right now i havent got any big ,'oceanic sense of oneness',or 'interconnected experiences with everything'.
my question is,is this experience a necessary stage of the path?
do i have to induce this in order to progress?
i sense there are now appropriate conditions for me to enter such 'oneness' ,but concern if it will be a detour rather than a unavoidable passage.
hoping for guidance from the adept :-) .
and im serious here.
i think the question can be more accurately put : do i have to expand this sense of beingness,by keep detaching/ignore from what's "not me"?
what has this to do with the insight into no-self?
this 'i am',sense of existence,is always here,no big deal,it seems.
but what im interested now is the insight/wisdom into the reality that has been taught through the ages,the truth of "no-self" or "there is no boundary of subject- object.'
so,whether this iam is identified with this "corpse",or the sense of fuzzy connection with everything,it just doesn't seem to make any difference to (the insight of)"know oneself".
the i am/witness is already here,a brief moment of attention/contemplation will leave one without doubt of this truth
an importabt question : do we have to keep on disidentified from everything(endless task!)in order to find the true me?
" do i have to expand this sense of beingness,by keep detaching/ignore from what's "not me"? "
this sentence would be better described it thus : do i keep "taking everything" into me,until there;s sense of 'nothing else'?
" an importabt question : do we have to keep on disidentified from everything(endless task!)in order to find the true me? "
right now,im sitting on chair ,so there's this sense/sensation of "my body'.
thoughts comes later on ;and with a little detach atention,there's the awareness that this thought is 'occuring to me'.
similar with feelings,memories etc....
wherever attention goes(body,thoughts ...),there's identification.
how can we break this curse?
Originally posted by a seeker:" an importabt question : do we have to keep on disidentified from everything(endless task!)in order to find the true me? "
right now,im sitting on chair ,so there's this sense/sensation of "my body'.
thoughts comes later on ;and with a little detach atention,there's the awareness that this thought is 'occuring to me'.
similar with feelings,memories etc....
wherever attention goes(body,thoughts ...),there's identification.
how can we break this curse?
When you stand as the I AM or Witness, you see clearly that objects are happening impersonally and the Witness have no stake in whatever happens, it just perceives.
If there is identification, and you become aware as the witnessing of the identification, that alone breaks that conceptual identification.
When you witness a thought "this is occuring to me", you see that the thought is simply a thought, an interpretation, but you are not the thought or interpretation, you are the witnessing, whether it is the thought "this is occuring to me", "this is occuring to him", "this is not occuring", "this is occuring", whatever. They are conceptual thoughts, like clouds floating by, appearing and disappearing in the vast sky of witnessing. What is undeniable is unconceptual being and awareness. Not being aware of the non-conceptual truth, we become lost in contents and concepts and take them to be absolutely true. In fact they are simply conceptual perspectives, not Truth.
Just keep inquiring. Who is aware of the thought? Who am I?
Hope this is useful, by Leo Hartong (I liked his e-book 'Awakening to the Dream' a lot):
18
Blinded by the light
There is a story about a soldier who was sentenced to death.
On the day of his execution, he is transported in an open
cart to the gallows. As he takes in his surroundings for
what he believes to be the last time, a great stillness descends
upon him. The world appears in a clear and transparent
vision of unity and harmony. His fear of dying is
replaced with a deep sense of peace in which he and all of
creation are one in a mystical union with God. At the very
last moment, the king pardons the soldier. He regains his
freedom and life, but loses the vision of paradise. The rest
of his life is a hopeless quest to regain that vision. He takes
to heavy drinking and dies years later as a lonely alcoholic.
For me the experience came when I was twenty-one.
For several reasons, I felt at the end of my rope, and as it
slipped through my fingers, my overwhelming sense of
desperation suddenly lifted. I’ve got a Feeling from the
Beatles’ album Let It Be was playing on the stereo, and it
touched something deep inside of me. A large space
opened up. It would be as true to say that I expanded to
encompass the whole of existence as it would be to say
that I had totally disappeared. Eternity, which I had understood
as time without end, appeared as the absence of
time. Everything was infused with life, including what, up
until that moment, I had considered inanimate. All exist-
ence shared a common source and the first day of creation
and the final day of destruction were seen as equally
present. The Universe was neither big nor small. It revealed
itself as simply One beyond all relative attributes,
such as size, location, and time. While on the relative level,
everything’s purpose was shown to serve everything else
in an intricate mosaic of perfect harmony, the totality of
creation showed itself beyond purpose. I saw that it simply
is as it is: Its own cause and fulfillment.
Things that really mattered before did not matter any
longer. The people I saw from my window all seemed to
be ‘in the know’ while pretending not to know who they
really were. As the experience was slowing down, I remember
thinking: How can I go on with my day-to-day life,
pretending to be this limited character? How can I go to work
and face the daily routine again? As it turned out, I was perfectly
able to continue my life as before – but I was left
with a certainty that, even when I do not see it, all is as it
should be.
What the soldier’s and my personal story have in
common is that they show a vision of the eternal recounted
as an experience with a beginning and an end. It has been
called a mystical, transcendental or peak experience, and
that is exactly what it is – an experience.
The content of such experiences seems to vary from
person to person, depending on one’s personality and
socio-cultural background; but in essence, all peak experiences
are similar in that they all recount a unity of
man and God (or whatever name you’re comfortable
with), and they all transcend space and time. It is the
sort of experience that people who want enlightenment
are looking for; and many have confused it with enlightenment,
as did I. What is generally overlooked, however,
is the silent background in which both the experience
and the ‘I’ that remembers and interprets it occur.
To this mirror-like Awareness, such an experience is simply
another cloud drifting by.
Over the years, that experience has been a source of
both comfort and confusion to me. There was a clear
memory of a vision of universal oneness, even though it
was not always felt. My initial interpretation of the experience
was that if all is One, then everybody and everything
is part of this oneness. Later, I realized that this was a
linguistic trap – that if all is truly One, there are no parts
and there can be no you and me to be part of it. I saw that
the ‘I’ of this body/mind is the same ‘I’ living in and as
everybody else. Perhaps an apt analogy would be to say
we are all the same Self dressed in a variety of costumes.
At the same time, there persisted this contradictory
sense of being an individual entity responsible for my actions.
Before I came to a simple and clear ‘This is it, I am
it, and that is that,’ this concept of being ‘part of it’ made
me work on myself to be a better part. In the Hsin Hsin
Ming, by Sengtan, the third Zen Patriarch, this working
on the mind with the mind to make the ‘good’ victorious
over the ‘bad’ is described, as follows:
If you want to get the plain truth,
Be not concerned with right and wrong.
The conflict between right and wrong
Is the sickness of the mind.*
There was a continued interest in matters considered spiritual,
as well as an interest in the parallels between the
mystical experience and subjects like the new physics, the
Gaia theory, and the ideas of an imminent evolutionary
leap for humankind.
More recently, a renewed attraction to the non-dual
teachings of Advaita, Taoism, and Zen emerged. It was
like a revival of sorts, and I reread books like the Tao Te
Ching, the Ashtavakra Gita, and the Way of Zen, as well as
new books from Tony Parsons, Ramesh Balsekar, Nathan
Gill, and many others. The same old words seemed to speak
to me in a fresh and clear manner. It was like the missing
pieces of a puzzle fell into place, and at the same time, it
clearly showed that nothing could ever be out of place.
I met Wayne Liquorman during a seminar with his
teacher Ramesh Balsekar. I told him that I was attending
to experience the presence of people like him and
Ramesh and that there were no questions I could ask, as
I had a complete intellectual understanding of the material
that was discussed. He answered, ‘Yes but you still
say I understand.’ I did not respond much to this as I
took it to be semantics; but somehow it stayed with me.
It kept coming back to my mind, percolated down into
my heart, and finally said, ‘Actually there is no ‘I’ that
understands it. There is simply understanding.’
Presently ‘I’ remains as ‘my address in life,’ as well as a
grammatical convention and convenience, which I will not
hesitate to use. There is, however, no objective ‘me’ that
can be identified or taken hold of. It is clear that my earlier
mystical experience was not enlightenment. The idea
of an ‘I’ having this experience created the confusing paradox
of an ‘I’ having a non-dual experience. Now, it is obvious
that the so-called mystical experience is as much an
experience as having a glass of wine, making love, doing
the shopping, or taking a walk in the rain. It is all just
happening as me – not to or by me. The silent background
in which experience appears and disappears had escaped
the attention of the ‘me’ that thought he ‘got it.’
Don’t get me wrong: It is not that I didn’t quite get it
before and now I do. It is now clear that there is no ‘I’ to
get it. The whole concept of someone getting enlightened
has lost its validity. Enlightenment appears as a goal that
one can reach only as long as there is the illusion of a
separate entity or ego. In Zen, it has been called the gateless
gate. When one stands before it, the gate seems to be there.
When one passes through and looks back, it’s clear there
never was a gate, nor anyone to go through it.
The mystical experiences described above – both the
condemned soldier’s and mine – however attractive they
may sound, were in the end a ‘blinding by the light.’ There
is no need to have such experiences for understanding to
happen. True understanding will level the artificial
boundaries between the mystical and the mundane, the
extraordinary and the ordinary, the experience and the
one who experiences. It will reveal the splendor and the
simplicity, along with the freedom – even from the need
to be free – that lies beyond this apparent duality.
There is a freedom -
even from the need to be free
even from the need to try to be spiritual.
This is beyond the duality of awake and asleep,
enlightened, and unenlightened.
This is relaxation into the suchness of things
just the way things are.*
This text points to absolute instead of relative and conditional
freedom. Absolute freedom’s inherent nature is such
that there cannot be any conditions that have to be met
before this freedom can be realized. There is no need for
a special experience to set you free. When you wait for
such an event, you feed the erroneous belief that there
really is a ‘you’ in need of liberation. Such an anticipated
event may be a transcendental experience; but even when
you do get such an experience, it can become a trap instead
of a liberation. The one having such an experience
may be overwhelmed and conclude that this should become
a permanent state.
There is a book by Suzanne Segal called Collision with
the Infinite. It tells the story of a woman who got shocked
by the sudden realization that there is no personal self.
She was not a seeker and had no interest in things like
yoga, Zen, and advaita. She thought she was losing her
mind and sought help from psychiatrists and psychologists;
but they were unable to help her. At some point, she
came in contact with the non-dual perspective; and from
that point on, her situation started to improve – so much
so that she started to hold meetings and began to help
people on their spiritual path.
By the end of the book, she gets sick and dies. In the
afterword her friend Stephan Bodian writes:
‘Yet toward the end of her life, we could only watch as the
realization slipped between her fingers like so much sand, leaving
her frustrated and confused.’ *
Suzanne Segal was a unique case, and her situation involved
a brain tumor; but in general, when ‘the experience’
– like all experience – turns out to be impermanent,
one might mistakenly consider this as a personal failing.
Like the condemned soldier, one may end up chasing the
experience, which is missing the point completely, much
as one of the actors in the following story does:
Imagine watching a movie in which two men walk toward
you. The setting is a desert. The sun is blazing overhead, and
a huge mountain range is visible in the distance.
One of the men stops and says to his companion, ‘Do you realize
that this is all an illusion and we are just variations in one
single light appearing as us, the sun, the sky, and the whole
landscape?’ His friend looks puzzled as he continues. ‘ This
whole world we see is a flat screen, though it appears as if there
is space all around us.’
Now his friend gets slightly worried. He thinks perhaps his
buddy has been affected by the heat, so he asks, ‘Are you feeling
all right?’
‘Absolutely fine! It is just suddenly obvious that all this is really
nothing but a very clever illusion appearing on a single
background.’
‘Really,’ says his friend getting slightly annoyed. ‘Please show
me this background.’
‘Well look, here it is; right here touching us, carrying us. It
contains everything we see.’ He turns and points to the screen.
His friend follows his finger, but sees nothing but the far off
mountains.
If transcendental experiences arise on ‘the screen’ of Pure
Awareness, so be it. If they do not, don’t worry about it.
There are people who have had such experiences and are
still seeking. There are also people who never had such
an experience and are clear on what they truly are. Human
experience is an ever-changing flow, but the clear
space of Pure Awareness in which this flow occurs does
not change. All there is is this presence, expressing itself
as the totality of manifestation, including everything, from
the most distant galaxy to smallest living creature, from
the illusion of space and time to the way you appear as a
character. This totality – both what arises and that in which
it arises – is your true identity. There is absolutely nothing
you can or have to do, nor is there anything you have to
wait for to simply be what you already are.
Just
sit there right now.
Don’t do a thing. Just rest.
For your
separation from God
is the hardest work in the world.*
Suzanne wrote:
My mind is spinning with confusion over
one of your pointers. You have said that we are unchanging awareness.
This is understood, and that appearances are inseparable from this
awareness. Then you say appearances ARE that same awareness. If thoughts
ARE that awareness, how is it's identity withdrawn from them; how are
they seen to not hold truth...
Where do thoughts arise from? A confused mind or purposeful
intelligence?
I've read
about two-thirds of the LR text, but my mind is caught on this point?
Also I wonder, where does personal will come from (seems like a strong
energy of opposition) if there is no 'personal'? Any clarity you can
offer that will break through this morass of mind, would be greatly
appreciated.
Scott wrote:
Let's put the questions as to where
thoughts come from and where personal will comes from aside for a
moment.
Let's focus on the pointer that is giving you trouble. It may
be helpful to look from a background awareness within you at first. Just
look from the place that sees a thought appear. This "place" notices
the thought but it is NOT the thought. In noticing it, you have the
first opportunity to just rest as awareness, and watch the thought pass
on by. You aren't moving to add another thought to it. You aren't trying
to understand where it came from or what "personal will" means. It is
just noticed. Seeing yourself as a witnessing, background awareness can
be helpful at first to "get some distance" from what is appearing.
There really is no "distance." That is just a pointer describing the
sense of being able to witness thoughts come and go within awareness.
This is how disidentification can happen. Each thought arises, but it
isn't me. I am this awareness that sees that thought. If there is
something appearing, you are that which sees the appearance, not the
appearance. When what you thought was you--a thought--starts to be seen
as something appearing within what you really are--awareness, that is
the beginning of real freedom and clarity.
You see that what is
appearing is appearing within the awareness that sees it. Anything that
you see as an appearance (including thoughts or emotions) can't be the
witnessing awareness itself. The awareness is what sees. It can also be
helpful, at first, to simply rest as often as possible as non-conceptual
awareness. This means to drop your conceptual labels about a person,
event, or situation, and simply be in that situation without labels
about it. If a label arises, notice it. See that what you are is this
witnessing awareness, and it remains untouched by what comes and goes.
As you become more
aware that you are this witnessing awareness, identification starts to
fall away. Things come and they go and they seem to have less pull, less
of a charge. As you begin to feel more comfortable that you are this
awareness, then the "inseparability" pointers can be handy. The
inseparability pointers are those pointers in the text that say, "see
that appearances are inseparable from awareness." We don't want to move
too quickly into this pointer. Again, at first, it may be more helpful
(if there is a lot of emphasizing storylines, thoughts, and emotions) to
see oneself as witnessing awareness and notice these stories, thoughts,
and emotions, as they come and go. It is only when we start to get a
real sense that we are this awareness that the inseparability pointers
become helpful.
To notice inseparability, see that, when a thought arises, it
bleeds seamlessly out of awareness. A thought never appears outside of
awareness. It is a movement of awareness. It is not a movement of EGO.
Ego is a name for thoughts about a self. Thoughts about a self are what
come and go within awareness. Awareness starts to see that thought is
transparent. It has no solid substance. It is a lot like an empty image
appearing on a movie screen. In recognizing that there really is no line
between awareness and the thought appearing in awareness, you see that
all thoughts are INSEPARABLE from awareness.
The text is full of
pointers on inseparability. I would also suggest you take a look at a
video I just uploaded on youtube called "Different pointers for
different folks." This talks about the difference between establishing
the witnessing awareness AND seeing that appearances are inseparable
from this witnessing awareness.
My main suggestion is not to look at the
questions "where do these things come from." Instead, stick to these
pointers. The source is always awareness. This is where all thoughts
come from. Once you see that a thought is not separate from awareness,
it begins to dawn on you that thought is none other than awareness. You
start to see it's all awareness. Nothing appears or can appear outside
of awareness.
The second suggestion for you, as with anyone who feels
inclined to do so, set up a time to talk with me. Phone or skype. I can
be contacted initially via email; scottkiloby@aol
Hi Seeker,
IMO, there is 'no should' or 'should not'. All already is.
For practice, learn to be aware of the mental and bodily sensation at moments as best as possible. It should not be a grasping type of attention, just a relax light noting.
Oneness has various degrees and depths. To me, it is induced by letting go.
Again, there are various degrees of letting go and release. IMO, the map is describing this various degrees of release. The thing is that, we cannot let go of anything that we are not consciously aware of. For example, one cannot let go of the dualistic grasping, if he or she is not aware that reality is non-dual.
Samsara has veils covering that are not made aware of until they(the veils) are discovered. This veils are firstly covering the non-dual nature of no-subject-object division. When the first veil is 'lifted', we discover the non-dual nature. Secondly, another veil is covering the 'emptiness' nature. When the second veil is lifted, we discover the emptiness nature.
Even when these veils are discovered, for practitoner, it is still an on-going process of integrating this natures into the daily life.
So, please be very very patient. For example, i have been practicing for decades, I do not consider my practices complete, but as of now there are very obvious benefits resulting from following the path. :)
Originally posted by a seeker:" an importabt question : do we have to keep on disidentified from everything(endless task!)in order to find the true me? "
right now,im sitting on chair ,so there's this sense/sensation of "my body'.
thoughts comes later on ;and with a little detach atention,there's the awareness that this thought is 'occuring to me'.
similar with feelings,memories etc....
wherever attention goes(body,thoughts ...),there's identification.
how can we break this curse?
Meditate on why "I" (and everything in relation to self) as a source of suffering.
firstly,i would like to thanks everyone who responded to my ' im confused!' post with advices and encouragements,i feel your kindness,really do :-)
long chen : the uncovering of veils ,i think,can best be understood analogically as the process of peeling an onion,layer by layer.
and it allcomes down to our inability to have realization immediately,and at the same time observing the ppls around us having the same condition.but as im attempting to do just the opposite,i cant let myself subscribe to this point of view.
no matter how immature and naive this may sound,i really attempt to awaken quickly, "in a single sitting".as the actor in the movie iron man says(when testing the new suit), "sometimes u just have to fly b4 learning how to walk" .(i can hear some of u thinking - just dont land flat on ur face :-) )
there's dharma dan's " u can get it quickly if u just stop f****** around " attitude .and franklin merrel-wollf once(perhaps more than once) attempted an 'induction',an attempt to 'cause' awakening in his listeners(something i read sometime ago),a 'dharma transmission'.
the stages of awakening can be understood as gradual attainment uinfolded over time,perhaps involving many lifetimes.but it can also be understood as the very instant occurance,right now.(just as paticasamuppada can be understood as involving 3 lifetimes,or the very conditions in this present moment)in other words, " reality is staring u right at ur face,see it! "
there's another model of spiritual stages im learning currently,and it describes the last stage prior to gnosis(enlightenment) as kenosis(death of subject and object,or as merrel-wolff says ;consciousness without subject and consciousness without an object - this seems to correlate to thusness's stage 5 & 6) .kenosis can be experienced,according to this teacher,by many as a very painful 'dark night of the soul',but some actually go through it in contenment.(wonder what's thusness's experience).
and as i understood,one can go through the stages quickly into the 'first distinction',as he describes it,the subtlest distinction between subject-object,and if 'lucky'enough,"grace takes over" and awakening occurs.what one needs to do is to keep remaining here,then the chances of recognition(of dharma)are very high.
metta
about awakening aspiration,this aspect seems to have a life of its own,but im not letting my guards down!
this is my 'manna' if 'karma comes' .
Full awakening in one sitting is impossible. An initial awakening or glimpse of one's nature can come faster, but is also extremely unlikely within one sitting. Most importantly one must have no expectations of anything whatsover when meditating.
When we meditate we set our interest on Truth. Ideas of 'gaining enlightenment' or 'me getting/going to get enlightened' are purely conceptual, in fact you can try to find if there is a separate self entity that truly exists that can 'gain enlightenment'. It only appears as an idea, a presently arising (and subsiding) thought, it does not truly exist. It is important we do not easily believe in our thoughts to be true, but to gently let them go by seeing them as fictitious notions which are a product of our imagination. If we find ourselves lost in such thinking, just observe and gently let it dissolve in clear seeing.
The Buddha-Mind that exists right now, is the same Buddha-Mind when one 'wakes up', is the same Buddha-Mind of a practitioner that has undergone eons of practice, because there is only ever This. The notion of time and future attainment does not apply to This, when there always is just This. We can 'wake up' from the dream of our illusions, and in fact there is even a gradual deepening of this 'waking up' (which doesn't mean there is an 'I' becoming more enlightened, but rather deeper layers of illusions are being seen through and dropped), but there is no 'time-bound separate me waking up' and such concepts are precisely what we wake up from. If these concepts are seen and dropped, the sense of separation (such as the notion that I am still not yet 'there' and need to get 'there', where there really is only This) and suffering is also dropped.
Those who 'woke up' will not see their 'waking up' as a kind of one time event.
As Thusness posted before,
...As what Joan Tollifson once asked Toni “if
she'd ever had one of
those big awakenings where life turns inside out
and all
identification with the body-mind ceases.
Toni replied, "I can't say I had it," she
replied. "It's this
moment, right now." ...
there's dharma dan's " u can get it quickly if u just stop f****** around " attitude
Dharma Dan himself practiced for many many years before full enlightenment. I think around 20 years from his first crossing of A&P. 'Quickly' is subjective.
The notion of enlightenment being gradual is true from one perspective, but if it is attached with the notion of a separate time bound self going to get something or somewhere, it does more harm. Once you become attached to an expectation, you are believing in the notion of a 'separate time-bound me going to become enlightened' which itself is a 'subject and object' dualistic relationship. It is important to question and drop all the beliefs so that you are left with only non conceptual naked absolute truth.
the stages of awakening can be understood as gradual attainment uinfolded over time,perhaps involving many lifetimes.but it can also be understood as the very instant occurance,right now.(just as paticasamuppada can be understood as involving 3 lifetimes,or the very conditions in this present moment)in other words, " reality is staring u right at ur face,see it! "
Awakening is definitely possible within this lifetime, and many traditions including the most original form of Buddhism - Theravada Buddhism - do accept it's possibility.
In fact I can hardly think of any Buddhist tradition that says enlightenment is impossible within one lifetime. Buddhahood is however, another issue, and even Dharma Dan himself admitted he did not attain Buddhahood.
There's a passage from The Supreme Source that I like very much:
"The desire for happiness is the disease of attachment; one can be happy only when free of desires. Realization is not achieved by striving for it; it arises spontaneously when one abides in the natural state without seeking anything. So remain in the natural state without seeking, without concepts! Even though the name "enlightenment" is used for the real nature, this does not mean that "enlightenment" concretely exists. If someone believes the opposite, [let them go ahead and try to find] enlightenment: apart from the dimension of fundamental reality, they will find nothing at all. So, instead of aiming for enlightenment, one has to understand the nature of one's mind beyond action. On examining one's mind, one finds nothing, yet at the same time there is clarity that is ever present. It does not manifest concretely, yet its essence is all pervading: this is the way its nature presents itself."