Recently a few people in AtR grouped realised anatta, also a few have realised I AM.

Here's one that realised I AM, Chris Jones:


Mr. C. J. :


I couldn’t make a post at the time, but about two weeks ago I had a realization while doing my daily practice of “who am I?” inquiry and abiding as awareness. At first I didn’t think anything of it. My mind just went completely quiet for about 10 minutes, and during that time there was no suffering, no emotion or thoughts at all, not even bliss. Just pure stillness. Then when my thoughts returned, I felt like I was no longer the body-mind. Since then, I no longer have to abide as awareness because I’m already there. The self-inquiry I was doing before now feels nonsensical. The best way I can explain this shift is that the experience of being “present” or “aware” that I was having glimpses of before, which required effort to sustain, has now solidified and is now my default way of experiencing the world. I experienced a tremendous amount of energy after the event and had trouble sleeping for a couple of days. The night that it happened, I didn’t sleep at all and just sat there for hours in pure presence. Fortunately it didn’t reach the point of extreme discomfort and eventually I passed out.
At this point my mode of perception is still the same, but the energy has subsided and things have somewhat gone back to normal. The body-mind mostly still behaves in the same way - the mind wanders, there is craving/clinging and aversion and the rest of it just as before. But rather than being the “doer”, I’m like a watcher in the background experiencing everything. All the sights, thoughts, bodily sensations, sounds, smells and tastes appear for a moment like pixels on a screen and then disappear as the movie keeps playing.
Often, the sense of being awareness fades and becomes less prominent. For example, when I’m deep in a stressful thought I almost feel like I’m the separate self again (this is becoming more rare). There is a sort of temporary contraction. But once the thought disappears, I drop back into awareness.

Soh Wei Yu
badge icon
Is there doubtless realisation and certainty of what your Being or Existence is?
Like https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2018/12/i-am-experienceglimpserecognition-vs-i.html
https://awakeningclaritynow.com/awakening-to-the-natural-state-guest-teaching-by-john-wheeler/
I AM Experience/Glimpse/Recognition vs I AM Realization (Certainty of Being)
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.BLOGSPOT.COM
I AM Experience/Glimpse/Recognition vs I AM Realization (Certainty of Being)
I AM Experience/Glimpse/Recognition vs I AM Realization (Certainty of Being)

     · Reply
     · Remove Preview
     · 1d

Mr. C. J.
Yes, I believe so. I’ve had glimpses before but this time there was a certainty to it. I felt like I was done with the inquiry and there was nothing else to find. I believed that I was a body/mind my whole life, and at that moment, the belief was shattered.
1

     · Reply
     · 1d

Soh Wei Yu
badge icon
Mr. C. J.
Sounds great. From that point the entire journey is about the unfolding of that taste of luminosity and Presence into its most mature and full blown actualization, free from all artificial boundaries and separation... yet in a totally effortless and natural and spontaneous manner. Deepening of insights into that Presence and the nature of it is required.
There is no need to rush for the next insight, but when you feel ready, you may want to look into the four aspects of the I AM and the two stanzas of anatta and Bahiya Sutta. Thanks for sharing.

     · Reply
     · 1d · Edited

Mr. C. J.
Thanks for your help Soh
. I’ll keep refining these insights and focus on the contemplations you suggested.
From your descriptions it sounds like Stage 2 is more of an experience than a permanent insight. Does that mean there is only a glimpse of “I am everything” at this stage?
And I guess dropping is only required as a practice after Stage 2? I’m jumping ahead a bit here but wanted to clarify.

     · Reply
     · 23h

Soh Wei Yu
badge icon
“It is bringing this I AM into everything. I AM the I in you. The I in the cat, the I in the bird. I AM the first person in everyone and Everything. I. That is my second phase. That the I is ultimate and universal.” - John Tan, 2013
John Tan said today "4 aspects r simply pathing u towards non-dual when you r in the phase of ultimate presence."

     · Reply
     · 21h

Soh Wei Yu
badge icon
This is Stage 2: https://www.facebook.com/521855784/posts/10156891243275785/
Although in my I AM phase, if you look into my e-journal, I went through the phase of impersonality where the I turns universal, I think it is not the full blown Stage 2.
John Tan did not want to lead me too deeply into I AM as he was worried that he will have a hard time getting me 'out of it' because the I AM is seen as ultimate.
But the I turning universal is natural also for one who matures the four aspects of I AM, but without much danger of continuously reifying and creating abstractions. It is the way to nondual along with the nondual contemplations.

     · Reply
     · 21h

Soh Wei Yu
badge icon
"dropping is only required as a practice after Stage 2"
Dropping was recommended to me even before Stage 1. John Tan told me to practice it alongside self-enquiry.

     · Reply
     · 21h

Soh Wei Yu
badge icon
Dropping is important throughout one's practice, just that it gets refined over time based on one's insights.
https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2008/09/six-stages-of-dropping.html
Six Stages of Dropping
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.BLOGSPOT.COM
Six Stages of Dropping
Six Stages of Dropping

     · Reply
     · Remove Preview
     · 21h

Soh Wei Yu
badge icon
John TanFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:22pm UTC+08
Also I did not lead u to I M everything.
Soh Wei YuFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:26pm UTC+08
oic.. how is I AM everything like?
John TanFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:28pm UTC+08
It is bringing this I M into everything. I M the I in u. The I in the cat, the I in the bird. I M the first person in everyone and Everything. I.
Soh Wei YuFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:29pm UTC+08
is this related to impersonality?
Soh Wei YuFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:30pm UTC+08
i dont think this is the samkhya understanding though. samkhya understanding of purusha is very individualistic..
John TanFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:30pm UTC+08
After impersonality and the experience of the higher power, u should progress into that.
Soh Wei YuFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:30pm UTC+08
when i experience impersonality it is something similar.. like universal
Soh Wei YuFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:30pm UTC+08
everything is from the same consciousness
John TanFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:31pm UTC+08
But becoz I worry u sank too deep and I worry I can't lead u out...lol.
John TanFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:33pm UTC+08
There was a period u went too deep into I Mness so I did not tell u to explore further into it.
John TanFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:34pm UTC+08
Instead I tell u to look into dissolving the subject/object duality.
Soh Wei YuFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:34pm UTC+08
Oic..
John TanFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:35pm UTC+08
Otherwise it should b dwelling further into the ultimate of I.
John TanFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:36pm UTC+08
Instead of dissolving subject/object division.
John TanFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:36pm UTC+08
I m the phase.
John TanFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:36pm UTC+08
That is my second phase.
John TanFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:37pm UTC+08
That the I is ultimate and universal.
John TanFriday, February 21, 2014 at 9:40pm UTC+08
For u, after direct apprehension of Awareness, I think there is no point to further strengthen this tendency to that lvl.

     · Reply
     · 21h

Mr. C. J.
Thanks again, this is all really helpful! Will keep practising bearing your comments in mind.
1
 · Reply
 · 15h




Mr. C. J.
Does anyone have any practices that they found useful at this stage? I’ve been focusing on the four aspects of “I AM”, currently contemplating luminosity by inquiring “what is aliveness in this moment?” and trying to notice the intensity/immediacy of sensations.
One thing that isn’t clear to me is when to switch over to non-dual contemplations. Or whether they should be done in conjunction with the four aspects of “I AM”. Any advice is welcome 🙂
1

     · Reply
     · 2d

Soh Wei Yu
badge icon
A fine balance of bringing the taste of Presence to the foreground interspersed with contemplation. Let it flow naturally. Sort of like self enquiry, you don't let the inquiry become just a repetitive verbal mantra.

 Mr. N. W.
Hey Mr. C. J.
well done. Sounds like you're doing great 🙂 Can I ask you what your sitting practice looked like before this? And how long were you doing Inquiry before this happened? And... how long had you been meditating and where were you mapping to prior to starting the inquiry process?

     · Reply
     · 2d

Mr. C. J.
Hey Nick
! I’ve been meditating for a while but have experimented with a lot of different practices. I spent about 7 years doing mostly concentration practices (anapanasati) with a few breaks during that time. At that point I wasn’t interested in the insight maps at all and did it from a self improvement perspective. I switched over to MCTB and Mahasi style noting, did that for a few months and that’s when I think my insight progress really kicked off. I experienced some shifts which I now believe got me to MCTB 2nd path (pre-“I AM”).
I discovered the AtR blog and ebook recently and was doing self-inquiry at every opportunity every day for about a month. Alongside that, about an hour of sitting meditation where I would abide in awareness and combine that with the self inquiry. The AtR maps and practices feel a lot more natural to me now than those from MCTB.

     · Reply
     · 2d

Mr. N. W.
Mr. C. J.
that's really interesting. Thanks so much for sharing 😃 I think like you I map to MCTB 2nd path but I got here mostly through applying the MCTB principles to the Goenka technique. I like Seeing that Frees a lot and just shifting from Anicca to Anatta as the focus has been huge this last week. Not sure I quite get Inquiry yet though. Were you just holding the question (sense of curiosity) within/on the field of thoughtless awareness that is in and around the body? When I try this stuff if clearly happening as I start to cycle up through the nana's and get a lot of head pressure but it's a big change to make and I don't want to waste a lot of time doing it wrong lol

     · Reply
     · 1d

Mr. N. W.
Anyway. Your success is very inspiring. Virtual beers on you Chris...

     · Reply
     · 1d

Mr. C. J.
I would inquire “who am I?” and then notice the shift in perception. The question itself is like a pointer that brings you back to awareness (of course, you were always it, the true self is just obscured by thoughts and conditioning). I wouldn’t say that awareness is in or even around the body, it’s not bound by time or space. The advice I received from Soh and others was to not mindlessly repeat it like a mantra, but treat it more as an investigation. You are trying to find your true self. When thoughts arise you can also ask “to whom does this thought occur?” and the same for the other senses. Keep going until you have doubtless certainty of who you are.
I’d recommend “Who Am I?” by Ramana Maharshi, it’s short and to the point.
1

     · Reply
     · 1d

Mr. N. W.
Mr. C. J.
yeah, I'm already reading it 🙂 I don't have many thoughts when I walk/do stuff in the day. When I ask "who am I" I feel the subtle body / energetic field in/around the body. If I then ask "who am I" focused on that sense of self then the perspective moves out and is wider and more inclusive and not full of energy/vibration etc. Does that make sense to you Chris?

     · Reply
     · 1d

Mr. C. J.
Yeah, that makes sense. I think some people are more predisposed to feeling energy in/around their body as a result of previous practice and whatnot. There are usually multiple layers of self to be seen through, so it sounds like you’re on the right track. Keep inquiring into the wider and more inclusive “self”. Is there something that is aware of that? What is it? Don’t worry about missing the answer, you’ll know when you’re done.
1
 · Reply
 · 1d

Mr. A. J.:

Have you compiled a book or something to guide a person from I am to Anatta stages in a graded way?

Soh:

Hmm i'm outside now.. will reply your messages later

But i have a guide but its messy and long and still being edited

U can see if any pointers help

https://app.box.com/s/157eqgiosuw6xqvs00ibdkmc0r3mu8jg

Mr. A. J.:

Thanks Soh !

    Thusness: ...To be more exact, the so called 'background' consciousness is that pristine happening. There is no a 'background' and a 'pristine happening'. During the initial phase of non-dual, there is still habitual attempt to 'fix' this imaginary split that does not exist. It matures when we realized that anatta is a seal, not a stage; in hearing, always only sounds; in seeing always only colors, shapes and forms; in thinking, always only thoughts. Always and already so. -:)

    This is beautiful. This is exactly what I am realizing.


Soh:

Are you doubtless about this yet?


Mr. A. J.:
I mean I am not in disagreement with this experience. I have an intuition of this and I would like to mature this and stabilize in this experience.
I was wondering about the methodology. Should it be only contemplation or is there some inquiry approach that can work along with contemplation.


Soh:

i see. you can do a little case study... lol. since you have the time, it might be good to go through these. a good thing about atr is that so far, many people who came across our group and blog has realised anatta. i estimate about 40 people. so i have collected some of their writings and even requested some to write a little.

from all these cases, you can see that some of them have slightly different trigger points. you can look into them and see what is their inquiry and contemplations that triggered the shift of insight for me. for me it is a sort of experiential contemplation or inquiry into the nature of 'consciousness' through bahiya sutta.

for john tan it was the two stanzas of anatta -- http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/03/on-anatta-emptiness-and-spontaneous.html

for me, slightly different, although not all that different, it was through contemplating on bahiya sutta to penetrate the subject-action-object dichotomy -- http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2010/10/my-commentary-on-bahiya-sutta.html , https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-wind-is-blowing.html

for ajahn amaro i think it is also bahiya sutta - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2008/01/ajahn-amaro-on-non-duality-and.html , https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2018/12/the-breakthrough.html

for soto zen priest and teacher alex r. weith, it is through bahiya sutta - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/10/a-zen-exploration-of-bahiya-sutta.html

i think you will like the approach of kyle dixon, because he approaches deconstruction and contemplation from many angles even quite early on, not just from the aspect of anatta, which is why he penetrated into twofold emptiness pretty quickly, so, highly recommended reading - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2012/03/a-sun-that-never-sets.html and https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2014/10/advise-from-kyle_10.html - you can see that he actually also integrated a little bit of his insights from Madhyamika, DP, j krishnamurti, alan watts etc along with AtR, dzogchen, all into it

for robert dominik too there was a series of contemplations and inquiries - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2019/09/robert-dominiks-breakthrough.html

for nafis rahman the most recent to breakthrough to anatta, it was through triggered while contemplating on two books which was recommended by atr/myself - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2020/10/nafis-rahmans-breakthrough-to-anatta.html

for joel agee , reading a verse on dzogchen triggered the insight - https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2013/09/joel-agee-appearances-are-self_1.html

for td unmanifest, its the two nondual contemplations in the atr guide and zen master dogen's uji that led to his insights - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2020/07/breakthroughs-to-anatta.html
kyle dixon is very clear about view and realization and experience are clear.. he practices dzogchen and his teacher arcaya malcolm smith is also clear. might want to read this on madhyamika, will help: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2020/06/choosing.html and https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2019/10/investigation-into-movement.html

btw arcaya malcolm smith is teaching dzogchen in two weeks, an online course. if you're interested you can join his group and check out: https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2020/09/buddhahood-in-this-life-great.html



What Is The "Me"? by Toni Packer

Mr. A. J.:

Thank you so much Soh ! That's quite a wealth of material. I'll surely go through all this and find my way 🙂

Thanks indeed !

 Written by Andre A. Pais:

Mipham seems to be one of the greatest inclusivists in the Buddhadharma. He always tries to embrace everything non-conflictingly, be it Pramana, Yogacara and Madhyamaka; Svatantrika and Prasangika; sutra and tantra; or inner and outer tantras (genral vajrayana and Dzogchen) [although I'm not so familiar here - nor anywhere else, for that matter...]. And usually Mipham uses a soft tone, despite not shying away from criticizing other views when need be.

As far as I understand it, from Mipham's introduction to Shantarakshita's Adornment of the Middle Way, his view is:

Mahayana, philosophically, is divided into Yogacara and Madhyamaka. Madhyamaka is further divided into Svatantrika and Prasangika.

Prasangika always keeps the 2 truths united, so they apparently have no interest in the conventional except for refuting it mercilessly, revealing its lack of nature. Even conventionally, phenomena are beyond the four conceptual extremes. [I don't know what this means conventionally].

Svatantrika splits the 2 truths:

Conventionally:

The conventional can either be embraced as

1) according to the Sautrantika system, accepting external objects as being momentary and composed of partless particles - this is the view of Bhavaviveka. It's called Sautrantika-Svatantrika-Madhyamaka.

Or

2) it can be accepted as according to the Cittamatra system that affirms that the objects of our experience are purely mental - this is the view of Shantarakshita. It's called Yogacara-Svatantrika-Madhyamaka.

It means that conventionally some Madhyamikas accept external objects, others see experience as mental. Any of these perspectives has its strength, and it's all for the sake of connecting with students who simply can't understand the sheer profundity of the prasangika stance beyond conceptual proliferation. Moreover, it allows Madhyamikas to debate non-buddhists or non-madhyamikas, since the former "seem" to accept objects in ways that are bridgeable to these other realist philosophical systems.

Ultimately:

Concerning the ultimate truth, the characteristic of the Svatantrika approach is that it further divides the ultimate in two: the aproximate or concordant ultimate, and the actual ultimate. The aproximate or concordant ultimate is a conceptual "image" or conviction that is concordant with and aproximates the mind of the meditator to the actual ultimate. Again, this is all pedagogical, established so that practitioners can, step by step, approach the ultimate conceptually, ever more subtly, until all conceptually dissolves and the ultimate is directly perceived without the aid of anything extraneous to it - and thus the path of seeing is reached, first bhumi.

However, the final view of any Svatantrika is a middle way beyond extremes, indistinguishable from any prasangika.

This being said, Mipham defends Bhavaviveka (and praises Shantarakshita and his main treatise above anything else in the world!) while simultaneously subscribing to Chandrakirti's radical and uncompromising view. He resolves the issue, like already intuited, by saying that Svatantrika exists for the purpose of gradual-type of practitioners, while Prasangika aims at the sudden-type. He even compares the Prasangika approach with the Dzogchen view of self-liberation - everything is already instantaneously and spontaneously liberated; reality abides always and "intrinsically" as natural nirvana.

My only issue is that Mipham, and Shantarakshita, makes use of Cittamatra as the supreme explanation of merely the conventional, as a step towards Madhyamaka. The translators do note, however, that the Cittamatra that reifies the mind is the Cittamatra that was solidified by doxographers as a tenet system, and not the scriptural Cittamatra. It's this "tenet system Cittamatra" that is refuted by Madhyamaka, not necessarily the Yogacara tradition; and it is this type Cittamatra that is being used as an explanation of the conventional - and so, when approaching the ultimate, it needs to be abandoned in favor of the superior Madhyamaka view. Yogacara as it "actually" is, and not as it is portrayed by some madhyamikas, doesn't necessarily reify anything and consequently doesn't necessarily have to be abandoned in favor of Madhyamaka when reaching for the actual ultimate.

Concerning Tsongkhapa, as some authors and lineage masters have pointed out, he's a peculiar Madhyamika, because his apparently obsession with philosophical analysis has him constructing elaborate theories concerning the conventional, supported by his appreciation for the epistemological tradition. In this respect, he seems to come closer to Bhavaviveka than to his Madhyamaka hero, the glorious Chandrakirti.

On the other hand, contrary to other great Madhyamikas, namely Gorampa, the Karmapas and Mipham, Tsongkhapa does think that the ultimate is a non-affirming negation and that conceptuality can rise all the way to the actual ultimate. Therefore, the actual ultimate is actually a negation and thus not beyond the four ontological extremes. In this sense, by conceptualizing the ultimate, he again seems to come closer to the "aproximate ultimate" of the svatantrikas than to the actual ultimate beyond extremes of the prasangikas.

See whole discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/AwakeningToReality/permalink/4595324210508973


Chris Jones recently realised I AM and posed this question.