Longchen's three new articles
-
All of our forummer Longchen's articles (http://www.dreamdatum.com/articles-path.html) are of especially good quality and very well written especially that it's coming from a sincere practitioner willing to share his insights gained from his practice.
He was just discussing about maintaining non-duality while engaging in conversation when I met him for lunch days ago in school, and which he later wrote this (followed by two other articles "Are we supposed to get rid of unwholesome thoughts?" and "The misconception surrounding Transcendental Nonduality"):
http://www.dreamdatum.com/nondual-conversation.html
Non-dual Conversation
Is it possible for one to maintain non-dual while having a conversation with another person? This is something that I am learning to do. From my few experiences, yes it is possible. But it is quite a challenge. And at as of this writing, I am very unstable at this.
There is really no method of how this can be done. It is really a matter of discovering something and entering into the state without volition.
I will state what happens when non-dual conversation is taking place. The following features are present when having a non-dual conversation:
1. No sense of talking to someone outside of oneself. All this is happening within the same space without subject-object division.
2. No sense of my body talking to another body. This has got to do with no sense of ownership of body. At this point, the sense of owning the physical body is absent. In addition to that, there is also no sense of the sound and sight of another body as being separated from all that is happening at the moment. This is different from no 'I' in the sense that it now encompasses 'no mine' or 'no ownership'.
3. Because of the absence of self-others demarcation, conversation occurs without the usual mode of trying to get some kind of response, reaction or effect from the other party. At my current stage, I did notice a slight grasping that is being used to translate sound into meanings. This is unlike the total deconstruction that occurs with the 'powering down' of perception.
OK, that all I can think of and write about this topic. I will revise and improve this article where the need arises.
For your necessary ponderance. Thank you for reading.
------------------------
http://www.dreamdatum.com/thought-detach.html
Are we suppose to get rid of unwholesome thoughts?
This article is related to a common misconception with regards to spiritual practice. Many spiritual teachings say that one must get rid of unwholesome stuffs in one's life. So does that include getting rid of unwholesome thoughts that one is having.
Are we suppose to get rid of unwholesome thoughts? Before we can answer this question, we must first ask..."Can the self or 'I' get rid of thoughts that are deemed as unwholesome?" The answer to the latter question is a NO.
As already mentioned and explained here, the sense of self or 'I' is not the doer of action. As much as this 'sense of self' desires, it simply has no power over the arising and ceasing of thoughts. Thoughts, are for most part, related to the functioning of memory. Because of that, thoughts and memory cannot be removed by will.
So, if thoughts cannot be stopped from arising using volition, are we powerless with regards to its influences. No.
While thoughts cannot be stopped, the attachment or aversion to them can be diminished with training. Both attachments and aversions are types of grasping.
So to be precise, during spiritual practice, we are not supposed to try to stop unwholesome thoughts from arising. This will prove to be ineffective and all we get will be more frustrations. What we can do, is to let go of the grasping to the thoughts. There is an energetic difference between the two.
About this letting go, it is really a gentle process and cannot be forced. Excessive forcing re-enforces the arising of 'sense of self' and ineffective grasping kicks into action again.
Often, the thoughts that arised are in conditioned response to what is being perceived by the senses. The speed of the arisal of the thought often is very fast. Because there is a perception, which is followed rapidly by the conditioned thought, the conditioned reaction(grasping) to the thought often is almost immediate. The rapid change that occur within this short span of duration is what makes 'recognising' the grasping from the perception and thoughts difficult.
OK, that all I can think of and write about this topic. I will revise and improve this article where the need arises.
For your necessary ponderance. Thank you for reading.
These articles are parts of a series of spiritual realisation articles.
----------------------------
http://www.dreamdatum.com/nondual-misinfo.html
(just updated)
The misconceptions surrounding Transcendental Non duality
This article is related to a common misconception with regards to the Transcendental experience of Nonduality. Within the spiritual circle, the term Non-duality is a very misunderstood or misinterpreted term. It must be understood that the term has more than one meaning and its perceived meaning largely depends on a person's stage of spiritual awareness.
More often than not, a lower stage understanding of the term is misconstrued as the Transcendental experience of Nonduality or non-dualism. This confusion is largely compounded by so-called new age spiritual materials.
The most common understanding of Non duality is related to the issue of Polarity such as light and dark. In this semantic, non-duality is explained as the non-biasness towards any side of a pole. This is about the concept of there being no absolute good or evil. In another word, it is about being non-judgemental. Many spiritual materials believed that this concept of non-duality is equivalent to enlightenment. This is not entirely correct.
Non-duality as a concept for no polarity is not wrong. However, it should not be mistaken for non-duality as the state of enlightenment. The term non-duality that is being used to describe Enlightenment is actually describing a state whereby there is no subject-object division. This is an experience that is difference from the concept of no absolute polarity.
No subject-object division is the true nature of existence. The method of realising this insight lies in the dissolving of the 'sense of self'. This often involves the continual and correct letting go of mental grasping.
OK, that all I can think of and write about this topic. I will revise and improve this article where the need arises.
For your necessary ponderance. Thank you for reading. -
The articles are still in draft stage. So, i will be making further changes.
-
I see...Originally posted by longchen:The articles are still in draft stage. So, i will be making further changes. -
wow nice.
-
Good stuff. Rememer to update here.Originally posted by longchen:The articles are still in draft stage. So, i will be making further changes. -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Yes all 3 articles are well written. You should not overlook the the title “non dual conversation” and also realize the importance of those marked in bold.
All of our forummer Longchen's articles (http://www.dreamdatum.com/articles-path.html) are of especially good quality and very well written especially that it's coming from a sincere practitioner willing to share his insights gained from his practice.
...
Non-dual Conversation
Is it possible for one to maintain non-dual while having a conversation with another person? This is something that I am learning to do. From my few experiences, yes it is possible. But it is quite a challenge. And at as of this writing, I am very unstable at this.
There is a difference between non-duality as experienced during sitting meditation and non-duality as a form of insight when sufficiently stabilized. As a form of insight (stabilized) the illusionary division of a subject-object dichotomy is thoroughly seen through and meditative state is carried beyond ‘sitting meditation’. The experience of pure presence is integrated naturally into walking, tasting, hearing and seeing in all arising phenomena without much effort (still not completely effortless).
In due time, the experience and understanding can get so clear that the entire ‘conceptual layering’ disappears. Even if concepts were to arise, they cease to serve as conditioning threads to the experience of pure presence.
However during ‘conversation’ and/or in engagement of certain activities where dualistic conditions are strong, even when non-dual experience is stabilized till the above case, a non-dualist will still find it "quite a challenge". -
Hi Longchen,
Thanks for the article and just to share with u some of my experiences:
Always so. Never was any experience not of non-dual. If meant only as an expression that non-dual state is always present, it is alright but if there is an intention to re-confirm subconsciously a non-dual state, then in my opinion, that 're-confirming' must be let go ultimately. The letting go will deepen the luminosity instead. That is my experience.
1. No sense of talking to someone outside of oneself. All this is happening within the same space without subject-object division.
I think this is a very important realization and the whole essence of having non-dual experience during conversation or engaging in activities and situations where conditions to create dualistic views are strong lies here -- in overcoming the bond of ‘mine’.
2. No sense of my body talking to another body. This has got to do with no sense of ownership of body. At this point, the sense of owning the physical body is absent. In addition to that, there is also no sense of the sound and sight of another body as being separated from all that is happening at the moment. This is different from no 'I' in the sense that it now encompasses 'no mine' or 'no ownership'.
3. Because of the absence of self-others demarcation, conversation occurs without the usual mode of trying to get some kind of response, reaction or effect from the other party. At my current stage, I did notice a slight grasping that is being used to translate sound into meanings. This is unlike the total deconstruction that occurs with the 'powering down' of perception.
I will relate it to the seeds of the 6th and 7th consciousness in Buddhism. In Buddhism, on top of the usual 5 senses, a 6th sense is added, that is, the conceptual mind. It is the habitual tendency of layering and naming that confuses a practitioner creating the subject-object split in terms of perception. Here the ‘condition’ for the arising of the split is mainly due to this ‘seed’ that resides in the 6th consciousness, that is, the conceptual overlay creating a ‘perceptual I’ (I referred to as the ‘bond’ of ‘I’) and overcoming this ‘bond’ of ‘I’ does not mean the overcoming of the bond of ‘mine’. The bond of ‘mine’ is a more subtle bond. A practitioner may continue to experience a strong ontological sense of ‘ITness’ and leave traces of the sense of self in holding to “Everything is Self’. At this stage, the sense of ‘ego’ can still remain strong.
Taking the above quote as an example, the symbolic meaning of a ‘body’ is created by the 6th consciousness (the bond of ‘I’) which is deconstructed during the first phase of non-dual insight but ‘owning the body’ belongs to the 7th consciousness (what I called the bond of ‘mine’) and is still strong. It often requires daily engagement in activities to allow the conditions to mirror the latent deep ‘ownership’. Here the ‘dual’ is between ‘ego’ and action/hostile environment. The separation is overcome by dissolving the ‘bond of mine’ where the 'agent' is being transcended into non-dual action. As for the grasping of 'sound into meanings', it relates more to the conceptual mind (6th consciousness).
At this point, the sense of owning the physical body is absent
....
At my current stage, I did notice a slight grasping that is being used to translate sound into meanings.
The best solution to overcome this bond of 'mine' is insight into our emptiness nature. It is the “discovery of the something” that enables us to “enter into the state without volition” in the most natural and self liberated way.
There is really no method of how this can be done. It is really a matter of discovering something and entering into the state without volition.
As an intermediate practice, one can sense any form of contraction that is manifested in the 5 aggregates. Sense all contractions that prevent totality and dropped them instantly but gently. There is no need to reason or find out why. Contractions are deeply embedded at the cell level due to a tightly held pre-conscious 'self'-preservation' seed. Release them. Any contraction that resulted in separation is a form of ‘self-preservation '.
When stepping out, feel the full sensation of stepping out. The totality of sensation without contraction.Â…
When breathing, feel the totality of the entire breathing without contractionÂ…
When engaging in thoughts or speeches that give rise to bodily contraction, Let go completely but gently as if the contraction is dying in its own accord without asking why. Do not feel bad when contraction arises, forget about the past and future, whatever mistakes done and whatever things that are left undone, just let go of these arising thoughts that resulted in contraction without justification and reason. Pure sensation of presence takes over all logical reasoning.
Practice till there is a natural momentum that in any circumstances or situations, whenever and whereever the sense of contraction arises, it is dropped immediately and gently. When there is no contraction, there is no worry of separation. The momentum with the practice of dropping whenever contraction arises will dissolve the ‘bond of mine’. When this bond is sufficiently dissolved, even “everything is Self’ is deconstructed. Here 'Self' is transended into mere action or activity and one realises that the entire idea of ‘I’ and ‘mine’ is learnt, there is truly nothing to hold. Insight of emptiness may arise; there is no I, there is no mine, all is the mere play of dharma, arises when condition is, self-liberates in their own accord.
This is also my practice before insight into the emptiness nature of phenomena. My 2 cents. -
Hi Thusness,
Thanks so much for the very detailed explanation. Appreciate it.
regards -
I like the article on "Are we suppose to get rid of unwholesome thoughts? " too. Insightful.Originally posted by longchen:Hi Thusness,
Thanks so much for the very detailed explanation. Appreciate it.
regards -
Hi Longchen,
Are we suppose to get rid of unwholesome thoughts?
This article is related to a common misconception with regards to spiritual practice. Many spiritual teachings say that one must get rid of unwholesome stuffs in one's life. So does that include getting rid of unwholesome thoughts that one is having.
Are we suppose to get rid of unwholesome thoughts? Before we can answer this question, we must first ask..."Can the self or 'I' get rid of thoughts that are deemed as unwholesome?"; The answer to the latter question is a NO.
As already mentioned and explained here, the sense of self or 'I' is not the doer of action. As much as this 'sense of self' desires, it simply has no power over the arising and ceasing of thoughts. Thoughts, are for most part, related to the functioning of memory. Because of that, thoughts and memory cannot be removed by will.
This is a wonderful article and it is also a bold assertion. I fully agree with what you said. The idea that there is a controller is an illusion. It is the result of deep conditioning that blinds us from seeing what exactly is ‘happening’ experientially.
This truth must be experimented and challenged for insight to arise. Try with all our might; control and will the next moment of thought to arise as desired. Try to penetrate with all our power and will to know what the next moment of thought will be. Experiment until this truth is clearly understood as an experiential fact.
I will re-phrase it to “if thoughts cannot be stopped from arising using volition, then what is its nature? How does it arise? Why does it arise?”
So, if thoughts cannot be stopped from arising using volition, are we powerless with regards to its influences. No.
There is no better way to phrase it then to borrow from the teachings of Buddha :-
When there is this, that is.
With the arising of this, that arises.
When this is not, neither is that.
With the cessation of this, that ceases.
-- the principle of conditionality
Understanding emptiness nature has profound implication to our practice. It reveals to us that our existing mode of practice as what you experienced and correctly put it, is not the right approach. We stop willing and controlling. Instead all moments are allowed to express themselves in their natural state, arising when condition is and subsides when condition ceases. Life is a whole oneness and pure presence is found in all moments and all states. There is no purer state. Practice is not about controlling or willing anything. It is allowing the pure presence to reveal itself in its manifolds. Emptiness and non-dual experience provide the insight that practice is neither aftering the mirror nor escaping from the maya reflection; it is to clearly 'see' the 'nature' of reflection. To see that there is really no mirror other than the ongoing reflection due to our emptiness nature. Neither is there a mirror to cling to as the background container nor a maya to escape from. Beyond these two extreme approaches lies the middle path -- the prajna wisdom of seeing that the maya is our Buddha nature.
We then extend this understanding to events, situations, relationships and practices to prove the profundity of this wisdom. Using this insight to dissolve the 'I', 'mine', 'karmic propensities' and all knots of solidity and effort. When this is correctly understood with the insight of non-dual, it reveals the truth of self-liberation.
Happy Journey! -
Hi Thusness,
Thanks again.
regards -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Agreed. We can say that the Nonduality of Subject and Object is related to other forms of nonduality, yet other forms of nonduality may not necessary bring out the essence of the Nonduality of Subject and Object, which is the fundamental kind of insights known as "enlightenment".
http://www.dreamdatum.com/nondual-misinfo.html
[b]The misconceptions surrounding Transcendental Non duality
This article is related to a common misconception with regards to the Transcendental experience of Nonduality. Within the spiritual circle, the term Non-duality is a very misunderstood or misinterpreted term. It must be understood that the term has more than one meaning and its perceived meaning largely depends on a person's stage of spiritual awareness.
More often than not, a lower stage understanding of the term is misconstrued as the Transcendental experience of Nonduality or non-dualism. This confusion is largely compounded by so-called new age spiritual materials.
The most common understanding of Non duality is related to the issue of Polarity such as light and dark. In this semantic, non-duality is explained as the non-biasness towards any side of a pole. This is about the concept of there being no absolute good or evil. In another word, it is about being non-judgemental. Many spiritual materials believed that this concept of non-duality is equivalent to enlightenment. This is not entirely correct.
Non-duality as a concept for no polarity is not wrong. However, it should not be mistaken for non-duality as the state of enlightenment. The term non-duality that is being used to describe Enlightenment is actually describing a state whereby there is no subject-object division. This is an experience that is difference from the concept of no absolute polarity.
No subject-object division is the true nature of existence. The method of realising this insight lies in the dissolving of the 'sense of self'. This often involves the continual and correct letting go of mental grasping.
OK, that all I can think of and write about this topic. I will revise and improve this article where the need arises.
For your necessary ponderance. Thank you for reading.[/b]
David Loy wrote in 'Nonduality' (highly recommended book on nondual concept), first chapter, which is called 'How many nondualities are there?'
In it, it distinguished 5 kinds of nonduality.
No concept is more important in Asian philosophical and religious thought than nonduality (Sanskrit advaya and advaita, Tibetan gNismed, Chinese pu-erh, Japanese fu-ni), and none is more ambiguous. The term has been used in many different although related ways, and to my knowledge the distinction between these meanings have never been fully clarified. These meanings are distinct, although they often overlap in particular instances....
...The following types of nonduality are discussed here: the negation of dualistic thinking, the nonplurality of the world, and the nondifference of subject and object. In subsequent chapters, our attention focuses primarily on the last of these three, although there will also be occasion to consider two other nondualities which are also closely related: first, what has been called the identity of phenomena and Absolute, or the Mahayana equation of samsara and nirvana, which can also be expressed as "the nonduality of duality and nonduality"; second, the possibility of a mystical unity between God and man. No doubt other nondualities can be distinguished, but most of them can be subsumed under one or more of the above categories....
A very short summary:
Dualistic thinking here, means thinking in terms of good and bad, right and wrong, purity and impurity, being and non-being, black and white and so on.
"Without relation to "good there is no "bad," in dependence on which we form the idea of "Good." Therefore "good" is unintelligible. There is no "good" unrelated to "bad"; yet we form our idea of "bad" in dependence on it. There is therefore no "bad." (Nagarjuna)
The second nonduality, the nonplurality of the world, is that...due to the superimpositions of dualistic thinking that we experience the world itself dualistically in our second sense: as a collection of discrete objects (one of them being me) causally interacting in space and time. The negation of dualistic thinking leads to the negation of this way of experiencing the world. This brings us to the second sense of nonduality: that the world itself is nonplural, because all things "in" the world are not really distinct from each other but together constitute some integral whole. The relation between these two senses of nonduality is shown by Huang Po at the very beginning of his Chun Chou record:
The third nonduality, is the nonduality of subject and object.
All Buddhas and all sentient beings are nothing but the One Mind, beside which nothing exists. This mind, which is without beginning, is unborn and indestructible. It is not green nor yellow, and has neither form nor appearance. It does not belong to the categories of things which exist or do not exist, nor can it be thought about in terms of new or old. It is neither long nor short, big nor small, for it transcends all limits, measures, names, traces, and comparisons. It is that which you see before you -- begin to reason about it and you at once fall into error.
This asserts more than that everything is composed of some indefinable substance. The unity of everything "in" the world means that each thing is a manifestation of a "spiritual" whole because the One Mind incorporates all consciousness and all minds. This whole -- indivisible, birthless, and deathless -- has been designated by a variety of terms, as all as the One Mind, there are the Tao, Brahman, the Dharmakaya, and so on.
We have seen the connection between the first two dualities: it is because of our dualistic ways of thinking that we perceive the world pluralistically. The relationship between the corresponding nondualities is parallel: the world as a collection of discrete things (including me) in space and time is not something objectively given, which we merely observe passively; if our ways of thinking change, that world also changes for us. But there is still something lacking in this formulation. By itself it is incomplete, for it leaves unclarified the relation between the subject and the nondual world that the subject experiences. It was stated earlier that the nondual whole is "spiritual" because the One Mind includes my mind, but How consciousness could be incorporated has not been explained. The world is not really experienced as a whole if the subject that perceives it is still separate from it and its observation Of it. In this way the second sense of nonduality, conceived objectively, is unstable and naturally tends to evolve into a third sense. This third sense, like the other two, must be understood as a negation. The dualism denied is our usual distinction between subject and object, an experiencing self that is distinct from what is experienced, be it sense-object, physical action, or mental event. The corresponding nonduality is experience in which there is no such distinction between subject and object. However extraordinary and counterintuitive such nonduality may be, it is an essential element of many Asian systems (and some Western ones, of course). Since the primary purpose of this world is to analyze this third sense of nonduality, it is necessary to establish in detail the prevalence and significance of this concept....
------
I came to realize clearly that mind is no other than mountains, rivers, and the great wide earth, the sun and the moon and the stars. ~ Dogen -
Hi Longchen,Originally posted by longchen:Hi Thusness,
Thanks again.
regards
Whatever the practice whether it is by way of directly sensing contraction or by insight into our emptiness nature or by boddhisattva practice of parimatas, one must ultimately give up the sense of self entirely. The sensation of the overcoming the bond of 'mine' is like mere crytal clear happening as if 'you' never existed. We must be completely fearless during meditation in giving up 'ownership' of our body, mind even that 'concious' portion. Experience that 'fearlessness' and 'openness' and be willing to let go of whatever holdings during meditation. Then nothing else matter and nothing can imobilize the flow. In silence, there is mere manifestation and in acting, there is mere action/activity. It is a very important experience but requires stability of non-dual insight to a certain degree otherwise there is no true giving up; even if there is, the giving up will end being a trance instead of pure presence. -
Originally posted by Thusness:
Hi Thusness,
Hi Longchen,
Whatever the practice whether it is by way of directly sensing contraction or by insight into our emptiness nature or by boddhisattva practice of parimatas, one must ultimately give up the sense of self entirely. The sensation of the overcoming the bond of 'mine' is like [b]mere crytal clear happening as if 'you' never existed. We must be completely fearless during meditation in giving up 'ownership' of our body, mind even that 'concious' portion. Experience that 'fearlessness' and 'openness' and be willing to let go of whatever holdings during meditation. Then nothing else matter and nothing can imobilize the flow. In silence, there is mere manifestation and in acting, there is mere action/activity. It is a very important experience but requires stability of non-dual insight to a certain degree otherwise there is no true giving up; even if there is, the giving up will end being a trance instead of pure presence.
[/b]
Thanks for this.