“Someone wrote on https://www.facebook.com/groups/AwakeningToReality/permalink/3999299513444782/: Hey folks, thanks for allowing me to join this group. I'm currently ploughing through the epic tome that is 'Awakening to Reality: A Guide to the Nature of Mind'. Right now I have consistent access to One Mind as an experience and periodic, but not consistent, access to No Mind as an experience. Judging by what I've read so far, the missing piece is deeper insight into anatta to make the flip from 'temporary experience' to 'baseline ground reality'. Over the last few months I've been practising a certain kind of letting go to cause the No Mind experience to arise more consistently, but I guess the AtR view is that this approach is somewhat mistaken and my time would be better spent contemplating anatta?

(Busy with nothing till old. (无事忙中老)

In emptiness, there is weeping and laughing. (空里有哭笑)

Originally there never was any 'I'. (本来没有我)

Thus life and death can be cast aside. (生死皆可抛)) - http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/11/differentiate-wisdom-from-art.html

• Nick Wilson

  Hey Soh, in terms of adopting a view, does what JT say point to "everything has the nature of awareness" over "everything appears in awareness"?
• 
  
•  · 
  Reply
•  · 11h
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu
Nick Wilson Arising "in awareness" is one mind - https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../differentiati...
John Tan said in 2008,
"Do not underestimate the impact of the constant chattering in a dualistic manner. If we continuously repeat “phenomenon arises in awareness” and not “as Awareness”, even though there never was a separation, consciousness will see as if there is a separation. Although it may seem to be a casual expression for communication sake, the impact is subtle. In time to come, the slow and subtle impact will make separation appear amazingly real. This is true even for those that have experienced non-duality; they are not spared from it."
Even when one says everything arises AS awareness, that may not be indicative of anatta realization. It can still be in the one mind~no mind territory.

• I told u about 3 points that u must see through in conceptualities:
  1.  Vase is empty of vase
  2.  Vase is empty of the inherentness of vase
  3.  Division
  
  Anurag is talking abt one of them -- vase is empty of vase.  Nagasena told king Milinda that there is no "chariot" that can be found anywhere ultimately but obviously Nagasena is ferried by what we conventionally designated as "chariot".  When u look at yourself there is no "Soh" or any identity u can point to yet obviously there is the mere appearances.  There is no cause and effect but there is functioning. So what exactly is "de-constructed" here?
  
  Is this same of different from the de-construction of "hearer hearing sound" in anatta?  Like "mover and movement", "lightning flashes", "thunder roars".
  
  Lastly, why is life designated as "life" and not the beginning of death?  Where exactly is the line of demarcation?  Like the question I asked you "this moment ceases as it arises, does it arise or does it cease"?  In experience, where exactly is the line that divides subject and object?
  
  The deconstruction on these 3 aspects of conceptualities can yield different experiences and u have to discern them with clarity.
  
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

Author
[5:03 PM, 12/29/2020] John Tan: Trekchö
Trekchö means to “cut through”. In Dzogchen we are cutting through the totality of karmic mind or sem.
The karmic mind is composed of conceptual constructs and beliefs. These mental constructs concern the subjective side of a self and the objective side as “other than self”.
It is discovered that our self, mind, problems, birth, death, our body, people, creatures and things; meaning our entire world and universe, are composed only our thought constructs and beliefs.
The method is to suspend paying attention to thoughts, actively thinking thoughts and investing belief in any thought.
As the process cuts deeper, all conceptual reference points are cut through and abandoned.
The beliefs in a self, a soul, a being, a spirit, a god, a guru, a path, enlightenment, a Buddha, Brahman, other people, creatures, objects, planets, stars, galaxies and universes, all are seen to be your own conceptual constructs.
When all such beliefs and all other remaining reference points have been cut though, what remains is a pristine and pure Awareness (Dharmakaya) that can’t possibly be understood conceptually or captured in thought.
Samsara is the self and its world created by the mind’s thought constructs and beliefs... all thought constructs must be “cut through” and abandoned.
Professor of Quantum Physics at John Hopkins, Richard Conn Henry wrote:
“We know for a fact that the universe is not “made of” anything. Get it through your heads, physicists! It is sometimes said that the only thing that is real are the observations, but even that is not true: observations are not real either. They, and everything else, are purely mental."
He later states: ".... there are no real monkeys or cats or other humans––the entire universe exists only in YOUR mind."
“In the real ultimate truth that Prasangika philosophers maintain, there is no objectively existent thing or event, even at the level of conventional truth.”
Tenpa Tsering
Lama Zopa on Prasangika Emptiness Teachings:
“The entire world, even the Dharma path, hell, god realm, positive and negative karma, and enlightenment, were made up by your own mind. Your mind projected the hallucination of things existing from their own side.
This hallucination of inherent existence is the foundation. Then, on top of that, you pay attention to certain attributes and label “wonderful,” “horrible,” or “nothing much.” When you think, “He’s awful” and get angry, you label the person an enemy. Not aware that you created the enemy, you believe there is a truly existent one out there and project all sorts of other notions on him. You justify your actions, thinking they are positive, when in fact you created the enemy. In fact, there’s no real enemy there. There’s not the slightest atom of an enemy existing; not even a tiny particle of true existence.”
Dzogchen teacher, Chokyi Nyima explains:
“The most subtle type of obscuration is to simply conceive of something – like simply thinking, “It is.” Any notion we may hold is still a way of conceptualizing the three spheres: subject, object and action. Whenever there is a thought which conceives the three spheres, karma is created. People ask, ‘What is karma? I don’t get it! Where is karma?” In fact, karma is our mind conceiving something. Karma is the doings of conceptual mind. This subtle forming of a notion of anything is like a web, a haze that obscures our innate Suchness just as mist obscures the sun from being vividly seen.
The great master Nagarjuna said, “There is no samsara apart from your own thoughts.” Samsara is based on thought; samsara is made by thought.”
Khenpo Tsultrim Gyatso:
“The aim of the Prasangika is to silence completely the conceptualizing mind, allowing the mind to rest in absolute freedom from concepts. Absolute freedom from concepts is what Prasangikas call Emptiness.”
[5:03 PM, 12/29/2020] John Tan: From jax
[6:36 PM, 12/29/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Oic.. what do you think?
[6:37 PM, 12/29/2020] Soh Wei Yu: I think can give the false impression that merely a nonconceptual state is liberation lol



[5:59 PM, 12/30/2020] John Tan: Vase empty of vase is like the semantics, meanings, definitions that r associated with a conventional term. The whole idea of and concept abt vase, cause and effect, physicality, existence. For example the whole idea of self/Self is eliminated but will that lead one to the same initial insight and experience of anatta, I doubt so and Non-dual seems to come only much later after maturing of deconstruction. Initially it is the releasing of the mind from the attachments to the "definitions and meanings" of the concepts.
Inherentness is like hearer of sound (imo). However they r related. Yet the experiences differs initially but ultimately both insights will align. Empty of inherentness is more intuitive.
[6:01 PM, 12/30/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Oic..
[6:07 PM, 12/30/2020] John Tan: So vase empty of vase is doing away completely with conceptualities. If practitioner were to start from such a way of practice, will take a long time to give rise to experiential taste similar to anatta. It must b directed to self/Self first before one look at phenomena.
[6:08 PM, 12/30/2020] John Tan: Like chariot is empty of chariot. If u start from there, it is hard to get to an experiential tasted similar to anatta.
[6:08 PM, 12/30/2020] Soh Wei Yu: ic..
[2:24 AM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Vase empty of vase is like Atmanananda way of deconstructing objects into consciousness right
[2:24 AM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: It is also taught in tibetan buddhism?
[4:08 AM, 12/31/2020] John Tan: Sort of.
• 
  
• •  · 
    Reply
  •  · 33m
  •  · 
    Edited
• 
  
Soh Wei Yu

Author
[6:36 AM, 12/31/2020] John Tan: That is y I cut and paste this part to u. This is vase empty of vase.
==> "to suspend paying attention to thoughts, actively thinking thoughts and investing belief in any thought"
This will lead one into dry non-conceptualities without insights. Rather the purpose is to trigger the "insight" to see through and transcend all these man-made constructs and conventions and mistake them as "real" (reifications).
So my first question to u is, will such an insight lead to non-dual, collapsing subject and object duality and inherentness? If no, y? If yes, when?
==>"As the process cuts deeper, all conceptual reference points are cut through and abandoned.
The beliefs in a self, a soul, a being, a spirit, a god, a guru, a path, enlightenment, a Buddha, Brahman, other people, creatures, objects, planets, stars, galaxies and universes, all are seen to be your own conceptual constructs.
When all such beliefs and all other remaining reference points have been cut though, what remains is a pristine and pure Awareness (Dharmakaya) that can’t possibly be understood conceptually or captured in thought.
Samsara is the self and its world created by the mind’s thought constructs and beliefs... all thought constructs must be “cut through” and abandoned."
"When all such beliefs and all other remaining reference points have been cut though, what remains is a pristine and pure Awareness (Dharmakaya) that can’t possibly be understood conceptually or captured in thought."
My second question, is this the purpose like what Jax said? Will this lead to "what remains is pristine, pure Awareness"? If yes how? If no y?
My third question, what is the final result of vase empty of vase?
[9:53 AM, 12/31/2020] John Tan: Quite good. (Soh: Referring to my earlier writing: [5:38 PM, 12/30/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Seeing life and death as mere designation is the seeing through of any inherentness of birth and death by realising that all designated entities undergoing birth/abiding/cessation is by mere designation or the confluence of conditions and designation
[5:43 PM, 12/30/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Not just life and death
[5:44 PM, 12/30/2020] Soh Wei Yu: There is also the sense that for example meditating here is deeply connected with buddha, there is no buddha and no me, just total exertion. It also makes sense that guan yin has thousand arms. It can mean literal emanations, but in a sense all practitioners can feel the total exertion with guan yin because there is no inherent division of guan yin and oneself
[5:45 PM, 12/30/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Just like life and death, that division and line is merely designated)
[7:01 PM, 12/31/2020] John Tan: Now is www.awakeningtoreality.com?
[7:05 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Yeah i think both links still work
[9:24 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Happy new year!
[10:22 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: No need for deconstruction to realise awareness
[10:22 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Just self enquiry is enough
[10:23 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: But deconstruction leads to deeper insights.. like for the atmananda path there is deconstructing objects after the I AM
[10:23 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Initially the deconstruction of objects does not result in nondual in that path
[10:24 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Its like from opaque to transparent witness
[10:24 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Everything is deconstructed to arisings in awareness.. but still dual
[10:24 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Then later that duality collapses
[10:24 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: But thats for atmananda path
[10:24 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: For me i was more like into anatta first
[10:31 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: A Very Important Step
I’ve found that the deconstruction of physical objects (including the body) to be the single most important step. People want to rush past this step to get to the sexy things like thoughts, feelings, free will, etc. But here’s the catch. Almost invariably, we think of thoughts and feelings and free will with the help of physical metaphors. We can’t help it. So we attribute positionality, containment and spatial relations to these subtle, non-physical things. (e.g., “thoughts in the mind,” “mind in the body,” “thoughts causing emotional pressure,” etc.) As long as we do this, we will feel limited in an almost physical way by the non-physical. This is unnecessary, and largely a trick of language. The book goes into this in great detail.
But if we work with the book in order, and begin by deconstructing physicality completely, we will no longer think or experience in physical terms. We will then no longer think of mental things along the lines of physical things. It is then that we begin to understand witnessing awareness much more clearly, and amazingly enough, witnessing awareness begins to become less and less real and substantial at the same time. Our global experience is much lighter and freer as our notion of physicality and awareness together become thinner and thinner.
To help with the deconstruction of physicality, you can read one of the most sustained critiques of physicality ever written: George Berkeley’s Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous (1713). A philosophical acquaintance of mine, and former teacher, Jonathan Bennett, has laboriously updated Berkeley’s 18th century English into more contemporary English for modern students. I was rigorously trained on this text with one of the world’s greatest Berkeley scholars, and it really, really worked to make physicality vanish!! Here is the collection of his modern renditions of Berkeley:
http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/authors/berkeley
- https://greg-goode.com/article/witnessing-awareness/
[10:31 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: But greg goode say before those who want to realise anatta should not do atmanananda direct path
[10:31 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Because it only gets to something like it at the very very end and only like talked about it briefly
[10:47 PM, 12/31/2020] John Tan: Very interesting. Where u get this?
[10:47 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Greg goode website.. the whole article is longer
[10:48 PM, 12/31/2020] John Tan: What is the url? Seams to deconstructs both mental and physical
[10:49 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: https://greg-goode.com/article/witnessing-awareness/
[10:51 PM, 12/31/2020] John Tan: Greg became a Christian right?
[10:52 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Last i heard he is into christianity
[10:52 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: But he doesnt seem to write about it in his website
[10:56 PM, 12/31/2020] John Tan: If he still teaching direct path?
[10:57 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: Im not sure he closed down his facebook group on direct path some years ago
[10:57 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: https://greg-goode.com/.../is-there-creation-in-nonduality/
[10:57 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: He explains advaita ajativada here
[10:57 PM, 12/31/2020] Soh Wei Yu: No creation


[11:01 PM, 12/31/2020] John Tan: Seems like he stop writing after 2017
 
 
.....
 
 
https://www.facebook.com/john.tan.9231712/posts/pfbid07gEbjtLy7Fx6bEHet1qxK9fexXhoSxxh4kMPtyzTyb9WauTC1GrgUdqVBd8WUyZ2l?__cft__[0]=AZUZ7t9QWFfK4Wd3W0hnZRK88FInyRHR5Ro-EC7V7u2sT5iRTyzLKDk96KN4ZjCLqB-mF9aL_IeIUsTAgYsJBkiPdB1GNJGWJV-3et_QDNaw4EKO94LcYv3oCcvV9BrkehLDlNzwiJWRrkC5uw4oAARq&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R
John Tan
Geovani Geo there is the way of de-construction from analysis where one analyses and understands that "named things" are empty and "non-arisen" but still, one may not directly taste that empty clarity even after clearly understanding it conceptually. We must ask y is it so.
So, my question is:
1. How can the understanding that conceptual notions are empty "SUDDENLY" lead to direct authentication of one's empty "clarity/awareness"? Or it does or does not affect one's "clarity/awareness"?
2. If it does not, then what is the purpose of such contemplations?
3. If we want to authenticate "clarity" directly, don't you find the neti neti way to self enquiry of "who am I" a much more direct and intuitive approach?
4. How do 1 and 3 differ from ATR anatta enquiry of:
In hearing, there is just sound, no hearer;
In seeing, there is just colors and shapes, no seer;
All the above r ways of deconstructing conceptual constructs, but they lead to different results. Clearly understanding which de-constructing technique lead to what "result" is crucial.
*** It has to do with whether we r deconstructing the "SYNTAX/STRUCURE" or the "SEMANTICS/MEANING" that is associated to conceptual notion but will not go into it.
......
I replied:
Soh Wei Yu
My take
1) In greg goode direct path, the conceptual notions and constructs of physicality and objectivity is deconstructed even at the I AM phase prior to collapse of witness
In this path, objects and physicality become deconstructed into arisings within witnessing awareness, even before witness collapses.
This leaves the subjective pole undeconstructed until much later.
(Their path: coarse Witnessing (correction: opaque witness) with personality undeconstructed > subtle Witness or opaque witness (correction: transparent witness) with personality and objectivity deconstructed > collapse of witness into pure consciousness (aka one mind) > finally even consciousness dissolve (no mind?))
3) will lead to dissociation and I AM. But neti neti is needed for self enquiry and I AM realization.
4) deconstructs subjective pole, leading to direct realization and taste of radiance as all manifestations. Aka anatta
Soh Wei Yu
As for 2) i think 1) can be a kind of release on mental level even if anatta isn’t realised. Greg goode said that by the time he reached transparent witness he was free of mental suffering.
Reply2wEdited
John Tan
Soh Wei Yu what is opaque witness? Free of mental suffering is true.
Reply2w
Soh Wei Yu
John Tan
Sorry wrote wrong. Opaque witness first followed by transparent witness. He became free from mental suffering at transparent witness:
Reply2w
Soh Wei Yu
Reply2wEdited
John Tan
Soh Wei Yu how does insight of "I Am" got triggered via such method of seeing through "named things"?
Reply2w
Soh Wei Yu
John Tan
To me I AM is triggered from self enquiry, not deconstruction. Seeing through named things is more on deconstruction
Reply2w
John Tan
Soh Wei Yu so u r saying 1 will not lead to realization of "clarity" but just mere release of mental suffering?
Reply2w
Soh Wei Yu
John Tan
If the deconstruction of all conceptual notions goes along with meditation into a state of cessation of concepts, there is also a possibility of discovering pure awareness / I AM. Doesn’t have to be self enquiry. Like sim pern chong got there by breathing meditation, some people through psychedelics, some people through yoga, kundalini etc
Reply2w
John Tan
Soh Wei Yu yes but not necessarily until total cessation of concepts, however at a much later phase of de-construction. The insight by then will be much clearer and stable imo though it comes at a later phase of de-constructing. I m more interested in how and why.
Reply2w
.....