, as it is everywhere ‘Present,’ as in omnipresence, and no where absent. Everywhere is Here and Now, and Presence. This lack of absence is better know as ‘Awareness.’
This lack of a particular center, or one above another, is where the particular personhood is lost/transcended. This is because we cannot limit Self to definitions, and so there is no story line. Whereas the ego is only a story line made up of temporary definitions. So one can easily see that the ‘I Am’ is not just more of the same.
It is the ‘Witness’ part of the mind that grabs center stage. ‘I Am’ is transcendent of this Witness. It is the ‘Witness’ that watches and keeps track of what is mentally going on within this dream world. Early on the ‘Witness’ may see itself as the ‘I Am,’ but this would be a mistake.
The Witness remains particular, (perhaps, what some have called the soul), although it is also very objective. (Objectivity having connotations of being separation, and requiring an object, still remains dualistic.) This objectivity may confuse the ‘Witness,’ and convince it into seeing a separation between itself from the mind. But the Witness still takes the mind as the prime mover, and honors it as the prime knower. The Witness still feels that what goes on in the mind is important (it is not) and that it needs to be corrected or improved (it does not). A dream is a dream, is a dream. And when we 'Wake Up,' we 'Realize' that NONE of it was important.
I will continue with other parts of your message, when time allows. : ^ )
Warm Regards,
S9
This is most excellent and peculiar. I have a note in my journal from June 3, 1957, resembling my edited version of your quote above.
I also admire your tenacity for intellectual honesty, as you have surely dwelled in the ether of contemplative practice.
Let kind thoughts traverse the bridge of words, for those who would refuse to hear an angry shout may strain to hear a whisper.
Thanks for the kind word about intellectual honesty. Iv'e known my own dishonesty and its consequences too well.
My journey serves only to muddle the waters of open discourse, and from what I have come to seemingly understand from your postings you undoubtedly recognize the fodder it may create…
As a person who has studied 59 years of 91, it is the tribulations of weariness that takes a little more of me. Yet I have come to understand with great clarity that which instructs my efforts and purpose, as I have found treasures in that which others have found worthless, beauty without the hindrance of sight, love without the trappings of possession, and freedom outside the construct of perception. Thusly I have come to understand and live by the wisdom of compassion, forgiveness, mindfulness, and yet no more from where there is much, as I have nothing but merely sipped from the wellspring of ultimate wisdom.
During this turn that is the wheel of life, I have traveled to places both near and far, and stood witness of a great many things. I have listened to the spoken word of laymen and wise men alike, and have come to learn a great many things. Years passing by-and-by, I have come to contemplate a great many things tangibly phenomenal and philosophical yet, of all things I have come to witness, listen, consider, learn, and thusly understand, the vestige and cessation of life remains a winding road to absolute awe...
It is perhaps here that we are all as one, yet, as there are as many different worlds as minds, not the same.
Happiness and good health, Richard Herman.