<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0"> <channel> <title>Non-dual/Immediate</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_category?p_l_id=&amp;mbCategoryId=77852</link> <description>All non-dual and immediate focused discussions.</description> <pubDate>Sun, 19 Oct 2014 00:34:21 GMT</pubDate> <dc:date>2014-10-19T00:34:21Z</dc:date> <item> <title>RE: The Most Profound Suttas</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5606933</link> <description>One of my favorite recent ones:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;dharmafarer&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;wordpress&amp;#x2f;wp-content&amp;#x2f;uploads&amp;#x2f;2009&amp;#x2f;12&amp;#x2f;1&amp;#x2e;4-Udumbarika-Sihanada-S-d25-piya-proto&amp;#x2e;pdf"&gt;http://dharmafarer.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/1.4-Udumbarika-Sihanada-S-d25-piya-proto.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In this sutta the Buddha gives a challenge to a group of outsider wanderers claiming that it would take them a maximum of 7 days to complete his challenge (arahatship). In the end none of the wanderers accept the challenge as they are overcome by Mara.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The peculiar part of this sutta is that the Buddha claims that it is not necessary for any of them to give up:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-Their notions of wholesome and unwholesome.&lt;br /&gt;-Their current teacher.&lt;br /&gt;-Their livelihood.&lt;br /&gt;-Their training.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The specific wonderful passage may be found here:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img src="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;i&amp;#x2e;gyazo&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;c02e923a0989d8017c52c3aeb38be846&amp;#x2e;png" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;img src="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;i&amp;#x2e;gyazo&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;07d2c4ef0182af7e5dddb82ee8af0d7d&amp;#x2e;png" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And as a bonus, here is some conversion magick for you!&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;dharmafarer&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;wordpress&amp;#x2f;wp-content&amp;#x2f;uploads&amp;#x2f;2013&amp;#x2f;04&amp;#x2f;45&amp;#x2e;8-Licchavi-Bhaddiya-S-a4&amp;#x2e;193-piya&amp;#x2e;pdf"&gt;http://dharmafarer.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/45.8-Licchavi-Bhaddiya-S-a4.193-piya.pdf&lt;/a&gt;</description> <pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2014 22:16:44 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5606933</guid> <dc:creator>J J</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-10-18T22:16:44Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: The Most Profound Suttas</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5606042</link> <description>Chachakka Sutta   Majjhima Nikaya #148&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This , to me is profound, due to the Sutta&amp;#039;s history of bringing &amp;#034;Sudden Awakenings&amp;#034; upon being heard out loud and understood.  Buddha the Direct Pointer.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;talks&amp;#x2e;dhammasukha&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;uploads&amp;#x2f;1&amp;#x2f;2&amp;#x2f;8&amp;#x2f;6&amp;#x2f;12865490&amp;#x2f;mn-148-dsmc-bt-110825&amp;#x2e;pdf"&gt;http://talks.dhammasukha.org/uploads/1/2/8/6/12865490/mn-148-dsmc-bt-110825.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Edit adding one more, &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Sammaditthi Sutta  MN-9 Right View  Profound , shows full path to cessation&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;talks&amp;#x2e;dhammasukha&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;uploads&amp;#x2f;1&amp;#x2f;2&amp;#x2f;8&amp;#x2f;6&amp;#x2f;12865490&amp;#x2f;mn-009-010824&amp;#x2e;pdf"&gt;http://talks.dhammasukha.org/uploads/1/2/8/6/12865490/mn-009-010824.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Psi Phi</description> <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2014 15:16:56 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5606042</guid> <dc:creator>Psi Phi</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-10-16T15:16:56Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: The Most Profound Suttas</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5606006</link> <description>I enjoy the Maha-dukkhakkhandha Sutta: The Great Mass of Stress:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;accesstoinsight&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;tipitaka&amp;#x2f;mn&amp;#x2f;mn&amp;#x2e;013&amp;#x2e;than&amp;#x2e;html"&gt;http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.013.than.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The buddha speaks of the allure, the drawback and the escape of sensuality, form and feeling.</description> <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2014 13:56:47 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5606006</guid> <dc:creator>John P</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-10-16T13:56:47Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: The Most Profound Suttas</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5605975</link> <description>Upatissa (later called Sariputta) meets Assaji, pesters him (&amp;#034;speak a little or a lot, but tell me just the gist&amp;#034;), gets pointing-out instructions, enters the stream. &lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;accesstoinsight&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;tipitaka&amp;#x2f;vin&amp;#x2f;mv&amp;#x2f;mv&amp;#x2e;01&amp;#x2e;23&amp;#x2e;01-10&amp;#x2e;than&amp;#x2e;html"&gt;Upatissa&amp;#039;s Question&lt;/a&gt;.</description> <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2014 12:17:26 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5605975</guid> <dc:creator>Florian Weps</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-10-16T12:17:26Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>The Most Profound Suttas</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5605913</link> <description>This thread is for linking to the most profound suttas in the Pali Canon.  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I&amp;#039;ll start with the Bahiya sutta.  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Here it is in two different translations: &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;accesstoinsight&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;tipitaka&amp;#x2f;kn&amp;#x2f;ud&amp;#x2f;ud&amp;#x2e;1&amp;#x2e;10&amp;#x2e;than&amp;#x2e;html"&gt;http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.10.than.html&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;accesstoinsight&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;tipitaka&amp;#x2f;kn&amp;#x2f;ud&amp;#x2f;ud&amp;#x2e;1&amp;#x2e;10&amp;#x2e;irel&amp;#x2e;html"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.10.irel.html&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;</description> <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2014 08:29:45 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5605913</guid> <dc:creator>Tom Tom</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-10-16T08:29:45Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: "Mom and Dad, where are you?" Practice</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5590410</link> <description>&amp;#034;Ah, I must not actually be dead.&amp;#034;</description> <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2014 20:18:46 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5590410</guid> <dc:creator>Not Tao</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-09-23T20:18:46Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: "Mom and Dad, where are you?" Practice</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5590365</link> <description>Once upon a time, there was a couple that found themselves in perfect bodies, with perfect bliss, in perfect union, and perfect everything. Since everything was perfect, they had no need to do anything, except just sit there.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And then there was impermanence.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This had the effect of creating desire in the hearts of the couple, so they thought (this had the effect of growing a couple limbs and doing some other weird stuff to them.).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;They conceived that there must be something better than perfection. This was a monstrosity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Out of this monstrosity came forth creation and destruction.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I was born into an imperfect world.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;BREAK&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Somewhere down in the depths of my mind this memory remained, but fractured into pieces. I had to reconstruct these images in order that I could let go of my desire to create, and subsequently destroy.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;La la la la la life goes on, and now I can look for my mother, because she is eluding me at the moment.</description> <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2014 19:56:30 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5590365</guid> <dc:creator>Adam Dietrich Ringle</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-09-23T19:56:30Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: "Mom and Dad, where are you?" Practice</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5566122</link> <description>&amp;#034;Where am I?&amp;#034;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="https&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;youtube&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;watch&amp;#x3f;v&amp;#x3d;2X86u4MMpnE"&gt;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X86u4MMpnE&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="https&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;youtube&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;watch&amp;#x3f;v&amp;#x3d;jMBsZC-FJNE"&gt;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMBsZC-FJNE&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="https&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;youtube&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;watch&amp;#x3f;v&amp;#x3d;QmZYIyySxPE"&gt;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmZYIyySxPE&lt;/a&gt;</description> <pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2014 22:50:11 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5566122</guid> <dc:creator>Richard Zen</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-09T22:50:11Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5566059</link> <description>Sure, some personal examples.   While I think to have a conversation you need to use some conceptual memory content, I tend to want to confirm whatever I&amp;#039;m dialoguing about, as much as possible, by checking to verify with my present experience.   Checking our interpretations/thoughts about any particular subject for accuracy.   What you are saying about habit patterns, or conditioning, seems similar to my own case.  Changes happening slowly over time, and part of the conditioning being the experience of &amp;#034;concern&amp;#034;.  But then there are other &amp;#034;layers&amp;#034; to this, a parallel recognition of no separate presence or personal connection to either the habit or the conditioned response of like or dislike.  The intent to strategize around conditioning collapses on itself when experienced in isolation (no self supporting it).   &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;A live example would be something like this:    I just got a call from the auto repair place while writing this and my car is ready to pick up.  Parallel to seeing my body typing away, thoughts about this subject, and images of hopping on my bike and riding over, there is a sense that this body, thoughts, and sensations are all just impersonal appearances, that I&amp;#039;m everywhere/no where, that awareness is present.  I also notice how much words and phrases refer to &amp;#034;me&amp;#034; and I recognize there isn&amp;#039;t one, and also that this is just the way it is.    There is alot of peace and space around the whole affair, a thrill at exploring and describing it to the unknown &amp;#034;listener&amp;#034;, and lots of tangent doors, opportunities for probing deeper into any element of this description.    Like, is there any physical reality beyond this moment?   Isn&amp;#039;t the moment just unfolding rather than that &amp;#034;I am going on my bike somewhere&amp;#034; (so the auto shop will just show up &lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;here&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; at some point as the body does it&amp;#039;s things and mind does it&amp;#039;s thing, etc.)?   &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This is pretty choppy but something of an example.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;My point about &amp;#034;space at the center of me&amp;#034; relates to my thinking at that moment of a conventional idea of self, and the relative sense of bodymind location.   Writing at the time, what I was referring to as &amp;#034;I&amp;#034; felt empty, the body shell like, thoughts and feelings passing by, no center &amp;#034;me&amp;#034; holding it all up.   At this moment there is an awarenss of being unboundaried, all of that body/mind stuff is &amp;#034;in me&amp;#034;, what I am is sort of a space with appearance suspended in it.  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So that&amp;#039;s a little about me, what&amp;#039;s happening there?</description> <pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2014 20:48:22 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5566059</guid> <dc:creator>Dan Kelso</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-09T20:48:22Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565846</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Dan Kelso:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Some things I might mention as present considerations in view of present experience of &amp;#034;no self&amp;#034; have to do with a complete disconnect with being a &amp;#034;doer&amp;#034;, there being a sort of empty space at center, how thoughts move freely without a thinker, what it means in relationship, what happens in making a living, etc.   All real life areas where this &amp;#034;no self&amp;#034; event changes the whole layout.    This is the discussion I was looking for.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Why not start things off ? With some examples from your own experience. That will make it clearer what sorts of things you are interested in sharing.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In my experience it takes time and intention for habitual patterns for day to day life to change. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Afflictive emotions are more rare. And I don&amp;#039;t remember the last time I felt them with the same sort of primal intensity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;That helps with relationships, work etc. But I still have concerns about those areas of my life. Habit patterns, and subconscious beliefs etc take time to change.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Traumatic events from the past, various repressed insecurities, etc can no longer be buried in the deep recessiss of the body mind. They create a tightness in the body. It can be quite painful and get in the way. Over time I have learned to work with this energy and release it. This is the bulk of my practice.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;span style="color: #111111"&gt;Now, I&amp;#039;m assuming there are some who have been involved in an all-out assault on the sense of self and achieved some significant breakthroughs that effect present views of what they are, what they are not, and how life looks with a space at the center of &amp;#034;you&amp;#034;.    I&amp;#039;d like to discuss our present views of how things look NOW.  &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;I don&amp;#039;t expereince anything that could be described as a space at the center of &amp;#039;me&amp;#039;. Do you ?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;How does it feel in terms of your sensory reality to experience this ? For eg. do you feel spaciousness within your head ? Or something else entirely ?</description> <pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2014 06:45:50 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565846</guid> <dc:creator>(D Z) Dhru Val</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-09T06:45:50Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565834</link> <description>Hi Psi,&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Well, I would say you do have things to say about this &amp;#034;no self thingy&amp;#034;.   Quite a bit perhaps.   What about those &amp;#034;stages within daily life&amp;#034; you mentioned?   Sounds like an interesting exploration for us there!     &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I &lt;u&gt;do&lt;/u&gt; find it very interesting,  and enjoy talking about how things seem in the moment, in real life, with this no self recognition thing.   I mean, it feels like being a kid again, life is a mystery and wonderful, bursting with newness, discoveries.   The sense of freedom is awesome, really!    Even just here, now, hands are typing, thoughts are moving, I&amp;#039;m witnessing it all and I&amp;#039;m no where at all, or everywhere.  I imagine your out there reading, but what does that even mean?   Out there, in here, does it really matter?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Don&amp;#039;t you just find this all so damn amazing, how it all rolls on without a you?  How wild is that?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So I&amp;#039;m just the new kid down the block wandering up to your porch and saying, &amp;#034;hey, want to come out and play, check out the neighborhood together?&amp;#034;</description> <pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2014 06:33:08 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565834</guid> <dc:creator>Dan Kelso</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-09T06:33:08Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565786</link> <description>Thanks D,&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;To restate my proposal simply, and putting all description of the process to get here and speculation on various constructs aside, the recognition of &amp;#034;no separate self&amp;#034; (for lack of a better term) is clearly a significant occurrance.   In the nondual traditions it&amp;#039;s something of a crown jewel.   This recognition is alive, here and now in &amp;#034;my&amp;#034; experience.  (I will also allow for the possibility that there may be some level of delusion present as well, however there are some significant insights present which are perfectly clear).    &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Now, I&amp;#039;m assuming there are some who have been involved in an all-out assault on the sense of self and achieved some significant breakthroughs that effect present views of what they are, what they are not, and how life looks with a space at the center of &amp;#034;you&amp;#034;.    I&amp;#039;d like to discuss our present views of how things look NOW.  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So, given the shut down of the stages of the &amp;#034;self process&amp;#034; you describe, I&amp;#039;m assuming some new functioning/point of view is in place now.    What&amp;#039;s that like for you.   Let&amp;#039;s just talk in regular language, even though it&amp;#039;s really not very accurate in describing things (like positing an &amp;#034;I&amp;#034; when there is not such thing, etc).  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Some things I might mention as present considerations in view of present experience of &amp;#034;no self&amp;#034; have to do with a complete disconnect with being a &amp;#034;doer&amp;#034;, there being a sort of empty space at center, how thoughts move freely without a thinker, what it means in relationship, what happens in making a living, etc.   All real life areas where this &amp;#034;no self&amp;#034; event changes the whole layout.    This is the discussion I was looking for.</description> <pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2014 06:01:47 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565786</guid> <dc:creator>Dan Kelso</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-09T06:01:47Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565783</link> <description>Just remembered something else to add:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Sometimes, People want to make the whole self , no-self thingy a meta-physical , or supernatural, or philosophical, or even a scientific debate,  it seems it is none of that, it is not that complex, or even a big deal.  &amp;#034;Thinking&amp;#034; about no-self, or self can help, but mostly hinder the mind with a thorny thicket of ideas and concepts)so, what is there? there is observing phenomenon that gives rise to an experience, then understanding that experience gives rise to wisdom.   Is there any indiviually experienced phenomenon that arises and fades away that can be held down and called a core self?  If there isn&amp;#039;t then what is left is the truth, there is no core self, but the mind is stubborn and patterns in the mind are engraved.  It is akin to the task of a person sanding down a rock, sanding sanding, getting it smooth, then keeps sanding, and sanding, until one day there is nothing left to sand, no rock at all left. Though, it seems some minds just cast aside the rock, and skip the sanding process.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There do seem to be stages within daily life though, sometimes I am still sanding the rock, sometimes I have to laugh when I forget and find I am carrying the rock, and sometimes I just leave the rock and move along.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Rock on</description> <pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2014 05:54:39 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565783</guid> <dc:creator>Psi Phi</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-09T05:54:39Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565777</link> <description>not looking for help friend, just fellow explorers, so to speak.</description> <pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2014 05:13:52 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565777</guid> <dc:creator>Dan Kelso</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-09T05:13:52Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565774</link> <description>Adios amigo.</description> <pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2014 05:11:09 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565774</guid> <dc:creator>Dan Kelso</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-09T05:11:09Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565770</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Dan Kelso:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;I&amp;#039;ve been reading some of Daniel&amp;#039;s book and posts here, and wondering if/how to enter the pool of discussion.   Finally just decided to do a cannonball in the deep end and see what happens.   Or maybe I&amp;#039;m in the shallow end and will hit the bottom in a second.   &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I&amp;#039;m mainly interested in exploring/understanding my experience, some shifts that occurred, and a major one a couple of years ago which resulted in a permanent sense of seeing the false nature of the sense of identity with a body, idea, sensation, etc.   (recognition of no self, or &amp;#034;not-self&amp;#034;?).     I come from a self-inquiry, &amp;#034;non-dual&amp;#034; approach to practice.  Many years of sitting and walking meditation, deeply investigating everything that seem to make up the sense of &amp;#034;me&amp;#034; (body, thoughts, spatial locations, imagery, etc.) &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In particular, I&amp;#039;d be very interested in anyone sharing their direct experience of their inner terrain in regards to what appears to be a ceasing of the process of identification.      &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;What I find in my experience are several key landmarks.   There is a persistent change in beliefs structures around identity based on what is actually here.   The conviction that I am not identical to/identifiable as any conventional appearances or sensed objects, nothing separate in experience, seems complete and to reflect the &amp;#034;obvious&amp;#034;.   And this conviction is based on direct experience, just what is here (as oppose to theoretical).   I would &lt;u&gt;not&lt;/u&gt; say that I don&amp;#039;t exist, however.   This was an important question to ask, so to speak, upon recognizing I do not exist as a body, thought, sensation, etc.    Existence is also quite obvious, but it&amp;#039;s just not clear what this existence IS.   I&amp;#039;ve got some ideas though.........     Then there is the &amp;#034;integration&amp;#034; of all this that seems part of a process that continues on (not having a sense of &amp;#034;doing&amp;#034; it, no doer, lot&amp;#039;s of things, everything, goes on, on it&amp;#039;s own).    &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Anyway, interested in any comments.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;Hey Dan !!&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Good Subject!  The &amp;#034;self&amp;#034; is there when and if one is thinking about it during life , or the mind is caught up in the stories about life and phenomonenon.  But, when one is free of the mind&amp;#039;s storytelling , the whole &amp;#034;self&amp;#034; issue is absent, there is existence where it just does&amp;#039;t come up anymore.  There definetely are processes, both mental and physical occurring, the brain sets protein markers which enables clinging, neurns form neuron circuits which allow for the process of mental formations and habits.  These processes can be moved, pushed and , shifted in wholesome directions, enabling a more harmonious flow within our mind/body environment and also outside of our sacks of skin.&lt;br /&gt;But back to the &amp;#034;self&amp;#034;, when one is just here, where is the &amp;#034;self&amp;#034;?? The self is only here when one ponders from a viewpoint of a self, or rather the self is a mental construct requiring the Ego support system.  Who is writing this anyway, where are my words coming from, my fingers are just typing what is arising in the mind, where is the self that is actually creating these words?  What about the Rabbits? Why didn&amp;#039;t my self think of Kangaroos?  Why did this so-called &amp;#034;I&amp;#039; think up kangaroos?  Actually I can trace back my thoughts and what they were associated with, so there really isn&amp;#039;t a self thinking thoughts , just associated neurons linking and forming, and typing, etc, all processes within processes.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;But to sum up, IMHO, Self is a mental fabrication that works as a delayed response, descibing internal and external phenomenon after the fact, but since this happens so quickly, and the brain &amp;#034;buffers&amp;#034; the information from the senses, and that most minds are cluttered and not able to stay within the present moment , a delusion from the above factors arises and thus most of humanity thinks &amp;#034;they&amp;#034; are seeing, thinking, feeling,  when actually the sensations are there, THEN, the recognition occurs.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So, one would suppose that to type this reply out, the &amp;#034;self&amp;#034; as a concept is/was used, and it seems so, but under closer scrutiny even that idea of a self collapses.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Going back to my &amp;#034;resting&amp;#034; mind state, thinking is a kind of dukkha...&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Peace&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Psi Phi</description> <pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2014 05:08:16 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565770</guid> <dc:creator>Psi Phi</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-09T05:08:16Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565723</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Dan Kelso:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;I don&amp;#039;t want to be offensive here, but you don&amp;#039;t seem to be able to write about real time, here and now experience.   Or to carry on an exchange, a natural back and forth dialogue about what is happening in your experience.   That&amp;#039;s really what I mean by showing up in a &amp;#034;Nondual&amp;#034; area of the website and inviting exploration together.  You keep wanting to teach me something, or express your Buddhist concepts.   What I see are that these comments your making are just concepts, abstractions &lt;u&gt;about&lt;/u&gt; existence.   I&amp;#039;m familiar with alot of these ideas, but once you get them, why not put them aside and dive into this experience and see what&amp;#039;s here?        &lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;On this forum I try to teach people (with concepts obviously) and they can meditate on their own.  I also post a practice log with my experiences.  If you want a non-dual experience in real time with people you can use the following app &lt;strong&gt;Buddha Pong&lt;/strong&gt;:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="https&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;itunes&amp;#x2e;apple&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;app&amp;#x2f;id897707690&amp;#x3f;mt&amp;#x3d;8"&gt;https://itunes.apple.com/app/id897707690?mt=8&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I think most people are going to write about their experiences in the past tense.  For most people who have developed some realizations a Buddha Pong app will be more efficient use of time than a traditional posting website.  I&amp;#039;ve never done ping-pong noting before and I don&amp;#039;t know how it could be used better than the app.  Skype is another way and some posters have made skype meetings to meditate with others doing ping-pong noting and concentration practices.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Have fun!&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Metta </description> <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2014 23:11:58 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565723</guid> <dc:creator>Richard Zen</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-08T23:11:58Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565717</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Dan Kelso:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In particular, I&amp;#039;d be very interested in anyone sharing their direct experience of their inner terrain in regards to what appears to be a ceasing of the process of identification.      &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Many years of sitting and walking meditation, deeply investigating everything that seem to make up the sense of &amp;#034;me&amp;#034; (body, thoughts, spatial locations, imagery, etc.) ...This was an important question to ask, so to speak, upon recognizing I do not exist as a body, thought, sensation, etc. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Anyway, interested in any comments.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;My direct experience of the inner terrain is similar to yours but more stage based than you describe.&lt;br /&gt;The self is a process, not a thing. The selfing process is made up of several subprocess that work together to create a selfing gestalt the interferes and obscures the experience of reality clearly cleanly and when operating there is an added stress that goes along with the process. &lt;br /&gt;The stages of selfing process that were shut down happened in this order-&lt;ol style="list-style: decimal outside;"&gt;&lt;li&gt;The rule set of external reality (things are solid, unchanging, etc) were seen thru and the possession or ownership of the rules were shut down&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;The 5 physical senses were seen thru and the possession or ownership of them were shut down&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Thoughts including the mental echo of the 5 senses were seen thru and the possession or ownership of them were shut down&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Proprioception/ sense of self in space was seen thru and the illusion of possession or ownership of a center point, outside diameter and personal bubble as mine was shut down.&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;The sense of a doer/selector of experience was shut down. Internal sensations no longer had any priority over external sensations. All sensations had an ordinary and stressless quality. (*caveat- This was not a permanent shift....still investigating this)&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ol&gt;The early shifts took years to do as I was not obsessed enough with meditation. Since doing a daily practice the later shifts sped up to about 8 months or so between.&lt;br /&gt;It&amp;#039;s kinda hard to describe what the deletion of a process is like as the only difference is after the fact comparison. You can&amp;#039;t see the process as it is before....and after it&amp;#039;s gone you can only talk about the difference....which is mostly like saying a 5 pound bag o invisible stress was dropped....and there might be more of it.&lt;img alt="emoticon" src="http://www.dharmaoverground.org/dho-theme/images/emoticons/happy.gif" &gt;&lt;br /&gt;I have enjoyed the book &amp;#034;The Ego Tunnel: The Science of the Mind and the Myth of the Self [Thomas Metzinger]&amp;#034; Fun stuff that pins down some of the processes and speculates what parts of the brain is involved.&lt;br /&gt;Hope this was what you were looking for. If not feel free to re-describe what aspect you are particularly interested in.&lt;br /&gt;~D</description> <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2014 22:38:45 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565717</guid> <dc:creator>Dream Walker</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-08T22:38:45Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565710</link> <description>Identifying with a body is unskillful. Not identifying with a body is unskillful. Identifying with a mind is unskillful. Not identifying with a mind is unskillful. Existing is unskillful. Not existing is unskillful.&lt;br /&gt;Buddhas do it differently. How exactly do they do it?&lt;br /&gt;Answer to that simple question is nibbana.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Helpful?</description> <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2014 22:21:09 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565710</guid> <dc:creator>Paweł K</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-08T22:21:09Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565692</link> <description>I don&amp;#039;t want to be offensive here, but you don&amp;#039;t seem to be able to write about real time, here and now experience.   Or to carry on an exchange, a natural back and forth dialogue about what is happening in your experience.   That&amp;#039;s really what I mean by showing up in a &amp;#034;Nondual&amp;#034; area of the website and inviting exploration together.  You keep wanting to teach me something, or express your Buddhist concepts.   What I see are that these comments your making are just concepts, abstractions &lt;u&gt;about&lt;/u&gt; existence.   I&amp;#039;m familiar with alot of these ideas, but once you get them, why not put them aside and dive into this experience and see what&amp;#039;s here?        </description> <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:54:41 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565692</guid> <dc:creator>Dan Kelso</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-08T20:54:41Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565645</link> <description>Any aversion creates a split.  If you dislike a wandering mind which most meditators condition themselves unknowingly via concentration and noting practices, you create a separation that you can feel.  Then it becomes a &amp;#034;meditator&amp;#034; that&amp;#039;s trying to get to enlightenment in some future, which in the end is just thinking about the future.  If the meditation doesn&amp;#039;t go where the ego wants it to go then you get aversion.  When you want the mind to achieve enlightenment then it&amp;#039;s desire again.  It&amp;#039;s the way the amygdala works in that it&amp;#039;s bipolar like a carrot and a stick. Because the carrot (dopamine/oxytocin/serotonin etc) undergoes impermanence we end up getting the stick (cortisol) in many different manifestations, including in measuring and rating our meditation attainments.  I was stuck in there for some years as I got to equanimity. Equanimity feels narrow when there&amp;#039;s still too much aversion hanging out where the meditator is not looking.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The middle path I&amp;#039;m referring to has to do with my understanding and my experience.  Anyone who looks at the 3 characteristics will see impermanence but at some point they might get nihilistic views that nothing matters which isn&amp;#039;t the case because cause and effect will still happen and we still get emotional over outcomes.  The permanence view is not really a view that people have when you ask them, but they do treat likes and dislikes with the gravity of objects being permanently, and undestructibly real.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This is why I linked to the Nagarjuna book because these understandings can be read and then added to the meditation so we don&amp;#039;t fall into either extreme.  I met an old lady after watching a movie that liked Hinduism and I mentioned I liked Buddhism.  She immediately went into how Buddhists are nihilists and are always in &amp;#034;states&amp;#034; because she had Buddhist friends that were probably stuck in their practices.  Trying to explain the middle path was impossible as she would interrupt me and repeat they are nihilists.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;A simple way to look into it is impermanence.  Is everything in the universe impermanent (even if slowly so)? Yes.  But is everything nothing? No because experience still happens.  Treating things as inherently existing is terminology that means when we act as if objects exist without cause and effect.  Because everything is conceptual to some degree in our senses and thinking process we have to remind ourselves that objects are constantly touching something and involved in cause and effect.  A tree needs sunlight, CO2, water, and soil, but what we see is a shape of a tree.  This is why understanding is important because my senses and thinking won&amp;#039;t go beyond what they can (noticing objects as inherently real) but I can cling less to &amp;#034;things&amp;#034; because I know they aren&amp;#039;t permanent, can&amp;#039;t satisfy permanently, and because of the former they can&amp;#039;t be owned by a self because even the body mind complex is under the same conditions.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Quoting myself above:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;span style="color: #111111"&gt;So finally objects are simplifications of the mind to find differences in the universe for survival purposes.  They don&amp;#039;t exist &lt;strike&gt;indefinitely&lt;/strike&gt; inherently and &lt;/span&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style="color: #111111"&gt;neither does the body and mind.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;span style="color: #111111"&gt;  All things break down into smaller parts and go through time as entropy.  So things exist but detail is over-simplified by the mind and conceptual thinking.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="color: #111111"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So I want to understand the perception of traffic lights and their use but I don&amp;#039;t want to start chasing lights to beat a red light or accidently go through a red light because I cling to not wanting to stop.  We need to recognize perceptions with less reactivity instead of not recognizing them or being full of desire and aversion towards them.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Here&amp;#039;s some talks that will help you with Nagarjuna and emptiness:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;dharmaseed&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;teacher&amp;#x2f;210&amp;#x2f;talk&amp;#x2f;11929&amp;#x2f;"&gt;http://www.dharmaseed.org/teacher/210/talk/11929/&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;dharmaseed&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;teacher&amp;#x2f;210&amp;#x2f;talk&amp;#x2f;9553&amp;#x2f;"&gt;http://www.dharmaseed.org/teacher/210/talk/9553/&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Things are empty of permanent form but they are not so empty that they don&amp;#039;t exist.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;span style="color: #111111"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 12px"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: lucida&amp;#x20;sans&amp;#x20;unicode&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;lucida&amp;#x20;grande&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;sans-serif"&gt;...space is neither an entity, the abscence of an entity, an entity with characteristics, nor indeed the characteristics themselves.  The remaining four elements - earth, water, fire, and air - are to be treated like space.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Identifying the cause with the effect is not appropriate.  But not identifying the cause with the effect is also not appropriate.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: #111111"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: lucida&amp;#x20;sans&amp;#x20;unicode&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;lucida&amp;#x20;grande&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;sans-serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 12px"&gt;Those of little intelligence, who see in terms of the &amp;#034;is-ness&amp;#034; and &amp;#034;not-is-ness&amp;#034; of entities, do not perceive the peaceful stilling of what can be seen. ~ Nagarjuna&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description> <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2014 19:06:09 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565645</guid> <dc:creator>Richard Zen</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-08T19:06:09Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565629</link> <description>Ok, so my understanding of your description of your experience is, conscousness seems to be registering impressions like a mirror (and you realize this interpretation is just another reflection in the mirror).   And your practice is to let go of concepts like that of time, and to work on deconditioning attachments by referrencing the &amp;#034;3 characteristics&amp;#034; (impermanance, etc).   And you have goals of practice like recognizing objects as not having absolute reality.  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;By &amp;#034;reducing the split further&amp;#034;, I assume you mean you feel your practice is reducing the sense of you being a separate self, identification with this &amp;#034;self sense&amp;#034;, is that correct?   &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;What do you mean, &amp;#034;it&amp;#039;s not permanent, but it&amp;#039;s also not nothing&amp;#034;.   What are you referring to?   Your practice?  Your understanding?</description> <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2014 18:32:14 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565629</guid> <dc:creator>Dan Kelso</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-08T18:32:14Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565613</link> <description>What I notice is that consciousness is aware of all the senses + thinking.  I can feel intentions with my consciousness and it appears like a mirror registering all these impressions.  Thinking of a mirror is also registered.  I also notice how thoughts about the past and future can be let go of leading to a dismantling of conceptual time.  I can also sense the last bit that needs to be let go of is pursuing preferences without holding them. Reactivity towards preferences is greatly reduced since I started meditation in 2007.  When the mind wanders there&amp;#039;s no aversion to it wandering which reduces again the self-split further.  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Now there&amp;#039;s still just the smaller clinging to preferences and time that has to be dealt with by deconditioning those attachments.  By seeing the three characteristics and by using concepts to further understanding of inherent existence I can ask questions like &amp;#034;this thing I want...when I get it will it make me permanently happy?&amp;#034;  Using imagination and concepts to realistically assess the value we put on activities is helpful.  Recognizing perceptions and objects without holding absolute reality in them is the goal.  One cannot be in the absolute all the time but one can bring the understanding into life by continuous reminders.  It&amp;#039;s the middle path where things exist but undergo the 3 characteristics.  It&amp;#039;s not permanent but it&amp;#039;s also not nothing.   </description> <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2014 17:40:39 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565613</guid> <dc:creator>Richard Zen</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-08T17:40:39Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565598</link> <description>I understand the logic of what you are saying but what&amp;#039;s happening is you seem to be remaining on a conceptual level with all this.    For one, your not really able to understand that I&amp;#039;m describing what I see, not using a mental reasoning process to present a point.  That seems like a big waste of time as two theories can completely miss eachother til the end of time.   Each is just a story.   I&amp;#039;m simply looking at what is here, now, investigating it with attention, and attempting to describe what I see in simple terms, and asking you to tell me what you see, keeping the interpretation to an absolute minimum.      Can you just look directly at your own experience and simply describe what you really know &lt;strong&gt;directly&lt;/strong&gt;?   Let&amp;#039;s compare on that level, ok?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Here is one point to address.    Sense of self.    Yes, it is subtly there at times, and yes there never is or was an actual self, just belief in and thoughts regarding one.  I know each of these points with complete certainty.   The result is, in spite of the arising of thought about a self, even one that says, &amp;#034;I am presence&amp;#034;, or &amp;#034;I am consciousness&amp;#034;, the experience of life as being without a separate self remains clear.    It&amp;#039;s not a deconditioning to function better, but a radical shift in seeing how things actually are.     So thoughts about &amp;#034;me&amp;#034; seem to come and go quickly, and have no &amp;#034;growth&amp;#034; into any type of alternative understanding.   But they do continue to arrise.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; I&amp;#039;m also interested in general conditioning of various types, and my interest in &amp;#034;Buddhist&amp;#034; descriptions is to give some structure to my on going investigations of behaviour and underlying thought patterns.   For example, &amp;#034;right speech&amp;#034; as it relates to work in the world.....&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;Look forward to hearing about your experiences!</description> <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2014 16:53:36 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565598</guid> <dc:creator>Dan Kelso</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-08T16:53:36Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565577</link> <description>Look this is a really difficult practice.  The sense of self is a gradation that is subtly there.  Even if you believe there&amp;#039;s an object in front of you and a consciousness self attending to it.  Any measurement or preferences (including in meditation) can cause stress.  Anatta as you describe it is good in accepting the mental habits already there so you don&amp;#039;t add stress reacting to the stress thinking that is a habit.  That&amp;#039;s a good realization but people will still find some stress there because consciousness could be construed as a self and the concept of the realization can be clung to (by constantly rehearsing the concept of realization in your mind).  The purpose of the practice is to get rid of greed, hatred and delusion (belief inherent existence of objects) in daily life.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Habits are addictions.  Another analysis could be actual behavior.  If you have habits that get in the way of your major goals then the eradicating of those habits would be a good litmus test for freedom.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So what you&amp;#039;re doing with the reasoning is good but it&amp;#039;s a mixture of reasoning, and meditation in daily life.  If the brain is not reacting with desire and aversion I would suspect you are an arhat.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I think a good way to look at your reasoning is to see that there was no &amp;#034;self&amp;#034; in the first place but there is a reactivity that feels like a self and deconditioning that to lower levels so you can function better.  In the book Clarifying the Natural State you would welcome the habitual thinking impulses but not act on them.  You would then watch the impulses naturally pass away and then cultivate something skillful like the brahmaviharas etc. This is a gentle for of Right Energy/Effort.  Habits get reconditioned to something you aim towards by constantly replacing behaviors with new intentions. Eg. A person who has craving for smoking should be able to tolerate withdrawal symptoms by not acting on any habitual impulses to smoke.  Over time they should stop being a smoker.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Make sense?</description> <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2014 13:53:48 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565577</guid> <dc:creator>Richard Zen</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-08T13:53:48Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565531</link> <description>Here&amp;#039;s the thing.   When there is no &amp;#034;self&amp;#034; at the center of all these appearances, no objectifiable, separate character, then what ever appears is not a problem.   If the appearance of layers of &amp;#034;clinging&amp;#034; occurs, what does it matter?    When there is no one subject to it, what&amp;#039;s actually at stake?    What happens to the thought, &amp;#034;something is wrong with the present moment&amp;#034;, when it has no believed &amp;#034;me&amp;#034; to tether to?   It comes, it goes, no matter.    &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Let me ask you this:   What exactly is this &amp;#034;you&amp;#034; that is&lt;span style="color: #111111"&gt; &amp;#034;working on looking at how thinking is involved in remembering and projecting into the future&amp;#034;?  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;You say, &amp;#034;Even the present moment is conceptual in that if you look for the present moment all you&amp;#039;ll find is ungraspable fleetingness&amp;#034;.    Yes, a mirage, a flash of light on a pond.   And so also are YOU, the core of you-ness, right now.   The essence of &amp;#034;Richard&amp;#034; is &amp;#034;ungraspable fleetingness&amp;#034;.    &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Yes?&lt;/span&gt;</description> <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2014 05:27:19 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565531</guid> <dc:creator>Dan Kelso</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-08T05:27:19Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565389</link> <description>Looking at experience I would find that the thinking mind has layers of clinging (which is perceiving that something is wrong with the present moment and then going into stories of what you want or what you dislike).  The first layer is simply long stories (I like this because, because, because...I dislike this because...etc).  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This obscures our understanding of the existence of objects totally.  Objects appear to be things that are worth attaching to.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Once you peel back this gross level you can notice the consciousness/awareness/knowing aspect of mind and prior gross level of thinking is looked at as objects for awareness.  Awareness appears to be an object.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;At this point objects appear to go through the three characteristics.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When consciousness is investigated then objects appear to be what consciousness needs to be conscious.  The three characteristics apply to the knowing aspect as well because it&amp;#039;s a strobing knowing that quickly moves intention to pay attention to objects for liking or disliking.  There&amp;#039;s plenty of memory and projection into the future relating to objects so there&amp;#039;s still some subtle level of clinging.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;What I&amp;#039;m working on now is looking at how thinking is involved in remembering and projecting into the future.  Even the present moment is conceptual in that if you look for the present moment all you&amp;#039;ll find is ungraspable fleetingness.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The objects in front of you have no staying power.  That staying power/clinging requires short-term and long-term memory and stories of continuity to bolster it&amp;#039;s existence.  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So finally objects are simplifications of the mind to find differences in the universe for survival purposes.  They don&amp;#039;t exist indefinitely and &lt;strong&gt;neither does the body and mind.&lt;/strong&gt;  All things break down into smaller parts and go through time as entropy.  So things exist but detail is over-simplified by the mind and conceptual thinking.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The best way to see this is to meditate and look at objects, your body, and mind activities and find it in the present moment.  Any duration is a thinking process that makes things more and more solid.  The more goneness you find the more insubstantial everything appears.</description> <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2014 13:26:54 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565389</guid> <dc:creator>Richard Zen</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-07T13:26:54Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565313</link> <description>Richard, I&amp;#039;d be more interested in your experience related to this point.</description> <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2014 05:04:46 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565313</guid> <dc:creator>Dan Kelso</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-07T05:04:46Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565302</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Dan Kelso:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;Existence is also quite obvious, but it&amp;#039;s just not clear what this existence IS.   &lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I would read Nagarjuna to get used to Buddhist analysis of the middle path between permanent existence and nihilism.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;amazon&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;Nagarjuna-Richard-H-Jones&amp;#x2f;dp&amp;#x2f;1451539797&amp;#x2f;ref&amp;#x3d;sr_1_3&amp;#x3f;ie&amp;#x3d;UTF8&amp;#x26;qid&amp;#x3d;1407382476&amp;#x26;sr&amp;#x3d;8-3&amp;#x26;keywords&amp;#x3d;Nagarjuna"&gt;http://www.amazon.com/Nagarjuna-Richard-H-Jones/dp/1451539797/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&amp;amp;qid=1407382476&amp;amp;sr=8-3&amp;amp;keywords=Nagarjuna&lt;/a&gt;</description> <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2014 03:36:14 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565302</guid> <dc:creator>Richard Zen</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-07T03:36:14Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>Convincing sense of no objectifiable self</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565167</link> <description>I&amp;#039;ve been reading some of Daniel&amp;#039;s book and posts here, and wondering if/how to enter the pool of discussion.   Finally just decided to do a cannonball in the deep end and see what happens.   Or maybe I&amp;#039;m in the shallow end and will hit the bottom in a second.   &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I&amp;#039;m mainly interested in exploring/understanding my experience, some shifts that occurred, and a major one a couple of years ago which resulted in a permanent sense of seeing the false nature of the sense of identity with a body, idea, sensation, etc.   (recognition of no self, or &amp;#034;not-self&amp;#034;?).     I come from a self-inquiry, &amp;#034;non-dual&amp;#034; approach to practice.  Many years of sitting and walking meditation, deeply investigating everything that seem to make up the sense of &amp;#034;me&amp;#034; (body, thoughts, spatial locations, imagery, etc.) &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In particular, I&amp;#039;d be very interested in anyone sharing their direct experience of their inner terrain in regards to what appears to be a ceasing of the process of identification.      &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;What I find in my experience are several key landmarks.   There is a persistent change in beliefs structures around identity based on what is actually here.   The conviction that I am not identical to/identifiable as any conventional appearances or sensed objects, nothing separate in experience, seems complete and to reflect the &amp;#034;obvious&amp;#034;.   And this conviction is based on direct experience, just what is here (as oppose to theoretical).   I would &lt;u&gt;not&lt;/u&gt; say that I don&amp;#039;t exist, however.   This was an important question to ask, so to speak, upon recognizing I do not exist as a body, thought, sensation, etc.    Existence is also quite obvious, but it&amp;#039;s just not clear what this existence IS.   I&amp;#039;ve got some ideas though.........     Then there is the &amp;#034;integration&amp;#034; of all this that seems part of a process that continues on (not having a sense of &amp;#034;doing&amp;#034; it, no doer, lot&amp;#039;s of things, everything, goes on, on it&amp;#039;s own).    &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Anyway, interested in any comments.</description> <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2014 18:41:55 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5565167</guid> <dc:creator>Dan Kelso</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-08-06T18:41:55Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Witnessing, witnessing mind</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5559776</link> <description>Deci Belle&amp;#039;s response seems spot on. I do not claim to have attained that level of formlessness.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;My initial reaction to the question was based upon my own predilections...namely, the two-self mind.  This is something that those who have what is considered &amp;#039;dual personalities&amp;#039; or &amp;#039;multiple personalities&amp;#039; will deal with - this sense of another &amp;#039;other&amp;#039; watching. I have personally labeled this &amp;#039;other&amp;#039; as Kundalini. It appears often in the yogic literature, that there is a separate self, known as Shakti, which awakens and acts as a transformative agent in the field of awareness and ego. In the traditional literature, the goal was to unify the Shakti (prakriti) with the Shiva (self) - resulting in Shiv-Shakti union.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There do seem to be correlates in western science, especially as concerns right/left hemispheres. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The act of separating oneself into multiple selves is commonplace and thus is of interest.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I believe that Deci Belle&amp;#039;s &amp;#039;method&amp;#039; transcends the dualistic approach and directly invites unity without seeing difference.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The yogic view starts with the dualistic view and ends in non dualism.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Both have merit.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I think it depends on approach.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If one is capable of directly transcending duality, this seems more concrete and less prone to delusion.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If one is hooked on the &amp;#039;need&amp;#039; for dualism, perhaps due to feeling adrift, lonely, needing God, etc. then the other approach is fine too.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I cannot conjecture that one is better than the other.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In Vajrayana practices, one seeks this same unity through Vajrasattva and yab yum.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The starting point is seeing in duality (male/female, self/other, etc.), then removing the dualistic view through tantrik union of polar opposites.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I hesitantly assume that Deci Belle has already achieved union of polar opposites...this is based on observation of the writings over a years worth of study of the material.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I too seek this union, but I am still in the later stages of seeing self/other...&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I do practice nonattachment to end-goals, because I do not want to miss out on the adventure. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;What I mean is that ends do not justify the means...this seems petty to me. I like the story. To be in a rush seems lacking tact, and born out of fear and attachment, thinking that one might &amp;#039;not make it.&amp;#039;  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Roshi Kapleau said: &amp;#039;If you do not die before you die, when you die, you still won&amp;#039;t die.&amp;#034;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The meaning is obvious - do you fear death? Do you fear that you will not make it? There is no rush in the bosom of Eternity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;All things come to those who wait.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;As far as the witnessing mind which witnesses yet another witnessing mind, these are just stories that are temporary, yet perhaps necessary to the pathwalker.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There is no shame in seeing double, even if it be illusion. When the time comes, you can take off your horse blinders by allowing your assumed self to disappear into its original state of non existence. When there is no one to witness, you are already there.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Choose your path not based on fear, but calmly approach the zenith of the illusion of self, knowing full well that there is no damage done. Do you fear suffering? This is Samsara. When you do not fear Samsara, this is Nirvana. Two sides of a single coin, both ultimately available to you right here, right now.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;What else is there than these games that we have played for forever and a day?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Are you scared to mess up?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Don&amp;#039;t worry about it.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The calmness gained by letting go is a forward strike against the backwards looking illusion, i.e. the reification of the little self.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Everything I say is ultimately meaningless, yet you will also find meaning in it.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This is the realm of thumbs not touching, yet not not touching.</description> <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2014 01:44:25 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5559776</guid> <dc:creator>Songtsan Crazyfox-Tiger Ali</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-07-24T01:44:25Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Witnessing, witnessing mind</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5559549</link> <description>It is necessary not to grasp meditation methods or take them as final realization so that one can just use them as a way back home.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In other words, one doesn&amp;#039;t seek these as an end in and of themselves at any time, nor does one use the effect of concentration in isolation&amp;#x2014; otherwise there will be no insight.  Stopping and seeing, concentration and insight, gradual and sudden are one without beginning.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;As for gradual and sudden, in use they constitute a pair and should not be set up in terms of intellectualism to denote separate paths.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Learning&lt;/em&gt; to meditate in quiet seclusion is a temporary expedient.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;As for effective &lt;em&gt;meditation&lt;/em&gt; per se, an ancient worthy once said that only after seeing essence for one&amp;#039;s self is one able to arrive at the proper recognition of &lt;em&gt;where&lt;/em&gt; to rest the mind.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It is not that meditation should be dispensed with after sudden realization.</description> <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2014 14:41:01 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5559549</guid> <dc:creator>deci belle</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-07-23T14:41:01Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Witnessing, witnessing mind</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5559020</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Rich Silva:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;I&amp;#039;m not sure if this is the right thread for this but since I&amp;#039;m working on non-dual awareness meditations, and meditations pertaining to non-self, I thought this may the closest to what my question is about. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Is witnessing mind okay to witness during meditation? Or is the object to simply be in awareness? &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I also find that while witnessing, I begin to witness whatever it is that is also, witnessing; sort of like a dual witnessing. It feels a bit like ego, but it also feels like something else entirely. It&amp;#039;s hard to explain, but does anyone know, and/or would be able to shed some light on what it may be that I&amp;#039;m experiencing? Am I on track? Or am I missing something entirely? &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Thanks...&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;As Thusness wrote in DhO in 2009:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;“Hi Gary,&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It appears that there are two groups of practitioners in this forum, one adopting the gradual approach and the other, the direct path. I am quite new here so I may be wrong.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;My take is that you are adopting a gradual approach yet you are experiencing something very significant in the direct path, that is, the ‘Watcher’. As what Kenneth said, “You&amp;#039;re onto something very big here, Gary. This practice will set you free.” But what Kenneth said would require you to be awaken to this ‘I’. It requires you to have the ‘eureka!’ sort of realization. Awaken to this ‘I’, the path of spirituality becomes clear; it is simply the unfolding of this ‘I’.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;On the other hand, what that is described by Yabaxoule is a gradual approach and therefore there is downplaying of the ‘I AM’. You have to gauge your own conditions, if you choose the direct path, you cannot downplay this ‘I’; contrary, you must fully and completely experience the whole of ‘YOU’ as ‘Existence’. Emptiness nature of our pristine nature will step in for the direct path practitioners when they come face to face to the ‘traceless’, ‘centerless’ and ‘effortless’ nature of non-dual awareness.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Perhaps a little on where the two approaches meet will be of help to you.</description> <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2014 16:29:06 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5559020</guid> <dc:creator>An Eternal Now</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-07-21T16:29:06Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Witnessing, witnessing mind</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5558915</link> <description>howdy,&lt;br /&gt;here is a link to a practice on this subject that is pretty cool.  it is called &amp;#034;Awareness Watching Awareness&amp;#034;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;albigen&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;uarelove&amp;#x2f;awa_instructions&amp;#x2e;htm"&gt;http://www.albigen.com/uarelove/awa_instructions.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;whirled peas&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;tom</description> <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2014 07:41:08 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5558915</guid> <dc:creator>tom moylan</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-07-21T07:41:08Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Witnessing, witnessing mind</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5558829</link> <description>I know this is an old post, but it is a very basic and useful question, none the less.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;First of all, formal meditation practice is a temporary expedient.  What is being practiced?  Observing mind, whatever is there is observed without arousing the human mentality (any further).  Since observation&amp;#039;s activity is the human mentality already, it would hardly do to create minds on top of minds where there are none to begin with.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Why?  To develop the habit of a permanent subtle concentration observing mind.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Just observe the mind anytime, at all times.  It does not require a particular posture.  It really does not matter at all outside of the will to observe the human mentality.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Of course, observing mind in stillness and during activities is just a device in itself.  A very effective device.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;Is witnessing mind okay to witness during meditation? Or is the object to simply be in awareness?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;One just uses witnessing the mind without following its contents to rest the mind on itself in order to develop the basis for simply being in a state of independent awareness at all times.  This is the benefit of observing the mind.  This is so because the human mentality is unable to function independently by the force of habitual reliance on externals to prop itself up.  This is so because the identity of the human mentality is falsely in control of the organism that is going to die, and it exists only by comparing itself to objects it considers not its original being.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Some people use formal meditation to relax, or to quiet the human mentality, but this is just a method of comfort, not the device of refining away the artificial identity of the human mentality to arrive at real human being, independent of objects of thought, completely awake.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Witnessing witnessing is a perversion of the practice of observing mind developed by the authentic teachings.  Do not let this develop further.  If this occurs, just take a break and start again later until fatigue set in.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;As soon as one can observe mind in the midst of situations without following its stream unawares, one should hasten to do so.  Silent sitting is suitable for rank beginners.  Real practice develops in the midst of ordinary situations.  Formal meditation practice is a temporary expedient.</description> <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2014 00:21:56 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5558829</guid> <dc:creator>deci belle</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-07-21T00:21:56Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Non-duality Realized all the time?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5557088</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Richard Zen:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Jinxed P:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;My question is when you reach stream entry, is that just a momentary glimpse into no-self that then fades away? Is 4th path the experience of non-duality that is present at all times? While before that you have seen non-duality, but it&amp;#039;s not always there unless you look for it?&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This is a debatable area.  Basically if you want to be a great moral person you have to improve your habits by repeatedly doing the right actions and abandoning (even in the middle) bad actions.  When you experience non-duality it&amp;#039;s easier to look at habits as just that, habits.  When people identify habits as a self they tend to have a self-defeating attitude that they can&amp;#039;t change this &amp;#034;self&amp;#034; of habits, which naturally fates them to not change.  Shinzen Young said that you&amp;#039;ll be tweaking your habits for the rest of your life.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I do like non-duality writers but there&amp;#039;s often an over-simplification of non-self experiences that people think they&amp;#039;ve got it when they haven&amp;#039;t.  Understanding dependent arising and understanding how conceptual time is for us normally will give you better insights and you&amp;#039;ll want to create causes and conditions for better behaviour.  Sometimes just stopping during a busy life and emptying your mind of thoughts will give you the difference between self and non-self experiences.  Notice the facial expressions after your mind goes into a reverie.  Then let go completely and notice how you feel.  The self likes to pose and reenact or make believe at a high rate.  Notice a mental story ruminating in your mind and notice when it&amp;#039;s not ruminating.  Perceptions of objects to like or dislike, and thoughts clinging to them make your brain release chemicals that make you feel good or bad.  How you feel will be a great predictor as to how you&amp;#039;ll act.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When you&amp;#039;re doing something that causes aversion, try and let go of the negative perception and just see the vibrations of experience as they are.  See if you can reduce the aversion so that the task seems to drain you less.  In fact wherever there&amp;#039;s stress it&amp;#039;s a good time to let go and experiment with acceptance of what is.  Reminding yourself that everything is made up of sub-atomic particles and those particles may be sub-divided even further can help with understanding emptiness and how all objects and experiences are always empty of inherent, unchanging, uncaused existence.  Everything has a cause behind it and even the concept of arising and passing away has to be investigated to avoid arising and passing away being treated as inherent objects.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Make sense?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Richard&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;Those are interesting methods, is there a specific school of thought those are associated with?  Just curious.  It kind of reminds me of Dog Whisperer.  Some years ago, I got a dog out of the pound and over the next few days, I discovered she had a lot of behavioral problems including acting like Kujo much of the time.  A lot of people thought she was just a bad dog.  But I spent quite a bit of time training her and over time I discovered the methods that worked well with her and now she is overall a very good dog and I get lots of compliments about what a good dog she is, calm and sweet and well behaved, and how they want one like her.  Which makes me laugh as of course she is the same dog that everyone said was &amp;#039;bad&amp;#039; before.  Same dog, different input, different results.  But people can&amp;#039;t easily understand there being a difference between a dog&amp;#039;s behavior and the core identity of the dog.  They can&amp;#039;t separate the concepts in their mind and realize you can remake a dog if you work at it.  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Overtime, I realized I could not only remake the dog, concepts I learned from Dog Whisperer, ie you are not stuck with the dog you have, the dog is not the same as its behaviors and so the behaviors can be changed because dogs live in the now and so the trainer also has to live in the now, but I also realized I could use the same tactics on myself.  I could become both the trainer and trainee of myself and understood that my identity was not the same as my behaviors.  I could watch the behaviors, emotions, etc and look for the triggers and change them to more useful ones.  Because those things are not me. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So I think I kind of understand that part of the concept of no self , ie that stuff is not me, it&amp;#039;s temporary (is this correct?).  But I don&amp;#039;t really understand the rest of the concept of no self.  If that is not me, which clearly it is not as I can ditch a bad habit but still be me, then what is me?  Does no self mean there is no me and the perception of me is like an epiphenomenon of inputs and other things? </description> <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2014 05:45:26 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5557088</guid> <dc:creator>Eva M Nie</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-07-15T05:45:26Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Non-duality Realized all the time?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5557073</link> <description>&lt;strong&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href="&amp;#x23;_19_message_5549671"&gt;Non-duality Realized all the time?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;Hi Jinxed, formal meditation is a temporary expedient.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Initially, its purpose is to create the habit of total, then subtle observation of the mind at all times.  There is a reason for that, but it is provisional, and I don&amp;#039;t do that.  Formal meditation is not &amp;#034;good&amp;#034;, unless it is serving that purpose.  Since the &amp;#034;high&amp;#034; produced by this kind of &amp;#034;artificial meditation&amp;#034; wears off anyway and is essentially ineffective, for the most part, in dealing face to face with ordinary situations to any great extent, it is best to do whatever is necessary to hit the ground running, so to speak, in terms of seeing reality as is cold turkey.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Unity of absolute and relative is the working definition of reality.  Nondual nature is your nature.  Consequently, Nirvana and Karmic evolution are not only equal, they are identical.  This is the basis of the saying &amp;#034;sameness within difference&amp;#034;, though there are several aspects in terms of dealing with the conceptual device relative to various teachings within buddhism.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Arriving at nonduality in terms of everyday ordinary affairs is essential to buddhist practice.  Actually, it is the working definition of enlightening being.  Enlightening being is the &lt;em&gt;function&lt;/em&gt; of awareness.  Awareness is your nature.  Awareness, your own mind right now, is not created.  Seeing reality is activating the mind without dwelling on anything.  The only reason this is possible is because your own mind right now is unborn.  Mind is one, undifferentiated, selfless, void of identity.  It&amp;#039;s you.  People aren&amp;#039;t just already enlightened&amp;#x2014; they&amp;#039;re enlightened mind incarnate.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Real 24/7 meditation practice is seeing through phenomena without denying their characteristics.  Taoist alchemy calls this refining the medicines.  Buddhism calls this using the sickness to cure the disease.  It&amp;#039;s not about meditation, after all.  You can take all the provisional entry-level teachings and use them as applications of the real in the midst of the false in broad daylight unbeknownst to anyone.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It&amp;#039;s about using the world to refine the self; using conditions to arrive at essential nature.  This cannot be accomplished by quiet sitting alone.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;That&amp;#039;s because, reality is already Mind&amp;#x2014; your mind, right now.  Perhaps you are not ready to hear this, but this is the &lt;em&gt;nondual&lt;/em&gt; section, after all.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Reality is relative to your mind.  As long as your mind is habituated to the view of its separate nature, you will not see essence in everyday affairs.  After a long process of self-refinement carried out correctly and effectively in everyday ordiary situations, the self-reifying mental habits that perpetuate the illusion of the separate self-identity as ultimately existent will die off, bit by bit and that much of your primordial potential will be activted as the selfless function of awareness.  Using this is selfless adaption, activating the subtle operation of spiritual transformations in the midst of worldly situations.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Nonduality realized all the time is seeing the physical, psychological, psychic, emotional, causal matrix of karmic evolution (Creation) as void of self&amp;#x2014; because that&amp;#039;s what it is (no different than you).  Going along with this, just as it is, knowing it is utter illusion&amp;#x2014; how could you possibly bring yourself to act on behalf of situations arising from this insane chaos, good, bad or indifferent?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Acceptance of conditions is &amp;#034;going along&amp;#x2014; not denying characteristics&amp;#034;.  Not acting on conditions is &amp;#034;seeing through phenomena&amp;#034;.  The sense of nonattachment to outcomes aids in adapting to the inevitable where unavoidable&amp;#x2014; the ups and downs look just like reality: &amp;#034;perfection is easy for those with no preferences&amp;#034;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Soon enough, you may come to the working strategy that this malestrom of karmic momentum is just your perception of it.  Otherwise, it just doesn&amp;#039;t make ANY sense (to leave it up to the world, and fortunately, you don&amp;#039;t have to).  YOU take total responsibility for your sensory perception and mental postures.  It doesn&amp;#039;t require doing&amp;#x2014; just meeting of conditions for what they are&amp;#x2014; illusion.  If you can come to the temporary working realization that phenomena is what reality &lt;em&gt;looks&lt;/em&gt; like without having the slightest shred of belief it its ultimate nature, then it might be possible to endeavor to work at adapting to conditions as they present themselves out of a sense of inevitability without clinging to good or bad outcomes.  Selflessness is nonattachment to outcomes.  There is no moral implication in terms of selflessness&amp;#x2014; it&amp;#039;s impersonal.  That&amp;#039;s mind. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This is actually an entry to the buddha&amp;#039;s teaching of &lt;em&gt;Suchness&lt;/em&gt; and carrying out the activation and partaking of the Great Vehicle.  This is reality, in fact.  Right in front of your nose is this nondual reality 24/7.  As such, it is so whether you are aware of it or not.  In terms of the point of meditation in the first place, and the fact of reality, it is Mind alone.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The lesser vehicle of personal liberation is a temporary expedient as well …why is this?  It&amp;#039;s another lie to trick you into the path, that&amp;#039;s all.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;That &lt;em&gt;Suchness&lt;/em&gt; is reality is nominally due to the fact that it is neither absolute nor conditional.  Both Nirvana and Creation are the same illusion.  One is your mind before creation and the other is after.  Clinging to one or the other is delusion.  Neither absolute stillness nor karmic momentum is the essence of reality unified, present and naturally so, without ever entering creation.  This is your nature already.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Even those who experience sudden enlightenment must learn to realize this truth by APPLYING it in the midst of situations seamlessly.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;You can begin to see this if you can dismiss your dependent relationships to circumstantial interpretations.  Reality doesn&amp;#039;t look any different than delusion when your relationships to circumstances are not dependent on outcomes, good or bad.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Unified with reality all the time is just this awareness of the essential underlying nature of circumstantial process as your own potential.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When you act based on karmic dependence, you change enlightening potential into karmic debt.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Ouch!</description> <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2014 04:23:17 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5557073</guid> <dc:creator>deci belle</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-07-15T04:23:17Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Non-duality Realized all the time?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5552372</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;deleted deleted:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;My suggestion is that you proceed cautiously with any philosophy that promotes non-duality. It is not a concept that the Buddha espoused.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Isn&amp;#039;t that like saying &amp;#039;one should proceed cautiously with anything outside the Bible, because it&amp;#039;s not something Jesus taught.&amp;#039;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Isn&amp;#039;t this part of the forum the &amp;#039;non-dual&amp;#039; area for posting? &lt;img alt="emoticon" src="http://www.dharmaoverground.org/dho-theme/images/emoticons/happy.gif" &gt;</description> <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2014 05:42:16 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5552372</guid> <dc:creator>Dean P</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-07-01T05:42:16Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Non-duality Realized all the time?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5550856</link> <description>no-self state is goal state described by various qualities of which realization and development can vary. One can eg. develop proper insight and still not even come close to experience its full benefits. When energy is blocked selfing is actually moving it somewhat and that is basis of why we do it by default. When energy is flowing naturally selfing stops it. So to not use selfing when energy is not flowing needs kinda doing opposite of what seem dealing with the issue.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Meditation itself and doing proper things will sooner or later lead to proper energetic bodies (reward bodies) but configuration of when it happen can vary. That way we have many variants of people. Some do not see much improvement and everything is forced even if they see their no-self nature, those have more issues in energetic bodies. Others can lack proper insight and still claim extraordinary experiences, those have better energetic bodies.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;For me there are at least two stages, one can be called no-self or half-non-dual and second non-dual or full-non-dual. First is orders of magnitude better than duality, especially the one created by both blocked energetic body and lack of insight. Full non-dual state is as much better from half-non-dual as half-non-dual from dual. First no-self is lacking gross self observing things but selfing is still somewhat experienced, like it was still around but hard to say where and how. Second is definitely lacking it, everything is clear. I could say &amp;#034;In the seeing, just the seen&amp;#034;, etc. understanding what was there other than seen but having synesthesia make those sentences kinda ridiculous as actually the more non-dual state I am in the more crosstalk between senses (kinda like it was taking place of selfing) so more proper would be to say that there doesn&amp;#039;t seem to be even subtle selfing in senses. But if its proper non-dual I have no idea. One thing I know is that I cannot be 4th path because I do not experience it all the time and it is purer and better than 4th path...&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Glimpses of that first level happen after 1st path and it is stable mode at 2nd path at which it get refined. At 3rd one have glimpses of full-non-duality and fall back to this refined half-non-duality. I suppose at 4th this awesome mode is stable and later refined to be even more ass kicking but we will see when we got there ; )</description> <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2014 16:39:59 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5550856</guid> <dc:creator>Paweł K</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-26T16:39:59Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Non-duality Realized all the time?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5550803</link> <description>And its becoming more stable in my experience is related to the way in which dualistic formations increasingly can be seen as arising in a nondual field. It&amp;#039;s like prior to awakening you get glimpses-- 90% cloudy, 10% clear. Then after awakening once awakening stabilizes however you conceive or label that it&amp;#039;s like 90% cloudy 100% clear (sky doesn&amp;#039;t obstruct clouds, clouds don&amp;#039;t obstruct sky). (ETA i wouldn&amp;#039;t equate this to what Daniel cals 4th path).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Obviously this is a pragmatic dharma definition of awakening (ETA as opposed to ten fetters or other traditional model for instance) and leaves aside the questions of whether when and how to decondition the mind&amp;#039;s habit of producing dualistic clouds</description> <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2014 14:46:26 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5550803</guid> <dc:creator>. Jake .</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-26T14:46:26Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Non-duality Realized all the time?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5550363</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Jinxed P :&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;So lately I have been listening to a few Sam Harris conversations about his new book coming out called Waking Up. What he seems to be saying is that you can experience non-duality or no-self during meditation, but then that experience goes away. You can then bring it back up again in a later meditation, when you are again analyzing (trying to find the self) and not finding it. He says some people can live their whole life with a no-self experience.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;My question is when you reach stream entry, is that just a momentary glimpse into no-self that then fades away? Is 4th path the experience of non-duality that is present at all times? While before that you have seen non-duality, but it&amp;#039;s not always there unless you look for it?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I would say that it comes and goes, but over time it seems to become more prevalent, or more of a percentage of awareness, and then some people seem to really go there in a very pure way and just abide.  I think the technical stream entry that we talk about here, the Burmese blip, is indeed momentary, but then again something has been opened up.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Seems like the word anatta might be relevant here.</description> <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2014 19:14:24 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5550363</guid> <dc:creator>Eric G</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-25T19:14:24Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Non-duality Realized all the time?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5550291</link> <description>Experiences that might be called &amp;#034;non-dual&amp;#034; vary between people, as some will call very unitive experiences &amp;#034;non-dual&amp;#034;, some very peaceful experiences &amp;#034;non-dual&amp;#034;, some formless experiences &amp;#034;non-dual&amp;#034;, and the like. Thus, for those who are not very careful with their phenomenology, which most practitioners aren&amp;#039;t, lots of things can get lumped into that category, many of which are find and good and useful experiences, but to call them &amp;#034;non-dual&amp;#034; might be stretching things a bit.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;As to whether or not the Buddha said &amp;#034;non-dual&amp;#034;, I do not find the phrase mentioned in any translation of the Pali Canon texts I have read, which is a lot of them. That might lead people to conclude that it was nothing he was talking about, which is a point worthy of careful discussion, as I think it depends on what you think the phrase means and whether that meaning is what the Buddha was pointing to regardless of whether or not he called it the same thing.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Non-dual, at its best, and IMNHO, points to to the following aspect of things:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Duality clearly is illusory, but seeing this directly in real-time is very difficult for most. Brief glimpses arise at the Conformity Knowledge level insight just before Fruitions, less than one-second experiences of the thing, which is obviously very captivating but not satisfying. Third Path as I see it gives people a sense of the thing when walking around, but it is incomplete. Finally, at whatever you wish to call it, which I generally use the term Fourth Path for (though plenty of others don&amp;#039;t), we have the walking around experience where dualistic perception has fully untangled itself and finally, at some point, locks in and that is it.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Unitive experiences are also very problematic, as they basically always involve a sense of this side that is now unified with that side, or has a dissolution of boundaries. Such experiences are routinely described in all jhanas, during the A&amp;amp;P, during Equanimity, and in states such as the formed version of Boundless Space and Boundless Consciousness, things I tag as the Boundless Space and Boundless Consciousness sub-jhanas of Equanimity, aka 11.4.5 and 11.4.6 in my own personal shorthand. These generally are transient experiences. This transience is key and brings me to the next point.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Unitive experiences are too transient, too ephemeral, to causal to hold up. They are great, interesting, sometimes produce lots of insight, but are not the final answer, as they don&amp;#039;t hold up, are not substantial, and thus are not a refuge or resting place or final answer. They are not fundamental enough, being created things, not something that has stopped.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Dualistic experiences are too illusory, too out of alignment with the way things are, and so they too do not provide some final answer.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Thus, with One and Two ruled out, we have Non-Duality.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In this way of experiencing things, we have something that aligns with things that the Buddha taught. We have from the Udana, &amp;#034;In the seeing, just the seen, in the hearing, just the heard, in the thinking, just the thought,&amp;#034; etc. In short, there are just the sensations, the transient sensations, and nothing more, no self to be unified with them, no separate thing perceiving them, just transient causality as it is, where it is, just being itself.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There are those who argue that, as the Buddha didn&amp;#039;t explicitly use the term Non-Duality to describe this, that he was pointing to something else. However, as the term didn&amp;#039;t exist then, it being a much more modern product of philosophical development, you can&amp;#039;t say that he either rejected it or accepted it. Thus, we are left trying to figure out of it applies to what he said. I believe I can argue that it does.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When you have phenomena that are just phenomena, sensations that are just sensations, and there is not Duality, a this and a that, a self to control or observe or whatever, and just things doing things on their own, that rejects the Two part, obviously. So far, so good.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And, given that the Unification of Mind that the jhanas produce was clearly found by the Buddha to not be a final answer, as he learned all 8 jhanas and found them very useful and helpful but not a sufficient final endpoint, we can clearly and easily show that the Buddha rejected solution number One, that of Unity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Thus, how is it that people say that Non-Duality, that quality that rejects both as being some endpoint, doesn&amp;#039;t apply?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;What definition of Non-Duality are you using that causes you to compare it to the experience of the thing as well as the theory of the thing and reject it?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;As to people who have seen through Dualistic answers and Unitive answers and perceive reality that way all the time, yes, it can be done and there are people who have done it and walk around that way today.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Thoughts?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Daniel</description> <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2014 17:00:58 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5550291</guid> <dc:creator>Daniel M. Ingram</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-25T17:00:58Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Non-duality Realized all the time?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5549765</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Jinxed P:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;My question is when you reach stream entry, is that just a momentary glimpse into no-self that then fades away? Is 4th path the experience of non-duality that is present at all times? While before that you have seen non-duality, but it&amp;#039;s not always there unless you look for it?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;My personal take on the matter is that there are several separate sub/pre-conscious selfing process that make up different aspects of the implied experience of self. These processes can be rewired/shut down so that the corresponding experience of self related to that process is no longer experienced. These seem to be permanent shifts for most people. &lt;br /&gt;The book &lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;amazon&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;The-Ego-Tunnel-Science-Mind&amp;#x2f;dp&amp;#x2f;0465020690"&gt;The Ego Tunnel&lt;/a&gt; explains the illusion of self from a neuro-cognitive viewpoint I find fascinating and talks about these different selfing processes.&lt;br /&gt;Of course this is not a traditional Buddhist explanation as the sub/pre-conscious is not a Buddhist concept.&lt;br /&gt;~D</description> <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2014 06:28:12 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5549765</guid> <dc:creator>Dream Walker</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-24T06:28:12Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Non-duality Realized all the time?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5549737</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Jinxed P:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;My question is when you reach stream entry, is that just a momentary glimpse into no-self that then fades away? Is 4th path the experience of non-duality that is present at all times? While before that you have seen non-duality, but it&amp;#039;s not always there unless you look for it?&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This is a debatable area.  Basically if you want to be a great moral person you have to improve your habits by repeatedly doing the right actions and abandoning (even in the middle) bad actions.  When you experience non-duality it&amp;#039;s easier to look at habits as just that, habits.  When people identify habits as a self they tend to have a self-defeating attitude that they can&amp;#039;t change this &amp;#034;self&amp;#034; of habits, which naturally fates them to not change.  Shinzen Young said that you&amp;#039;ll be tweaking your habits for the rest of your life.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I do like non-duality writers but there&amp;#039;s often an over-simplification of non-self experiences that people think they&amp;#039;ve got it when they haven&amp;#039;t.  Understanding dependent arising and understanding how conceptual time is for us normally will give you better insights and you&amp;#039;ll want to create causes and conditions for better behaviour.  Sometimes just stopping during a busy life and emptying your mind of thoughts will give you the difference between self and non-self experiences.  Notice the facial expressions after your mind goes into a reverie.  Then let go completely and notice how you feel.  The self likes to pose and reenact or make believe at a high rate.  Notice a mental story ruminating in your mind and notice when it&amp;#039;s not ruminating.  Perceptions of objects to like or dislike, and thoughts clinging to them make your brain release chemicals that make you feel good or bad.  How you feel will be a great predictor as to how you&amp;#039;ll act.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When you&amp;#039;re doing something that causes aversion, try and let go of the negative perception and just see the vibrations of experience as they are.  See if you can reduce the aversion so that the task seems to drain you less.  In fact wherever there&amp;#039;s stress it&amp;#039;s a good time to let go and experiment with acceptance of what is.  Reminding yourself that everything is made up of sub-atomic particles and those particles may be sub-divided even further can help with understanding emptiness and how all objects and experiences are always empty of inherent, unchanging, uncaused existence.  Everything has a cause behind it and even the concept of arising and passing away has to be investigated to avoid arising and passing away being treated as inherent objects.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Make sense?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Richard</description> <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2014 04:32:49 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5549737</guid> <dc:creator>Richard Zen</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-24T04:32:49Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Non-duality Realized all the time?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5549685</link> <description>My suggestion is that you proceed cautiously with any philosophy that promotes non-duality. It is not a concept that the Buddha espoused.</description> <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2014 02:24:28 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5549685</guid> <dc:creator>deleted deleted</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-24T02:24:28Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>Non-duality Realized all the time?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5549671</link> <description>So lately I have been listening to a few Sam Harris conversations about his new book coming out called Waking Up. What he seems to be saying is that you can experience non-duality or no-self during meditation, but then that experience goes away. You can then bring it back up again in a later meditation, when you are again analyzing (trying to find the self) and not finding it. He says some people can live their whole life with a no-self experience.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;My question is when you reach stream entry, is that just a momentary glimpse into no-self that then fades away? Is 4th path the experience of non-duality that is present at all times? While before that you have seen non-duality, but it&amp;#039;s not always there unless you look for it?</description> <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2014 02:13:29 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5549671</guid> <dc:creator>Jinxed P</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-24T02:13:29Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Stages of non-dual perception</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5544345</link> <description>Unfortunately it often still feels like I was doing something to sensations. Calling their cessation can happen automatically without me and when it does it that way they just seem to appear less and less and handle itself even more automatically. Unfortunately sometimes I have to step up and do it myself or otherwise it will develop into self. Its kinda ridiculous as this &amp;#039;I&amp;#039; that is calling sensation cessation comes from the same consciousness that is to disappear so its kinda like committing mental suicide. In past I tried to find where do this &amp;#039;mine&amp;#039;, where do &amp;#039;I&amp;#039; come from to maybe do something... I do not know what though... its just like itching which one can&amp;#039;t scratch as it always is able to escape and trying to catch it make itching stronger and stronger until it becomes full blown suffering. Not to mention that methods to do that are all somewhat painful, no matter how I look at it now. So I gave up for time being and I will just practice being closest non-duality I can and maybe it &amp;#039;flips&amp;#039; as you say, though I am not holding my breath. Reality is already just fine as it is when I do not let bad sensations to overtake mind.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Its nice you like my model. Usually my models become obsolete after few weeks after their creation. Will soon (month/two) see how this one will stand =)&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Oh, and BTW, I&amp;#039;d like to thank you for taking time to write description of spaciousness of sensations you wrote not so long ago. My mind took it seriously and started feeling quality of spaciousness. At first it was kinda sweet white like samatha jhana bliss but also had black and bitter feel to it but now its more transparent. Also it probably helped me to open heart chakra more. It was somewhat opened (as in not clenched tight) already and now it is opened more. Not fully though yet. It made those spaciousness sensations more transparent. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Each chakra add qualities to sensations, like eg. 1st make them solid, 2nd make them kinda jello, 3rd dispersed and kinda flowery, 4th apparently spacious and volumetric, 5th smooth and airy, 6th glowing and to be experienced one sensation next to other, 7th enable them to be experienced at multiple sides, 8th point to external world, enable feeling other peoples bodies as my own. Each chakra add their own version of sweetness and change glow of colors to its own palette when activated. Also opening 6th allow me to feel colors as tastes though lately almost exclusively chakra tastes. That&amp;#039;s my all chakras overview without going too much into details. Does that make any sense and is it how they present itself to you too?</description> <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:40:49 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5544345</guid> <dc:creator>Paweł K</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-10T18:40:49Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Stages of non-dual perception</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5544292</link> <description>I actually like this model, it being very similar to my own models and experience, that we progressively see phenomena as just phenomena, just where they are, on their own, as what is happening in the field of manifestation, and this becomes more complete until finally it flips over and then finally stays that way. I think where people get into trouble is when they are sure they understand what all of the more relative implications of that are and try to predict, map and model that for every person from every practice background and how that will specifically manifest.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The DhO doesn&amp;#039;t seem to be dying from my point of view, though it has its periods of what I feel is better and worse, more and less active, with posts of higher and lower quality, etc, and there is plenty of traffic (I now host it at home so can monitor the traffic), plenty of hits on posts, as the counters clearly show, and still there are plenty of strong practitioners and eager adventurers who show up and learn from each other, so, while I do sometimes miss that very unusual and early period, there is plenty still today that I think is healthy, and I also don&amp;#039;t miss some of the drama that was also part of that early period and has thankfully largely vanished for the time being.</description> <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:51:38 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5544292</guid> <dc:creator>Daniel M. Ingram</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-10T16:51:38Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Stages of non-dual perception</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5544262</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt; But in reality my behavior is more of an attempt to assimilate myself into what I saw as a Buddhist community, which I just now realized is not Buddhist at all, but really a secular and synthetic Dharma. And the reason it has been dying (this community), is simply because it IS a secular and synthetic Dharma, sort of like a tree cut off from its roots.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I do not see it as dying. All communities that are longer than are few years have people bitching about &amp;#039;community dying&amp;#039;, even when they flourish. It depend on mind state. If someone think world is getting worse, web forums dying, etc then it only is sign of developing depression and nothing more. BTW DhO is about hardcore-dharma and not another Buddhist portal. Also as I see it as rather open community that while prefering some methods over others is not condemning different traditions than Theverada/MCTB/Buddhist. The fact that there are a lot of folks from different traditions like eg. AF is DhO biggest strength and as long as those people do not try to convert others its all good as all traditios have something to add to community... even AF...&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;Yes, I am a stream-winner. The Pali Canon indicates that this is the case, no I have not attained &amp;#034;full non-duality&amp;#034;. I find it odd for people (such as yourself) to be discussing Buddhism and Buddhist Dharma on a forum with such a lack of understanding that you possess, furthermore you are not even a stream-winner. How could you then discuss the Buddha Dharma?&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;according to MCTB criteria I am at least SE as I had multiple fruitions, some of which are like being taken straight from book. Maybe not that much in quantity as Daniel describe I should have but I have my own theories why is that.&lt;br /&gt;according to my own criteria which is following Noble Eightfold Path I am too SE&lt;br /&gt;and lastly because my suffering level improvement I really do not care what path level I am at. I could be below typical human in path level for all I care. If I cared even a bit I would suffer and I don&amp;#039;t like suffering so I do not care.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;You don&amp;#039;t even have an intellectual understanding of the Dharma. I am nonplussed that you would presume to judge me (well not really nonplussed as I can see why would you judge me, given my &amp;#034;behavior&amp;#034;). &lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I do not have to care about &lt;u&gt;proper&lt;/u&gt; understanding of dharma and will just make my own dharma instead, the one which works for met. I won&amp;#039;t be misinterpreted as long as I describe in good detail what I mean by some concept like eg. non-duality, even if Buddha taught something different by that name.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;So yes, I am better than you. Yes, I have more attainments than you. No, I am not boasting. I am establishing the factual basis of this conversation.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Good for you. For me it changes absolutely nothing. There were, are and will be people better than me even in stuff I put my whole heart to. I do not aim for being best or better at anything than anyone, like at all. If I was then I would suffer and I do not like suffering so I am not.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;You strike me as someone who does not even meditate, but rather prances about this forum writing random crap and quoting the Heart Sutra and the Bible. And who knows, maybe even the Diamond Sutra!&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;its not random crap but my observations and theories which while might not be of any use to anyone or might not be too accurate, but are something I post wholeheartedly without intention to just troll. I sometimes quote various texts but rather seldom. What of it?&lt;br /&gt;As for my meditation, I meditate enough to see that I suffer, to find source of my suffering, to end my suffering and to walk path that leads me to end of my suffering. And still there is/was enough meditation time left to open all chakras, develop means of having bliss in body, get rare forms of five-fold-synesthesia that advanced mediators have, to find my God and to feel love for world and myself. If I meditated any more I would probably have too much time to wonder about my neurotic self crap... so no, thank you for caring but I have just enough meditation for my personal needs.</description> <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2014 15:34:11 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5544262</guid> <dc:creator>Paweł K</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-10T15:34:11Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Stages of non-dual perception</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5544230</link> <description>Pawel,&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I agree with most of what you write, here is my factual rebuttal:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Yes, I am a stream-winner. The Pali Canon indicates that this is the case, no I have not attained &amp;#034;full non-duality&amp;#034;. I find it odd for people (such as yourself) to be discussing Buddhism and Buddhist Dharma on a forum with such a lack of understanding that you possess, furthermore you are not even a stream-winner. How could you then discuss the Buddha Dharma?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;You don&amp;#039;t even have an intellectual understanding of the Dharma. I am nonplussed that you would presume to judge me (well not really nonplussed as I can see why would you judge me, given my &amp;#034;behavior&amp;#034;). But in reality my behavior is more of an attempt to assimilate myself into what I saw as a Buddhist community, which I just now realized is not Buddhist at all, but really a secular and synthetic Dharma. And the reason it has been dying (this community), is simply because it IS a secular and synthetic Dharma, sort of like a tree cut off from its roots.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So yes, I am better than you. Yes, I have more attainments than you. No, I am not boasting. I am establishing the factual basis of this conversation.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;You strike me as someone who does not even meditate, but rather prances about this forum writing random crap and quoting the Heart Sutra and the Bible. And who knows, maybe even the Diamond Sutra!&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Peace.</description> <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:06:57 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5544230</guid> <dc:creator>J J</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-10T13:06:57Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Stages of non-dual perception</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543971</link> <description>you see, there is a problem with descriptions like &amp;#039;touching the Deathless with the body&amp;#039;, they literally tells nothing about associated sensation because without any description its not possible to pick which sensations you are pointing to exactly. Its not like there is only one type of sensations that can happen... &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;sure there are a lot of people claiming attainments at DhO, its to be expected but it only show immaturity. Imho most of those claims are just silly including mine or yours. Strong meditative states and interesting perception changes can make impression of having ultimate enlightened and similar stuff but when one needs confirmation or approval prove its not it. One should mark those sensations as unskillful and be done with them. If one cannot do that then one is definitely not enlightened =)&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;anyhow, you failed to convince me of your full non-duality, your posts do not even show half-non-dual behavior, you seem rather unstable and more on a duality side than non-duality.</description> <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2014 23:04:03 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543971</guid> <dc:creator>Paweł K</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-09T23:04:03Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Stages of non-dual perception</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543601</link> <description>Hey Pawel!&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Not entirely sure what I get from being here, as this place is entirely about speaking openly about attainments.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Phenomenologically there isn&amp;#039;t much to describe, other than that the heart angst was uprooted, at the core. It is very satisfying, bodily, like touching the Deathless with the body.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Phenomenological descriptions often miss the point.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Description: I feel the physical body very rarely, for the most part I experience an energetic relaxation 24/7, the solidness of &amp;#039;self&amp;#039; is gone, it is no longer solid, but penetrated and seen through.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I still experience pain, but its cause is seen through. Existential pain has no... something. I don&amp;#039;t have angst, I experience dukkha fully knowing its cause and escape. As opposed to a solid and indestructible kernel of &amp;#039;self&amp;#039; in the chest. Make sense?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I still experience aches and pains of the subtle body, but physically, almost no pain. The visions were experiences of &amp;#039;seeing&amp;#039; myself as the Tathagata. It is a bit like seeing a destination when you&amp;#039;re in a ship or on a car, you see the end point or destination in the horizon. In the same way, I saw the Tathagata, I was the Tathagata. I did not hallucinate and visually see anything, rather I saw with certainty. The dharma eye, so to speak.</description> <pubDate>Sun, 08 Jun 2014 23:41:55 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543601</guid> <dc:creator>J J</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-08T23:41:55Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Stages of non-dual perception</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543594</link> <description>hi James&lt;br /&gt;my thoughts would be to congratulate you and ask you nicely to describe it more thoroughly on sensation level in fine detail this experience and what changed after it, what you saw (visualizations), how it influenced perception of energetic body and physical body. Also do you have all chakras opened? Was this December experience opening heart chakra? I would be interested in crown chakra too, what it changed when you opened it? &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;unfortunately DhO lack good description of states, even though many people claim high path stuff they refrain from describing anything about it except claiming it. Its more probable than next person will quit DhO right after claiming 4th path than that he/she will describe anything about it that will be of use to anyone. Isn&amp;#039;t this just saddening?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I have but one question more: what do you get from boasting about attainments?</description> <pubDate>Sun, 08 Jun 2014 22:55:11 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543594</guid> <dc:creator>Paweł K</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-08T22:55:11Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Stages of non-dual perception</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543497</link> <description>Hey Pawel,&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Interesting, I would say that ever since December that I abide in a state of full non-duality. In other words I have penetrated and ended sakkaya-ditthi.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Acc. Pali Canon&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;#034;And what, bhikshus, is self identity?&lt;br /&gt;It should be said: The five aggregates of clinging.&amp;#034;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Those things were uprooted entirely for me in December, perhaps due to habitual tendencies I occasionally fall into old habits or do strange things.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;But yes the existential angst or friction is completely gone. At first I was wary of claiming that in response to this thread because of my past here and so I feigned modesty, I lied in essence.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;But yes I have ended the aggregates entirely and uprooted them. This is precisely why I had visions of being the Tathagata etc.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Because I was the Tathagata.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Thoughts?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-James&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;P.S The experience I had is essentially called the heart release (ceto vimutti), it is called the heartwood in the Saropama suttas. </description> <pubDate>Sun, 08 Jun 2014 17:12:28 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543497</guid> <dc:creator>J J</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-08T17:12:28Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Stages of non-dual perception</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543421</link> <description>hi James&lt;br /&gt;yes, by non-dual I mean lack of any sensation regarding self and no selfing&lt;br /&gt;obvious elephant in the room &amp;#039;the self&amp;#039; can&amp;#039;t be there but also more subtle things like body skin tension or sensations regarding if thing I see is mine or not, how I feel, what I want, etc Nothing of the sort can arise, not that you think &amp;#034;I am one with the world&amp;#034; but that nothing like that ever arise in non-duality. Regarding my favourite mu koan you study it and realize that you do not know question and answer is pure bliss because it doesn&amp;#039;t matter if that mean yes or no, it doesn&amp;#039;t even matter if you have answer or not or that you have question or not. There is only nibbana and mu represent not caring for having it or not, being enlightened or not. Like thought &amp;#039;I have done it, I am enlightened&amp;#039; is worst thing possible because it push you back and is hurting you so you rather remain ignorant of your own enlightenment status and remain in non-duality.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;it does sound kinda ridiculous to be in such mind state all the time in our violent and demanding world and rather too big of a difference between normal dual perception so between dual and non-dual there is intermediate state which is neither dual nor non-dual, hence I named it half-non-dual&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;there is idea of me but only as aggregate of all the stuff that make up perception and my reaction to things, by which I mean knowledge of causes and their effect to eg. allow or not some sensations. Body&amp;#039;s skin tension is almost not felt but instead of total transparency there is this kinda numbed down like one gets from local anesthesia and kinda blurred sensations that do appear. It is not felt as pure selfing but its obvious that it is something that relate to it but not actualized like seeing that from some distance through thick blurring glass that allow only blurred outlines without details. Same with all selfing sensations and self itself. Because of that blurriness it is possible to enter from dual/non-non-dual to this half-dual/half-non-dual mode relatively easy compared to sharp difference between dual and non-dual, kinda like with shift stick cars you do not start with eg. 4rd gear but you have to build momentum first on lower gears. Also with this half-non-dual perception what is important stuff you see that is not you is partially you, part of you, seen as indifferent from you and you indifferent from reality around you. What make it not full is that in full non-duality there is not even slightest idea about you and not you hence idea of being with reality does not arise either. But if thought &amp;#039;I am exactly what?&amp;#039; arise you do not counter it with &amp;#039;I am all the things in universe!&amp;#039; or something like that which would make just another version of subtle duality but you mark it as dual and unskillful loaded question and refuse to answer it. Just not worry if mind gets irritated several dozen thousandths times at first, the point is to unlearn to ask stupid and ignorant question and not to find answer.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;general advice for anyone who haven&amp;#039;t experienced non-dual more deeply and have issues to go there is that final goal should be final goal but intermediate goal were main focus until they are mastered and one of those intermediate goal is mastering half-non-duality that is like good foundation and main body of work is done there. Its there where one actually practice Noble Eightfold Path by which I mean choosing to allow or deny sensations from arising and if they arise stopping them. And one have to stop all stuff that describe him/her so its dirty work with a lot of hard choices. Thankfully as it seems there is no need to do like most spiritual masters advice to throw those babies with bathwater and instead all is necessary to throw bathwater. As I always said, desire is aggregate of skillful and unskillful sensations. It is possible to feel oneness with object of desire without suffering of not having it. In dual perception mode one can&amp;#039;t really do any of these things like that so it is necessary to first get to stable ground of partial non-duality. In dual perception desire hit and it hit hard because it hits both mind and body, it create tension in your skin, in your muscles. How can you stop tension in your muscles? You can&amp;#039;t and because of that you have to not feel them is such way in the first place.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I kinda get what you mean by &amp;#039;inkling&amp;#039; and my advice would be to mix it with duality, with self. Its impossible for you to jump from dual to non-dual directly. You will only feel irritation from trying it. You have to merge those sensations of dual and non-dual into one. &lt;u&gt;Try to feel duality and non-duality at once without any flickering back and forth&lt;/u&gt;, that should do the trick and open your way to half-non-duality like it did for me. I had the same issue, I tried to enter non-dual directly from duality and while it was not complete failure it is now considered by me to be unskillful way to do that that made me needlessly suffer. Well, there was probably benefit from practicing that but true change came with attainment of proper half-non-dual mode. There is even topic about that &lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;dharmaoverground&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;web&amp;#x2f;guest&amp;#x2f;discussion&amp;#x2f;-&amp;#x2f;message_boards&amp;#x2f;message&amp;#x2f;4593289"&gt;URL&lt;/a&gt;. Just mind that my then &amp;#039;full non-dual&amp;#039; is nowhere near my current full-non-dual perception and realization that topic is about is what I call half-non-dual now. My no-self mode then was one of important ingredients of non-duality but not really what I call non-duality now. In no-self there were a lot of question, answers were just hard to find or pointed to non-existence, to fact that things like my own body movement is doing itself. In non-duality as I have it now there are no such questions, I just couldn&amp;#039;t care less, and if one do arise (which is act of unskillfulness) I can answer &amp;#039;mu&amp;#039; and be done with it. In half-non-duality there is answer to those questions but compared to &amp;#039;mu&amp;#039; its just dry burnt and bitter toast. Still it is better to know those things to not ask those questions anymore.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;ps. sry for wall-of-text above ;)&lt;br /&gt;ps2. you probably already had half-non-dual state at some point in your life, as a kid for example. It is nothing out of ordinary. Its us who complicated those things with our ignorance and unskillful ideas. Imho many people never really fall down to state of self, they instinctively avoid dwelling in self based stuff too much. So technically it is nothing out of ordinary. Though there is difference between it being attainment and just natural state and it is in reliability and not falling from it. People even when are &amp;gt;90% in half-non-dual still easily fall to non-non-dual, are too dependent on conditions. Non-duality practitioner that have similar mind state as people around him differs in that he won&amp;#039;t fall off this bull when there is some disturbance and this is what make main body of difference. Maybe after some time its possible to not fall even from full-non-dual but that for now is only speculation and its not like I even care bout that. I was caring about that I wouldn&amp;#039;t be able to hit full-non-dual at all. I can&amp;#039;t worry about any state being there for me or else I fall into duality and suffer. Feel where it is heading?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;edit://&lt;br /&gt;ps3. I should also note that this realization is not really even touching Three Characteristic or &amp;#039;blips&amp;#039;. It skips all that entirely. 3C is such a dual idea anyway as eg. for impermanence there should be permanence and the point is to not ask question about permanence of things at all and not having any answer for those unasked question either. It doesn&amp;#039;t matter if sensation is permanent or not if you do not allow yourself to desire it or cling or get away to it to the point that mind does not desire anything or cling or use aversion toward anything. In full-non-dual ideas like impermanence, non-satisfactoriness and no-self of sensations do not arise, ideas of being, of sensations, of emptiness, etc they all do not arise. Mind abides in nothing at all. If anything arise then it is not full-non-dual but half-non-dual, mind has fallen out of nibbana and one is not really enlightened anymore</description> <pubDate>Sun, 08 Jun 2014 08:55:43 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543421</guid> <dc:creator>Paweł K</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-08T08:55:43Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Stages of non-dual perception</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543368</link> <description>I have inklings of non-duality, by non-duality do you mean &amp;#034;lack of self sensations&amp;#034;? If so that only occurs rarely to me. I wish it would happen more often as I often feel that a &amp;#039;self&amp;#039; is in the way all the time, hence the increased friction.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I would say that I experience an &amp;#039;inkling&amp;#039; of non-duality all the time, that I have the core or essence of it, all the time. But it hasn&amp;#039;t really expanded that much, if at all.</description> <pubDate>Sun, 08 Jun 2014 00:20:14 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543368</guid> <dc:creator>J J</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-08T00:20:14Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>Stages of non-dual perception</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543175</link> <description>From my experience there are three distinctive levels of non-duality: non-non-dual, half-non-dual and full-non-dual.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;non-non-dual&lt;/strong&gt; is this flat self obsessed perception in where everything is referencing to everything through mediator in form of self. Its usually some kind of concentrated wanna-be-real-badly bunch of sensations. Sensations in this mode seems dry, flat and bleak in itself and all imply self and they being pleasurable or not depend on usability to self and those that are not get ridiculed and trimmed.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;half-non-dual&lt;/strong&gt; have space which condition how sensation will look/feel when they arise as sort of a template. It can be influenced by will (which is just bunch of strong sensations) and sensations influence it too. Because of that it is important to keep sensation field clean and not allow unskillful sensations which can force other sensations to be like them and... self can happen. There is way more vibrancy of sensations but because of template the kinda feel like another copies of template sensation, not truly unique sensations. Its good enough mode to be in imho when mind is clean and concentrated on doing rightful stuff. Its also fallback mode from which I work up to full-non-dual, its pointless to try to go from non-non-dual to full-non-dual as that cant work.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;full-non-dual&lt;/strong&gt; at some point central space seems to vanish and there is nothing to be template to sensations. Sensations seem to be only for themselves. They can influence itself but not necessarily globally which make landscape of sensations more differentiated and enable to extreme depth of vibrancy, bliss and immersion, etc, depending on what is used to draw on this canvas it can look and feel very differently. Usually it feels like letting go of control of anything and let stuff happen on their own. Its not necessary to even know own personality or wherabouts or anything at all. It can get quite spaced out but not necessarily. Its crazy pleasurable with no effort at all.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Going from dual to non-dual make many painful sensations be felt as actually pleasurable and not just some mind noise. Like most of my synesthetic sensations can&amp;#039;t really work properly in duality and only cause suffering even if in non-duality they give bliss. Similarly other sources in bliss in non-duality people use are suffering in duality. Example is Joshu&amp;#039;s Dog and answer &amp;#039;Mu&amp;#039; to question if dog have buddha nature or not. Its pure suffering in non-non-dual state, drive dual mind crazy. Its non-dual state where point of this koan is revealed and its great bliss in itself. Same with other bliss ways like color synesthesia. In non-non-dual it would have to point to at least some taste to work at all and in non-dual it is hardly color-&amp;gt;taste synesthesia as it is not even pointing to taster but to non-duality itself and different tastes of bliss... kinda like in Christianity God stop pointing to whatever one think of God but to bliss from non-duality itself. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I myself very rarely fall into non-non-dual and usually remain in half-non-dual though it can still happen which is bad and sad. State of full-non-dual can happen when conditions are right by which I don&amp;#039;t mean only sitting meditation but normal everyday situations too. Difference between these states is quite big and between non-non-dual and full-non-dual just impossible. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;names I picked are just example, different people name those stages differently, that doesn&amp;#039;t even matter and what matter is how experience present itself and there seem to be those three stages. Half-non-dual is already very non-dual, just not fully and duality of it is in control of sensations. Full-non-duality is when duality does not arise in mind anymore with &amp;#039;full&amp;#039; not implying some kind of ultimate or final state but just that mind is not fixed on controlling itself or controling anything for sake of accuracy or good performance but just express itself however it want at the moment.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I wonder how it compare to other people experiences, especially of those skilled folks who often reside in full-non-dual or no-dog or actual freedom or whatever they like to call it in their tradition of choice.</description> <pubDate>Sat, 07 Jun 2014 12:59:55 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5543175</guid> <dc:creator>Paweł K</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-06-07T12:59:55Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5539575</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Not Tao :&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;Why does it matter what reality is? I don&amp;#039;t see how it would change my life whether I see it as matter or consiousness. I&amp;#039;d rather figure out how to live in it without stress. Maybe I&amp;#039;m too practical though.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Never been able to relate to that. For me, the greatest happiness (which isn&amp;#039;t a feeling, but can involve feelings) comes from witnessing the unfolding of something utterly amazing (which this world actually is) that is completely beyond my desires or preferences, including any desire for peace or contentment. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I don&amp;#039;t want peace as such, or spiritual attainments as such, except to the extent that they remove a veil of complacency and ignorance from what would otherwise be full of intrinsic meaning and wonder. I agree that full knowledge of the composition of reality doesn&amp;#039;t matter so much, but the delight of marveling at its unfolding (even in its most ordinary manifestations) really does.  A peace and contentment that comes &lt;em&gt;from&lt;/em&gt; that is really worth something... but a peace devoid of that, or indifferent to that, is something I just can&amp;#039;t relate to.</description> <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2014 23:57:06 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5539575</guid> <dc:creator>John Wilde</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-29T23:57:06Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5538664</link> <description>This reads quite a bit like the &amp;#034;Law of One&amp;#034; stuff - basically the general new age ethos taken from indian scriptures. While it&amp;#039;s true that some people would call this enlightenment, I&amp;#039;ve never really understood the point of it. Why does it matter what reality is? I don&amp;#039;t see how it would change my life whether I see it as matter or consiousness. I&amp;#039;d rather figure out how to live in it without stress. Maybe I&amp;#039;m too practical though.</description> <pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2014 18:53:06 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5538664</guid> <dc:creator>Not Tao</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-27T18:53:06Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5538487</link> <description>But you see the problem Goran?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;You have toiled away, producing something that you think has value. It is worth something. Exactly 29 dollars! (not 30...)&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;But then you say:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;#034;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;I made this site to help you find what I found. I want to help you wake up.&amp;#034;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;So you want to help people to wake up. If they give you their 29 dollars. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It is...awkward. The Thervadans (who bias this site) tend to think pretty badly of charging for the &amp;#034;Dharma&amp;#034;. Daniel gives his mammoth book away for free. But then he has a job so he doesn&amp;#039;t need the money...The donation route is one way to avoid the problem. But you can see why you might get some negative reactions by posting here (and giving the impression of &amp;#034;pimping your book&amp;#034;). &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Also, you know that this statement below is pretty antithetical to the DhO? And that many around here think that investigating phenomena is about as interesting as it gets!?! &lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&amp;#034;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;I had found an online community of people that shared my aspirations, and there were some enlightened people there too. At least they said they were.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;“You become enlightened by practicing meditation,” I was told.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;They gave me some pretty simple instructions; and if I just followed them, my enlightenment would be assured. But although the instructions were simple, executing them was not. I don’t know if you’ve tried it, but sitting in meditation is plain &lt;em&gt;boring&lt;/em&gt;. You were supposed to “investigate phenomena” which is about as boring as it gets. And when one of the enlightened guys finally said that I would have to sit for &lt;em&gt;years&lt;/em&gt; before I could expect any significant progress, I knew that I would never pull this meditation thing off. I couldn’t sit for five minutes, let alone five years.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;So I went off looking for something different. I immediately found others who promised that enlightenment could be attained in no time at all. I really liked that.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;Instant enlightenment.&amp;#034;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;http://www.uncoveringlife.com/awakening-story/&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;p.s. typo that needs fixing:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;and &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;holy shit&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt; was I exited. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description> <pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2014 08:00:02 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5538487</guid> <dc:creator>sawfoot _</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-27T08:00:02Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537907</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;goran c backlund:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;What do you think about this essay I wrote?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;uncoveringlife&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;enlightenment-what-it-is"&gt;Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Hi Goran&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Nice deconstruction work there!&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;For me, the deconstruction was a huge step, but it did not stop there. For example, when I see suffering, I get awareness of light, and awareness of compassion. To exclude the latter (or any other co-arising &amp;#034;co-dependent&amp;#034; phenomenon) is still a form of delusion, a not-so-subtle way of fooling myself.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Speaking from my own experience here. YMMV, as always.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Cheers,&lt;br /&gt;Florian</description> <pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2014 11:20:39 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537907</guid> <dc:creator>Florian Weps</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-26T11:20:39Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537774</link> <description>So I read most of your essay, and I also read the section on your website where you discuss your awakening.  I&amp;#039;m just curious if you see there as being more to do, further awakening to acomplish, or if you consider yourself to be at the end of the road?  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Perhaps you are aware, Buddhist traditions have recorded many stages of enlightenment that people encounter as they progress on the path.  I am curious if you know of these and how you relate to them. </description> <pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2014 03:54:35 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537774</guid> <dc:creator>T DC</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-26T03:54:35Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537748</link> <description>&lt;span style="font-size: 12px"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: verdana&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;geneva&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;sans-serif"&gt;I think I&amp;#039;ll stick with Nagarjuna and the middle path.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description> <pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2014 02:47:03 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537748</guid> <dc:creator>Richard Zen</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-26T02:47:03Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537561</link> <description>&lt;span style="font-size: 12px"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: arial&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;helvetica&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;sans-serif"&gt;Guys, if you are really out there, I swear to god that I exist.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If you do, please respond and maybe we can take our consciousness for a crossover à la Jetsons-meet-the-Flintstones.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description> <pubDate>Sun, 25 May 2014 16:30:02 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537561</guid> <dc:creator>Felipe C.</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-25T16:30:02Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537500</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;sawfoot _:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;goran:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;In other words, &lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;uncoveringlife&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;new-refuting-external-world&amp;#x2f;"&gt;get the book.&lt;/a&gt; You won’t be disappointed. I guarantee it.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;But what if you are dissapointed, Goran? Do you offer a 14 day quibble free money back guarantee?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And John, did you not read the quote on the website?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;&lt;em&gt;Through the discovery of a simple but fundamental error of thought, in Refuting the External World Göran Backlund does nothing less than put forth a sober and irrefutable argument as to how and why an external physical world cannot exist.To effortlessly see for yourself how and why the existence of an external physical world is logically impossible, is like to having the master key to any existential question.”&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt; &amp;#x2013; Kristoffer Lindgren&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The argument is irrefutable!  It is an irrefutable proof! Which means you can&amp;#039;t refute it!&lt;br /&gt;It definitely absolutely positively isn&amp;#039;t the worst argument in the world...&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;web&amp;#x2e;maths&amp;#x2e;unsw&amp;#x2e;edu&amp;#x2e;au&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x7e;jim&amp;#x2f;worst&amp;#x2e;html"&gt;http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~jim/worst.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Yes! If you buy the book and don&amp;#039;t feel that I deliver exactly what I promised, I&amp;#039;ll give you a refund.</description> <pubDate>Sun, 25 May 2014 08:40:12 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537500</guid> <dc:creator>goran c backlund</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-25T08:40:12Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537491</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;goran:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;In other words, &lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;uncoveringlife&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;new-refuting-external-world&amp;#x2f;"&gt;get the book.&lt;/a&gt; You won’t be disappointed. I guarantee it.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;But what if you are dissapointed, Goran? Do you offer a 14 day quibble free money back guarantee?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And John, did you not read the quote on the website?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt;&lt;em&gt;Through the discovery of a simple but fundamental error of thought, in Refuting the External World Göran Backlund does nothing less than put forth a sober and irrefutable argument as to how and why an external physical world cannot exist.To effortlessly see for yourself how and why the existence of an external physical world is logically impossible, is like to having the master key to any existential question.”&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="color: #333333"&gt;&lt;span style="font-family: adobe-garamond-pro&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;EB&amp;#x20;Garamond&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Georgia&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Baskerville&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x20;New&amp;#x20;Roman&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;Times&amp;#x2c;&amp;#x20;serif"&gt;&lt;span style="font-size: 24px"&gt; &amp;#x2013; Kristoffer Lindgren&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The argument is irrefutable!  It is an irrefutable proof! Which means you can&amp;#039;t refute it!&lt;br /&gt;It definitely absolutely positively isn&amp;#039;t the worst argument in the world...&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;web&amp;#x2e;maths&amp;#x2e;unsw&amp;#x2e;edu&amp;#x2e;au&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x7e;jim&amp;#x2f;worst&amp;#x2e;html"&gt;http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~jim/worst.html&lt;/a&gt;</description> <pubDate>Sun, 25 May 2014 08:12:36 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537491</guid> <dc:creator>sawfoot _</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-25T08:12:36Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537352</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;Really simple? Not so much. You are confusing several separate concepts together to make it extra confusing though. It will take time and effort to figure this out if you are really interested. Look up Tom Campbell in youtube and watch some lectures...if you find it interesting then read his trilogy. This will explain the reality we are experiencing and the greater reality and answer the fractal nature of consciousness and how we are one yet individuated at the same time.&lt;br /&gt;As far as experiencing reality as nondual yourself, if you shut down the selfing processes layer by layer that create the sense of self then a non dual experience of reality will happen. The book &amp;#034;The ego tunnel&amp;#034; outlines these layers quite well and is a fun read. &lt;br /&gt;I wish I could explain it in a paragraph but I read about 1000 pages to learn it all.&lt;br /&gt;Good Luck&lt;br /&gt;~D&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Everything I&amp;#039;ve read along these lines boils down to: we don&amp;#039;t &lt;em&gt;experience&lt;/em&gt; anything other than experience, therefore there &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; nothing other than experience... which means that experience is not experience &lt;em&gt;of&lt;/em&gt; anything. The criterion of proof makes it impossible to prove the existence of anything other than experience, and then the absence of proof is turned into proof of absence. If anyone knows of a coherent treatment of this theme that does NOT rely on such a sleight of hand, I&amp;#039;d be interested to hear about it...&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;Meanwhile, of course experience is nondual... for everyone, all the time, whether they know it or not. Experience never experiences the absence of itself, or the boundaries of itself. They&amp;#039;re only inferred, never experienced. But I haven&amp;#039;t seen really convincing arguments that the inference (that something exists independently of awareness) is wrong.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;(Edit: I can see the value of treating experience this way, and I often play around with such things myself for the psychological effects -- but turning it into metaphysics / ontology is a different matter).</description> <pubDate>Sun, 25 May 2014 02:07:33 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537352</guid> <dc:creator>John Wilde</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-25T02:07:33Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537320</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;John Wilde:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Dream Walker:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt; I like your essay well enough and believe similar things as you.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Can you -- or can anyone -- explain something really simple to me?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If there is nondual Consciousness as the sole ontological reality, nothing other than that, how could there be anything other than global omniscience?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;Really simple? Not so much. You are confusing several separate concepts together to make it extra confusing though. It will take time and effort to figure this out if you are really interested. Look up Tom Campbell in youtube and watch some lectures...if you find it interesting then read his trilogy. This will explain the reality we are experiencing and the greater reality and answer the fractal nature of consciousness and how we are one yet individuated at the same time.&lt;br /&gt;As far as experiencing reality as nondual yourself, if you shut down the selfing processes layer by layer that create the sense of self then a non dual experience of reality will happen. The book &amp;#034;The ego tunnel&amp;#034; outlines these layers quite well and is a fun read. &lt;br /&gt;I wish I could explain it in a paragraph but I read about 1000 pages to learn it all.&lt;br /&gt;Good Luck&lt;br /&gt;~D</description> <pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2014 23:59:00 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537320</guid> <dc:creator>Dream Walker</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-24T23:59:00Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537312</link> <description>I enjoyed the article my investigations so far points to either there is no mind as such only awareness, perception, experience whatever&lt;br /&gt;Or another possibility is http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html&lt;br /&gt;Let&amp;#039;s hope whoever wrote the program didn&amp;#039;t work for microsoft</description> <pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2014 22:58:01 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537312</guid> <dc:creator>Jeff Grove</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-24T22:58:01Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537303</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;goran c backlund:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt; My argument refutes other minds as well.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So if there are no other minds, why are you talking to yourself?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;He&amp;#039;s not. You are.&lt;br /&gt;See?</description> <pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2014 22:10:57 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537303</guid> <dc:creator>John Wilde</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-24T22:10:57Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537297</link> <description>Your articles read like a bad philosophy 101 paper. You confuse epistemology with ontology.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If there is no external world..why do you..&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1. Eat food&lt;br /&gt;2. Look both ways before crossing the street&lt;br /&gt;3. Wash your hands to avoid getting sick&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If there is no external world ,..do you believe...&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If all humans were to suddenly vanish, would monkeys still exist?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Do you have parents? How did you come to be alive? How would it come that you would die? If you don&amp;#039;t believe in time, was there ever a person named Abraham Lincoln who once lived? &lt;br /&gt;If you don&amp;#039;t believe in space, why aren&amp;#039;t you in Hawaii right now? Or why can&amp;#039;t you get to Hawaii instantly?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If other minds don&amp;#039;t exist, who do you hope buys your book?</description> <pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2014 21:46:57 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537297</guid> <dc:creator>Jinxed P</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-24T21:46:57Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537282</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;goran c backlund:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt; My argument refutes other minds as well. Besides covering all of this extensively in my book, i did wrote a few articles about this some years ago. You can read them here (4 part series)&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;uncoveringlife&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;veil-of-perception&amp;#x2f;"&gt; http://www.uncoveringlife.com/veil-of-perception/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Okay, thanks. While I don&amp;#039;t find the argument convincing, it gives me a better understanding of what you&amp;#039;re about. (Seemingly the same as Greg Goode, Rupert Spira, Francis Lucille, etc). The section on space and time -- (part 3 of 4, I think) -- contains what I was looking for: an explanation of how/why some people can conceive of consciousness as non-partitioned / non-localised / non-individualised.</description> <pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2014 21:24:51 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537282</guid> <dc:creator>John Wilde</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-24T21:24:51Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537277</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;goran c backlund:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;My argument refutes other minds as well.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So if there are no other minds, why are you talking to yourself?</description> <pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2014 21:14:00 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537277</guid> <dc:creator>Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-24T21:14:00Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537143</link> <description>My argument refutes other minds as well. Besides covering all of this extensively in my book, i did wrote a few articles about this some years ago. You can read them here (4 part series)&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;uncoveringlife&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;veil-of-perception&amp;#x2f;"&gt; http://www.uncoveringlife.com/veil-of-perception/&lt;/a&gt;</description> <pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2014 10:53:39 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537143</guid> <dc:creator>goran c backlund</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-24T10:53:39Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537140</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Dream Walker:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt; I like your essay well enough and believe similar things as you.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Can you -- or can anyone -- explain something really simple to me?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If there is nondual Consciousness as the sole ontological reality, nothing other than that, how could there be anything other than global omniscience? And if there is a global omniscience, how could there be (or even seem to be) any kind of limited knowingness? And if there isn&amp;#039;t any kind of limited knowingness, why can&amp;#039;t the writer of these lines witness the readers&amp;#039; environment and thoughts and vice-versa? And if there is a limit to the content of any experience, doesn&amp;#039;t this imply that there is something other than the witnessing subject -- even if it&amp;#039;s only another subject -- in which case it can&amp;#039;t be global/nondual/undivided?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I understand that we never actually experience any separation, and that our experience is already nondual in that sense, and that subject and object are inferred rather than directly experienced. But to turn this experiential limitation into an ontological truth, a nondual Consciousness as the sole reality, leads to something less plausible than an actual world experienced by many limited beings, each with it&amp;#039;s own limited perspective.</description> <pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2014 10:42:00 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537140</guid> <dc:creator>John Wilde</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-24T10:42:00Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537134</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;goran c backlund:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;What do you think about this essay I wrote?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;uncoveringlife&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;enlightenment-what-it-is"&gt;Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;You are pimping your book...Please be honest enough to do so up front.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;This book &lt;em&gt;will&lt;/em&gt; dispel any wrong-thinking that’s standing in the way of awakening. It’ll show you &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; why the external world&lt;em&gt;&amp;#x2014;&lt;/em&gt;that is,&lt;em&gt;&lt;/em&gt;an&lt;br /&gt; objective physical universe of time and space&amp;#x2014;doesn’t exist &amp;#x2013; &lt;br /&gt;thereby effectively revealing Consciousness as, not only the ground of &lt;br /&gt;being, but as the &lt;em&gt;ultimate reality of all.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;p style="text-align: center"&gt;Available in .PDF-format for direct download.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="text-align: center"&gt;Price: $29.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;I like your essay well enough and believe similar things as you. I&amp;#039;d of course have to read your book to see if the similarities are actually the same but I am happy with my thoughts on the matter so far as $29 goes.</description> <pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2014 07:58:25 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537134</guid> <dc:creator>Dream Walker</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-24T07:58:25Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537105</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;goran c backlund:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt; What do you think about this essay I wrote?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;uncoveringlife&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;enlightenment-what-it-is"&gt;Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;How do you justify the leap from a simple epistemological limitation (ie. &lt;em&gt;knowing&lt;/em&gt; is experience, dependent on experience) to ontological truth (there &lt;em&gt;exists&lt;/em&gt; nothing other than experience)?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Also, could the arguments that you use to refute the external world also be used to refute the existence of other minds, other experiences, other subjects? Am I justified in saying that because I don&amp;#039;t directly experience your experience, your experience isn&amp;#039;t actually happening?</description> <pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2014 05:26:18 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537105</guid> <dc:creator>John Wilde</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-24T05:26:18Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537010</link> <description>What do you think about this essay I wrote?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;uncoveringlife&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;enlightenment-what-it-is"&gt;Enlightenment: What It Is And How To Get It&lt;/a&gt;</description> <pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2014 05:04:05 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5537010</guid> <dc:creator>goran c backlund</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-05-24T05:04:05Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: A nice technique for recognizing non-duality</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5354686</link> <description>I&amp;#039;m a fan of this sort of thing. A similar technique, actually my introduction to effective meditation technique (i.e. non-mushroomy) is this: Notice the silent, peaceful pauses in between your thoughts. See if you can expand them, just a little bit at first. So if you&amp;#039;re noticing a second between thoughts, see if you can relax your mind into lasting 2 seconds between thoughts. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When you can do that, try 3. Then 4. Then 5. So on and so forth. Even a beginner can rapidly learn this technique and get to a state where there&amp;#039;s more peacefulness than thinking. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It&amp;#039;s a simple but powerful meditation technique that combines beginner-level insight with beginner-to-intermediate-level concentration. It&amp;#039;s a great bridge into more heavy-duty jhana or vipassana or combined practice. It also makes a great warm-up prior to those practices -- try this for 2-5 minutes and once your mind is settled, switch to the more advanced technique. It&amp;#039;ll work more efficiently that way.</description> <pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2014 19:05:21 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5354686</guid> <dc:creator>J Adam G</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-03-27T19:05:21Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: A nice technique for recognizing non-duality</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5331425</link> <description>Thanks for sharing this useful pointer. The frequency of application strikes me as effective. I&amp;#039;ve not had time to check out any of BM&amp;#039;s stuff over the years.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;+1 Tommy M&amp;#039;s comments.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I know these posts are a few years old, though having just joined recently here (although relatively long time practitioner), I&amp;#039;m enjoying going through many of the rich posts available in this forum.</description> <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2014 01:55:52 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5331425</guid> <dc:creator>Dean P</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-03-21T01:55:52Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: Awareness Watching Awareness</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5330762</link> <description>The OP was about a year ago.. how did you go with the AWA practice?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I&amp;#039;ve been doing this for a few years, and it&amp;#039;s a pet of mine.. sometimes I&amp;#039;ll leave it and return as well. It really does work, though needs to be done (as others have indicated) for more than just 20-30 mins per day. Even the author of it (in the &amp;#034;Bliss&amp;#034; book) advises to do the practice for as many hours as possible, and to clear away as much unnecessary time commitments as possible.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Bear in mind also, that the actual descriptions for the AWA exercises are pointers themselves. I&amp;#039;ve often come across people taking the pointers as theological/philosophical truths, which they are not. We know on an ultimate level there is no &amp;#034;you&amp;#034; attempting to &amp;#039;watch your awareness&amp;#039;, likewise nobody owns their little &amp;#039;awarenesses&amp;#039;.. however, when the descriptions are read in every day context and simply applied, they work in directing the mind onto awareness only, while dis-identifying with thought, feeling, body, etc.</description> <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2014 23:17:47 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5330762</guid> <dc:creator>Dean P</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-03-20T23:17:47Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: "Mom and Dad, where are you?" Practice</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5236546</link> <description>&amp;#034;What the fuck is going on?&amp;#034;</description> <pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2014 00:23:24 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5236546</guid> <dc:creator>Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-02-27T00:23:24Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>"Mom and Dad, where are you?" Practice</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5236498</link> <description>Imagine you just woke up after dying.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;What&amp;#039;s the first thing that you would think of.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Bingo.</description> <pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2014 00:11:44 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5236498</guid> <dc:creator>Adam Dietrich Ringle</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-02-27T00:11:44Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: feeling like I recognise everyone from somewhere</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5221154</link> <description>Practice is good, progressing steadily - contually seem to be realsasing old energy blocks and getting a clearer inner connection to my body - have had some quite difficult phases over the last year though and am still not convinced I know where I am at on the path - really need to find a good teacher or mentor to guide me a little but seem to be hitting a hick wall every time I look</description> <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2014 08:03:51 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5221154</guid> <dc:creator>b man</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-02-20T08:03:51Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: feeling like I recognise everyone from somewhere</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5220300</link> <description>Kinda sounds like a byproduct of equanimity. How is your practice otherwise?</description> <pubDate>Wed, 19 Feb 2014 22:34:31 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5220300</guid> <dc:creator>T DC</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-02-19T22:34:31Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: feeling like I recognise everyone from somewhere</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5219079</link> <description>It sounds like a false intuition. Probably if you keep feeding it you can get to the point where you always by default feel like you know everyone from somewhere. This doesn&amp;#039;t seem particularly useful though ...</description> <pubDate>Wed, 19 Feb 2014 16:54:28 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5219079</guid> <dc:creator>Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-02-19T16:54:28Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>feeling like I recognise everyone from somewhere</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5218292</link> <description>Hi guys, &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I recently started getting the feeling that I know people from somewhere. Its really subtle. Is this part of the insight process or am I just going a bit bonkers?!&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;cheers, &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;bman</description> <pubDate>Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:09:50 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5218292</guid> <dc:creator>b man</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-02-19T10:09:50Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5107915</link> <description>How refreshing to hear this well explained, It seems from this I will have another tool to use, if this paper tiger formation gets past my mindfulness, then I can just note &amp;#034; paper tiger sensation, paper tiger sensation&amp;#034; have a quick laugh at the minds absurdity, and get back to bare mindfulness. Indeed it is not a person or a person&amp;#039;s ideas, or a person&amp;#039;s negative comments taht give arise to dukkha, but only the mind creating a &amp;#034;paper tiger&amp;#034; This is such a relief. I tawt I saw a puddy tat, I did I did! I&amp;#039;ll stop funnin&amp;#039; too many hours at work.&lt;br /&gt;Thank you, &lt;br /&gt;Okay, that&amp;#039;s all for meow....&lt;br /&gt;Bye meow</description> <pubDate>Sun, 05 Jan 2014 06:55:48 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5107915</guid> <dc:creator>Psi Phi</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-05T06:55:48Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5106050</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;Chris M:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;Vipassana (lhag-mthong, Skt. vipashyana) meditation within the sphere of Theravada Buddhism entails noting and watching the arising and falling of moments of conceptual thinking, but not through the “eyes” of an independently existing “me” as the observer. Through this procedure, we realize the impermanence or fleeting nature of conceptual thought and of mental activity in general. We also realize that mental activity occurs without an independent agent “me” either observing it or making it happen.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Dzogchen meditation, in contrast, focuses on the simultaneous arising, abiding, and disappearing of moments of conceptual thinking &amp;#x2013; not simply noting or watching it. This allows us to recognize first effulgent rigpa &amp;#x2013; the aspect of rigpa that spontaneously establishes the appearance of simultaneously arising, abiding, and disappearing thoughts. It then allows us to recognize essence rigpa &amp;#x2013; the aspect of rigpa that serves as the cognitive space underlying every moment of mental activity and allowing for the spontaneous establishment of simultaneously arising, abiding, and disappearing thoughts.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I was wondering if you could clarify (or anybody else) the bit I bolded re simultaneous arising, abiding, etc in dzogchen? That is, what does it mean to focus on &amp;#034; ... simultaneous arising, abiding and disappearing of moments of conceptual thinking&amp;#034; that Berzin mentions? He doesn&amp;#039;t seem to expand on this point, or at least it wasn&amp;#039;t clear to me.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Normally thoughts are seen as occurring over time with a sort of: beginning -&amp;gt; middle -&amp;gt; end progression that is spread out over time.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The focus with any type of insight practice is on the experience of phenomeon, which is always occurring cusp of the present moment. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Thought is a type of experience. When is a thought really happening ? When does it abide ? When does it stop ?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;We are not looking for intellectual answers for these questions. Because that would just be more thoughts.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Noting is happening after the moment has passed and some cognition has taken place. So too slow and gross (aggregated) from a Dzogchen standpoint.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;We are also not trying to watch the thought as a background watcher to the thoughts, then that is also just cognitive imputation happening because of ignorance of the present moment. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There is no need for a &amp;#039;watcher&amp;#039; because there is a very basic knowing implicit in the thought occurring at all. This sort of &amp;#039;knowing&amp;#039; is also implicit in perceiving a &amp;#039;watcher&amp;#039; or any other phenomenon. It is not other than the phenomenon itself.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So the key is to see thought as thought in the present moment without getting distracted. Then we can see that it is simultaneously arising, passing, and ending. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;We see the nature of thought prior to forming ideas of when and where, prior to attachment to aggregates (but to say &amp;#039;prior&amp;#039; is a bit misleading due to no time). This is something like the first taste of Rigpa.</description> <pubDate>Sat, 04 Jan 2014 17:18:18 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5106050</guid> <dc:creator>(D Z) Dhru Val</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-04T17:18:18Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5105892</link> <description>Hi Sci Fi,&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;First, I enjoyed your recent reply to sawfoot in o&amp;#039;er in yonder humour thread.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;Personally, I am trying to bring this habit to cessation, I find when I disagree with what someone says, my instinct is to correct their viewpoint. Kinda funny. This arises from personality viewpoint, meaning, when we know something because of our personal experiences, we &amp;#034;know&amp;#034; it is correct, after all it is within our realm of experience. Problem is, there are 7 billion other personality viewpoints out there, and they all feel they are correct, also. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt; So I have raised paper tigers in such a way in the past that did gratify my own conceit. As you may know or imagine, that gratification is not worth boo. It is trouble. So I had to look at that. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Now I call out &amp;#034;paper tigering&amp;#034; because I see it in many talks and writings more often than not* and as far as I can tell people, like myself, like the outcome of removing paper tigers in their thinking. There is an actual reason for this: we are removing an enemy from our brains that we have created and sustained, a sort of vigilance that forces the amygdala to keep routing information to a fight/combative mode (which has its uses in actual fights). So a benefit of ceasing paper tigers is actually pleasure (removing a sustained threat, enemy) and the ability to learn much better; the amygdala can send information on to the prefrontal cortex and memory banks...&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;*I could be very specific here just in regards to some of the scholars I listened to or read in the past two months, say, but I was able to discuss the issues directly at the time. In person my softer approach, which is deliberate, can be shown and felt. In blog forums, if I am dealing with someone using an anonymous avatar then I tend to just say, &amp;#034;Okay, to hell with it: there&amp;#039;s conceited paper triggering. I&amp;#039;ll just call it.&amp;#034; I forget that the person using conceit is usually fronting for some pain, some brain threat, like anxiety. But I am starting to think that I should just send a PM and see if people want to talk online for a few minutes. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Also, speculation is also kinda of good: it shows the actual brain is myelinating a story; it is learning something and creating something. It&amp;#039;s just that at the end of the day, in meditative practices that speak of progressive lightenings up, speculation doesn&amp;#039;t offer reliable mind at the moment of dying. Speculation doesn&amp;#039;t offer the calmness of understanding that the study, investigation and experience do.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I was really lucky to start here when Tarin, SKD and Daniel were giving airtime to actualism. The way Tarin encouraged me in the actualism practices of being at the senses lined up usefully with my own disgust with my &amp;#034;clever&amp;#034; intellect. So suddenly one day I was willing to try something new, and totally. One day I just said, I&amp;#039;m doing that practice till I change. I had a lot of conviction in Tarin, in part because he withstood so much of my combativeness without being moved, by also burning up my paper tigers. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And he eventually did just start ignoring my affective iterations. So one day I decided to try something like &amp;#034;sati-or-bust&amp;#034;, practice not speculate or argue. For the first four days my mind actually missed the gratification of my stories about everything, my cleverness. Then about two weeks in my partner was like, &amp;#034;What are you doing? You seem really nice.&amp;#034; I was actually listening to him, finally, for days and days and days with friendliness and non-judgement, enjoying the pleasure in the senses of hearing someone who is not being harmful. Then about 4-6 weeks in single-point concentration happened out of the blue and I thought, &amp;#034;Wow. They aren&amp;#039;t kidding. The mind really hyper-focuses and it&amp;#039;s wild.&amp;#034; Thus started my interest in sitting meditation again. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And this fall I needed to start returning to sincere, tender sati. It does wonders. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So, yes, sometimes I do presume to suggest people actually practice. Speculation has a great use in showing that the mind is interested, is building a novel story, but at some point speculation is a balloon that pops and leaves nothing, unless that bust moves someone to practice.</description> <pubDate>Sat, 04 Jan 2014 13:35:04 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5105892</guid> <dc:creator>katy steger</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-04T13:35:04Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5105723</link> <description>Nirvana is where you are being created. You can withstand more and more energies. Find the blocks where energy is stuck and eliminate/resolve them. Gather/cultivate energy and let it show what you need to do.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;No complicated concepts, just energy.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Figure out the way to be where you will feel the vaccuum like balance, feels like time stands still. It expands, the more you cultivate it. Energies will lead you there eventually.&lt;br /&gt;It can get overwhelming, you also can add fuel to enhance it or you can stop the fire also. Overall in a big picture it is slow process.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It get more enjoyable over time. I am mere beginner in this haha.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;streamenterer:&lt;br /&gt;there is stream of energy flowing, to be stream enterer i need to jump in.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;arahat:&lt;br /&gt;i also need to let go from holding my feet on bottom, i need to let go myself completely from the things what holding me from flowing freely with the energy. If i am flowing freely with the same pace with the energy, there is no flowing at all...vaccuum.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Also: you are less vulnerable by the attacks from the shore people, but ther eare some stuff in deeper waters, but seems earth stream is pretty safe to evolve.</description> <pubDate>Sat, 04 Jan 2014 12:40:22 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5105723</guid> <dc:creator>Rist Ei</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-04T12:40:22Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5105600</link> <description>Thanks for your input all.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I thought I read something in passing, Katy, when I read a bit of something something you wrote, if you don&amp;#039;t recall it. Maybe I&amp;#039;m wrong. If so sorry. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I&amp;#039;ll try to take your advice and meditated a bit more, and look to my own personal experience a bit more.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Thanks for your thoughts. Your a thoughtful and interesting person. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Neem.</description> <pubDate>Sat, 04 Jan 2014 11:04:06 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5105600</guid> <dc:creator>Neem Nyima</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-04T11:04:06Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5104872</link> <description>&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;katy steger:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I do flag paper tigers/presumption (in myself, teachers and anyone asking for feedback if it occurs in their accounting) as these &amp;#034;paper tigers&amp;#034; and &amp;#034;straw men&amp;#034; form conceit. Maybe I flagged something that was unsubstantiated or needlessly created an inferior foil so that the speaker could be the superior character in their speech? This is not what I think of when I think of this monk, but I know that lately I am aware of how often I read &amp;#034;paper tigers&amp;#034; foils. Even this morning and last night, two scholar-practioners who are new to me wrote disparaging comments with &amp;#034;paper-tiger&amp;#034; peoples to make their own points. And I can immediately think of a third scholar-practioner who I recall doing it. Why does this happen? Is there a value to disparaging others even by way of paper tigers? I only find the seeds of harmful cause-and-effect when I see this or have done it myself.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Personally, I am trying to bring this habit to cessation, I find when I disagree with what someone says, my instinct is to correct their viewpoint. Kinda funny. This arises from personality viewpoint, meaning, when we know something because of our personal experiences, we &amp;#034;know&amp;#034; it is correct, after all it is within our realm of experience. Problem is, there are 7 billion other personality viewpoints out there, and they all feel they are correct, also. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In other words, there is one reality, but 7 billion human mind reflections of that reality, none of these human reflections with personal viewpoints are correct, so therein lies the conflict, thus dukkha.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;With a universal viewpoint, there is no conflict, people view what they view. If there is no craving for things to be different, there is no conflict, no dukkha.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Now, if I can only get this to sink through the thickness of my skull.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Anyways, just sharing something I am struggling with, didn&amp;#039;t mean to butt into the Rigpa Nibbana Dimensions....&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Why Phi</description> <pubDate>Sat, 04 Jan 2014 06:50:12 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5104872</guid> <dc:creator>Psi Phi</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-04T06:50:12Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5104043</link> <description>Okay, here&amp;#039;s a little Stars of the Lid intermission: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxqVrgFOk3o. There is an unexpected refereeing in there at the end. Admittedly, I enjoy this a lot more if if I just watch the scenery shots.&lt;br /&gt;_________&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Back to the thread.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In short, I don&amp;#039;t understand why there is a debate, as in &amp;#034;I have had this debate with a friend.&amp;#034;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And I don&amp;#039;t understand why there is a problem, as in &amp;#034;the problem is I these books are coming from the ultimate perspective, of our very essential nature&amp;#034; and &amp;#034;To me the problem is around how we cling to conceptions of self. But not about whether a self exists or not, this self that exists is a flux.&amp;#034; Who is the &amp;#034;We&amp;#034; that does this?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;To your thread question ~ &amp;#034;What is the difference between Nirvana &amp;amp; Rigpa?&amp;#034; ~ what is your experiential answer? &lt;br /&gt;I&amp;#039;m not looking for right/wrong, but our exchange of experiences.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;_________&lt;br /&gt;Could you point me specifically to where you find basis for this: &amp;#034;I&amp;#039;ve read part of a thread of yours where you talk about the problems of Thanassaro Bikkhu, Thanassaro is quite good for a traditionalist, who is likely wrong in the areas you critiqued him.&amp;#034; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I do flag paper tigers/presumption (in myself, teachers and anyone asking for feedback if it occurs in their accounting) as these &amp;#034;paper tigers&amp;#034; and &amp;#034;straw men&amp;#034; form conceit. Maybe I flagged something that was unsubstantiated or needlessly created an inferior foil so that the speaker could be the superior character in their speech? This is not what I think of when I think of this monk, but I know that lately I am aware of how often I read &amp;#034;paper tigers&amp;#034; foils. Even this morning and last night, two scholar-practioners who are new to me wrote disparaging comments with &amp;#034;paper-tiger&amp;#034; peoples to make their own points. And I can immediately think of a third scholar-practioner who I recall doing it. Why does this happen? Is there a value to disparaging others even by way of paper tigers? I only find the seeds of harmful cause-and-effect when I see this or have done it myself.</description> <pubDate>Sat, 04 Jan 2014 00:38:58 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5104043</guid> <dc:creator>katy steger</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-04T00:38:58Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5103666</link> <description>Hi Neem,&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I am rethinking my reply and editing this.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;Shit I&amp;#039;ve gone on, oh well...&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt; Me, too. If I am ever succinct out of the gate, then I&amp;#039;d like a scout badge for my sash for that.</description> <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2014 20:52:31 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5103666</guid> <dc:creator>katy steger</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-03T20:52:31Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5103045</link> <description>Greetings Katy&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;katy steger:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;I listened to the &amp;#034;bonus follow-up&amp;#034; you linked. He says at 3/4 point, &lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;#034;I find all of this enormously inspiring and fascinating as challenges for experience (...) if this can actually become experiential, that&amp;#039;s pretty interesting, to put it lightly,&amp;#034;&lt;/em&gt; which indicates that he may be teaching some of this based on text principle versus realization. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Maybe, but who knows, he comes from that old school group of people like Jack Kornfield, and they don&amp;#039;t talk about their attainments. I&amp;#039;ve listened to about thirty of his talks and guided meditations, and he talks a fair bit about his history and experiences. I&amp;#039;d be inclined to think he has experience an attainment? &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I&amp;#039;ve read part of a thread of yours where you talk about the problems of Thanassaro Bikkhu, Thanassaro is quite good for a traditionalist, who is likely wrong in the areas you critiqued him. I&amp;#039;d like to remind you that Daniel&amp;#039;s last teacher before he attained, Sayadaw U Pandita, who is also my teacher in Melbourne, has quite a lot of traditional dogma just as Thanasaaro. I asked him about whether an Arhat would die if he didn&amp;#039;t take the robes, and he said yes. If he spoke truly then he must not think Daniels attained. What I think here, is that attainment of Arhatship doesn&amp;#039;t make you perfect in your morals or intellectual wisdom, and you can still be wrong about things. In the end it is only the person how knows whether they are attained based on, what identifications remain.&lt;br /&gt;I remember Daniel in a thread once saying that Wallace is close minded, around dry insight and by that suggesting also that other areas of his critiques of soft jhana are wrong. I expect Wallace to be close minded around the dry insight issue, but that doesn&amp;#039;t mean Dry Insighter&amp;#039;s have to follow suit. But there does seems to be some discrepancy between, notions of soft jhana, insight jhana and the notion of jhana in the Visuddhimagga. But that doesn&amp;#039;t mean everything that Mahasi taught is wrong, and i understand what he means by soft jhana and insight jhana, but they don&amp;#039;t conform to the common language of the Visuddhimagga. I guess I&amp;#039;ll have to accept the break with the association with those traditional terms, within the the dry insight school.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;Yes, I listen to a teacher, sometimes debate them, but ultimately, I have to do my own work.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;For myself, for example, the typology of khandas was adequate to guide me in meditation and I still refer to it for convention in conversation. To me the khanda of consciousness, because it is a typology, contains the experiences of consciousnesses I&amp;#039;ve had and which I raised above: this includes primary &amp;#034;released&amp;#034; consciousness arising after cessation and which is can move in equanimity, and its predecessor ~ subtly conceited consciousness, which can also move about in equanimity, though it is not released and bears subtle conceit, and affective consciousness seen in &amp;#034;normal&amp;#034; daily moods.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So what makes your words any different to anyone else&amp;#039;s words. I&amp;#039;m assuming that mixed in with the sharing about your experience is also a sense of advice, sorry if that isn&amp;#039;t so. Its not that your advice isn&amp;#039;t good, its just that other advice is also good. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Yeah i have a chat every now and then and share a point or two and also disagree with a point or two. Mostly I avoid these more complicated debates, and offer simple advice around practices I know and how to practice them.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It seems that dzogchen might be wrong or they might be right, about a deeper level of consciousness, but this is not the point, for me, because that can&amp;#039;t really be resolved, without the direct experience of it, just with Path. The point to me is understanding others views, with clarity, and then making up your own mind, along with maybe seen how or why someone might think that way. In that regard, we have more of a chance to read between the lines, to the essence of their intention, rather than get caught up, in the semantics of their perspectives. Or we might go this is how these people think, i&amp;#039;m not inclined to think that, there is reincarnation or rigpa, or continuation after Arhatship. But its not like they want to burn all gays and think god is sending everyone to hell that doesn&amp;#039;t believe in him. And maybe its possibly true, that there is reincarnation and rigpa, personally i don&amp;#039;t know. Thought I feel a strong, a bit more strongly about reincarnation, truthfully I still don&amp;#039;t know. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There is a theme, that emptiness is form and form is emptiness, and emptiness is not other than form and form is not other than emptiness. Thats how I view the concept of self and not self. So I see a dilemma, in this need to attack self, there is no self to attack, what&amp;#039;s the big deal? But this is one of those argument even amongst Buddhist who advocate for no-self... &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&amp;#034;I have annoyed quite a few faith driven students at Namhai Norbhu&amp;#039;s retreats in Australia.&amp;#034; &lt;br /&gt;Where I would spend more time in argumentation or rumination, then I would essentially be getting gratified by those ruminating/argumentative actions and avoiding my own study-practice. That would be me; I&amp;#039;m not saying that&amp;#039;s what you&amp;#039;re doing. Sometimes training in meditation on the cushion and/or dedicating weeks and weeks to sincere, effortful sati is too hard compared with habitual ruminating/argumentation/speculation/discursiveness. So one ruminates and argues and seeks to discuss a bit. That is useful for unwinding that urge/habit until those activities are seen to be unreliable and not satisfactory. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;At the time i was studying Dzogchen, and i was trying to work out whether, Rigpa could actually be worked with and what the difference was between awareness and rigpa, no one really understood, and many of them were upset by my questioning, because it created doubt in them around their devotion to Namkhai Norbu and his path and around their attachment of Dzogchen. &lt;br /&gt;Yeah, I&amp;#039;m not spending all my time getting it done, but are you, and are you an Arhat? Have you finished it all, and just because one person does, does that mean it will be that easy for everyone?&lt;br /&gt;I&amp;#039;ve got another retreat in april for a month, I&amp;#039;ll be good a month before that retreat. I don&amp;#039;t like a lot about existence, it often bores me but i don&amp;#039;t like meditating a lot too(I&amp;#039;m sick of trying to make it better, and the sensitisation that comes with the practice, i&amp;#039;m getting better at accepting that.). I&amp;#039;ve notice in the last four years since I started this path, that after my earlier retreat, that on a deeper level I may be becoming more equanimous. My basis for saying that is that, during my last retreat, last April. Things where mostly smooth! And that has never the case before (in my eleven months of retreat), it was sort of fucking intense a lot of the time. So is my glass half full or is it half empty? I&amp;#039;m taking it easy, or trying to, while I study transpersonal counselling.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;Also, I quoted LongNails not to effect silence. Not at all. But to question a tone of perhaps needless disagreement/presumption (which I also question in myself when I spot it) which can telegraph that one is using the mind&amp;#039;s energy to ruminate on evaluating others versus seeing for oneself in practice, wherein satisfaction, satiety, can actually be found. LongNails on this point is akin to the fifth point in the &lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;accesstoinsight&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;tipitaka&amp;#x2f;an&amp;#x2f;an05&amp;#x2f;an05&amp;#x2e;159&amp;#x2e;than&amp;#x2e;html"&gt;five qualifications of a teacher that I like to remember&lt;/a&gt;, helpful to seekers and teachers alike.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Yes I see that point, but you seem quite vocal your self. &lt;br /&gt;Also I&amp;#039;m getting better at not getting involved, for an socialist greenie &amp;amp; idealist. Jack Kornfield said quite elegantly, that, some people care a bit more and this can make them angry or more offensive, and some people are more detached and this can make them more tolerable or uninvolved. They are both quite good qualities in different ways. &lt;br /&gt;Sharing, at least with people who I feel i can help in areas of meditation that I have traversed, makes me happy, makes me feel metta, this gives me meaning, in a dark night period were dukha and a no-self, kind of nothingness of meaning has prevailed, for many years. This helps my personality, my sense of self as it is reconstructed in each new moment. Jack Kornfield also talked about the benefits of approaches that deal with personality and how this can be complementary to some peoples path. Comic examples of this are enlightened people who need counselling to learn to relate to others better, depicted in, After the Ecstasy the Laundry. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;You sound a be more zealous, and critical, than you have been, in some of your other threads that i&amp;#039;ve seen. I tend to not read that much of what goes on on this site. As sometime its to intellectual and a lot of the arguments go round in circles. Many seem to have a tendency to nit pick over finer points, than aren&amp;#039;t relevant to me. To the people i know, i am intellectual, but to the people on this site, I think what I write may be a bit intellectually disinteresting, maybe even a bit simple. Maybe this is just my projection around some of the arguments on this site. But when i start to read a lot of these threads, I quickly get really bored by the intellectualisations and arguments. But if a person seems to be speaking from a position of trying to learn something, something that i know about, something that is coming from the heart, then it seems much more interesting to me. Yes there is some conceit around this but also there is just some really nice rejoicing in the opportunity to help, and in peoples progress on the path. And some compassion and some empathy.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Shit I&amp;#039;ve gone on, oh well...</description> <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2014 14:20:19 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5103045</guid> <dc:creator>Neem Nyima</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-03T14:20:19Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5102832</link> <description>Hi DZ, I read the article on dzogchen V. vipassana from the link you provided &lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;berzinarchives&amp;#x2e;com&amp;#x2f;web&amp;#x2f;en&amp;#x2f;archives&amp;#x2f;advanced&amp;#x2f;dzogchen&amp;#x2f;basic_points&amp;#x2f;introduction_dzogchen&amp;#x2e;html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;Vipassana (lhag-mthong, Skt. vipashyana) meditation within the sphere of Theravada Buddhism entails noting and watching the arising and falling of moments of conceptual thinking, but not through the “eyes” of an independently existing “me” as the observer. Through this procedure, we realize the impermanence or fleeting nature of conceptual thought and of mental activity in general. We also realize that mental activity occurs without an independent agent “me” either observing it or making it happen.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Dzogchen meditation, in contrast, focuses on the simultaneous arising, abiding, and disappearing of moments of conceptual thinking &lt;/strong&gt;&amp;#x2013; not simply noting or watching it. This allows us to recognize first effulgent rigpa &amp;#x2013; the aspect of rigpa that spontaneously establishes the appearance of simultaneously arising, abiding, and disappearing thoughts. It then allows us to recognize essence rigpa &amp;#x2013; the aspect of rigpa that serves as the cognitive space underlying every moment of mental activity and allowing for the spontaneous establishment of simultaneously arising, abiding, and disappearing thoughts.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Moreover, vipassana deals only with the grosser levels of mental activity, whereas dzogchen accesses the subtlest level, rigpa.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I was wondering if you could clarify (or anybody else) the bit I bolded re simultaneous arising, abiding, etc in dzogchen? That is, what does it mean to focus on &amp;#034; ... simultaneous arising, abiding and disappearing of moments of conceptual thinking&amp;#034; that Berzin mentions? He doesn&amp;#039;t seem to expand on this point, or at least it wasn&amp;#039;t clear to me.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Thanks in advance,&lt;br /&gt;Chris</description> <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2014 10:17:26 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5102832</guid> <dc:creator>Chris M</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-03T10:17:26Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5101300</link> <description>Hello Neem Nyima,&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;On that note maybe there is nothing deeper than presence, than being, and Path is merely a constructed myth. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;What I was getting at is that there is no being or presence or some inherently existing &amp;#034;thing&amp;#034; and therefore there can be nothing &amp;#034;deeper&amp;#034; as since nothing (no thing) inherently exists then the word &amp;#034;deeper&amp;#034; no longer applies to the situation. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;But I believe that a path holder has seen to a deeper level of reality, on that basis, maybe there is also another deeper level of reality called rigpa, then again maybe not and the only deeper level of reality is cessation. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;A path holder does not see to a &amp;#034;deeper level of reality,&amp;#034; but rather sees things closer to the way they actually are.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;Substrate, is when the mind becomes very calm and thought has ceased, its always there but the affect of being with your being without thought and absorbed in its nowness is profound. So presence is experienced in different ways, in relation to mindfulness and samadhi. What&amp;#039;s your problem with the idea of an unobscured view of substrate consciousness. It just unadulterated absorption in being presence or consciousness, with one object. Love, Space, Light, Unconscious-Sleep or Death.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Absorption is not realization, absorption is the result of temporarily pretending phenomena is permanent for the purposes of bliss and/or exploring interesting results into the nature of relative reality. It can also be used for gaining insight similar to the way one would build a house of cards and then knock it down.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;An analogy to the primordial awareness debate is the previous scientific belief that light ( electromagnetic radiation ) had to travel through some sort of &amp;#034;aether&amp;#034; to propagate. As such, physicists postulated that there was some mysterious &amp;#034;luminiferous aether&amp;#034; that was weightless, transparent, and permeating all matter and space. &lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;en&amp;#x2e;wikipedia&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;wiki&amp;#x2f;Luminiferous_aether"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether&lt;/a&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It was later realized from the Michelson-Morley experiment and special relativity that there is no such aether and light need not require this aether for its propagation. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Similarly, phenomena does not require some pre-existing primordial substance, but rather arises where it is with no external awareness whatsoever. Similarly, the luminosity intrinsically arises from the proper perception of phenomena - from the realization that &amp;#034;&amp;#034;&amp;#034;one&amp;#034;&amp;#034;&amp;#034; was pretending phenomena or phenomena&amp;#039;s mental echo (which is more phenomena) was somehow permanent and/or an observer of other phenomena from which phenomena arises, as causality requires no pre-existing backdrop for its operation. EDIT: Thus there is no luminous primordial ooze, primordial awareness, or rigpa that is (edit) not (/edit) sensate or phenomenal (though these terms can serve as useful pointers to (edit) the realization of this (/edit)).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This can sound scary or annihilative, though there is no such fear arising over the situation since when and where is also absent: since there is nothing to move around, nothing to travel around, nowhere to go, nothing to do other than the doing itself. There is only phenomena arising as phenomena and as such there is nothing to die, nothing to cease, nothing to annihilate. It is not merely some comforting language, but rather a direct realization of the actual situation in which we &amp;#034;find ourselves.&amp;#034;</description> <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2014 23:12:45 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5101300</guid> <dc:creator>Tom Tom</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-02T23:12:45Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5101286</link> <description>Hi Neem,&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I listened to the &amp;#034;bonus follow-up&amp;#034; you linked. He says at 3/4 point, &lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;#034;I find all of this enormously inspiring and fascinating as challenges for experience (...) if this can actually become experiential, that&amp;#039;s pretty interesting, to put it lightly,&amp;#034;&lt;/em&gt; which indicates that he may be teaching some of this based on text principle versus realization. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So the take away for me is always not to spend time and energy too much on questions arising from anyone&amp;#039;s lecture, like &amp;#034;Is there a consciousness beyond khandas or is primary consciousness part of the consciousness khanda? What is rigpa? What is pari-nibbana?&amp;#034; These are human typologies that have gained convention through teaching groups; obviously typologies are symbols related to language symbols so that people can communicate each other&amp;#039;s systems.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Yes, I listen to a teacher, sometimes debate them, but ultimately, I have to do my own work.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And in contrast to the symbolic knowledge we hear and discuss with peers and teachers, we each have the option to study consciousness through our own practice, using tools like concentration (open awareness, focused awareness, noting, mantra, prayer, sati). &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;For myself, for example, the typology of khandas was adequate to guide me in meditation and I still refer to it for convention in conversation. To me the khanda of consciousness, because it is a typology, contains the experiences of consciousnesses I&amp;#039;ve had and which I raised above: this includes primary &amp;#034;released&amp;#034; consciousness arising after cessation and which is can move in equanimity, and its predecessor ~ subtly conceited consciousness, which can also move about in equanimity, though it is not released and bears subtle conceit, and affective consciousness seen in &amp;#034;normal&amp;#034; daily moods.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;To me, the consciousness study is huge and we each have a lab. If we have kindly, safe conditions for that lab, this is amazing. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So if you like this teacher, great, use it. And...&lt;br /&gt;Neem:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;I have annoyed quite a few faith driven students at Namhai Norbhu&amp;#039;s retreats in Australia. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;where I would spend more time in argumentation or rumination, then I would essentially be getting gratified by those ruminating/argumentative actions and avoiding my own study-practice. That would be me; I&amp;#039;m not saying that&amp;#039;s what you&amp;#039;re doing. Sometimes training in meditation on the cushion and/or dedicating weeks and weeks to sincere, effortful sati is too hard compared with habitual ruminating/argumentation/speculation/discursiveness. So one ruminates and argues and seeks to discuss a bit. That is useful for unwinding that urge/habit until those activities are seen to be unreliable and not satisfactory. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;______&lt;br /&gt;Also, I quoted LongNails not to effect silence. Not at all. But to question a tone of perhaps needless disagreement/presumption (which I also question in myself when I spot it) which can telegraph that one is using the mind&amp;#039;s energy to ruminate on evaluating others versus seeing for oneself in practice, wherein satisfaction, satiety, can actually be found. LongNails on this point is akin to the fifth point in the &lt;a href="http&amp;#x3a;&amp;#x2f;&amp;#x2f;www&amp;#x2e;accesstoinsight&amp;#x2e;org&amp;#x2f;tipitaka&amp;#x2f;an&amp;#x2f;an05&amp;#x2f;an05&amp;#x2e;159&amp;#x2e;than&amp;#x2e;html"&gt;five qualifications of a teacher that I like to remember&lt;/a&gt;, helpful to seekers and teachers alike.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Best wishes.</description> <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2014 22:35:39 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5101286</guid> <dc:creator>katy steger</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-02T22:35:39Z</dc:date> </item> <item> <title>RE: What is the difference between Nirvana &amp; Rigpa?</title> <link>http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5101210</link> <description>Hi neen nyima, sorry I have not had time to reply to your post in my thread, I am glad you re-posted this question. This is an interesting discussion.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;neem nyima:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;&lt;br /&gt; Asking questions about difference between pure awareness and primordial awareness/rigpa. It turns out its just like Namkhai Norbu says when he would repeatedly say to the gathering over the ten days teachings, (I did 2 of those at the Australian Namgyalgar Centre) that no one is recognising Rigpa, he actually meant it quite literally. The notion that Rigpa is available because it is our primordial nature, is stretched, to say the least.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This statement by Namkhai Norbu could be interpreted in two ways: 1) that when an individual recognizes rigpa, in doing so, or prior to doing so, they have so overcome their dualistic clinging to a &amp;#039;self&amp;#039; such that they are not forming the delusion that there is someone recognizing &amp;#039;rigpa&amp;#039;. Instead, ripga is simply recognized, and this recognition is not ascribed to a separate self. 2) more literally, that no practitioners are having any luck recognizing rigpa in their own personal practices.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In my opinion, the 1st interpretation seems the most likely given Namkai Norbus&amp;#039;s apparent realization. Why would such a teacher, so focused on transmitting advanced Dzogchen teachings tell his students that they will likely fail? It seems more likely that he means this statement in a less literal way meant to be interpreted on the basis of ultimate tachings. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Further support for this interpretation comes from the definition of rigpa itself. From the Rigpa Wiki, rigpa means: &amp;#034;‘the innermost nature of the mind’, our ultimate nature, the state of omniscience or enlightenment&amp;#x2014;a truth so universal, so primordial that it goes beyond all limits, and beyond even religion itself&amp;#034;. The definition from Wikipedia is: &amp;#034;In a Dzogchen context, rigpa is the knowledge that ensues from recognizing one&amp;#039;s nature. So to sum up these definitions in my own words, rigpa is both our ultimate nature, and the recognition of our ultimate nature.&amp;#034; In other words, the recognition of our ultimate nature entails the experience of the ultimate nature recognizing itself. As nothing is separate, and all is one, as all things are composed of the same ultimate nature, in the full recognition of non-duality, one&amp;#039;s awareness recognizes itself and all things as one. As Trungpa said, it is the &amp;#034;razor blade cutting itself&amp;#034;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;On the basis of these definitions, the 1st interpretation seems completely accurate. As rigpa is the state of ultimate awareness, of complete enlightenment, once this realization dawns, no false sense of duality remains, thus there is no one (aka separate self) that recognizes rigpa. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Having said this, your post seems mostly to deal with the 2nd interpretation, which frankly is also relatively accurate. Most people are not recognizing rigpa, however this is not to say they cannot. Enlightenment is achievable, it&amp;#039;s just not easy to achieve.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;div class="quote-title"&gt;neem nyima:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="quote"&gt;&lt;div class="quote-content"&gt;I have had this debate with a friend. who leans toward the books that seem to talk about Dzogchen&amp;#039;s availability.., the problem is I these books are coming from the ultimate perspective, of our very essential nature. There is a tendency in Dzogchen teachings to start from the top and then move down to the relative, so in these pointing outs or texts that speak of the recognition of the primordial, come from the position of speaking to and from the root of our Omniscient Buddha Nature. &lt;br /&gt;So because Rigpa is our nature, from an ultimate perspective, it is ultimately available. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; Being or Presence and the non-dual stabilisation of it (by this I mean path) or the stabilisation of the the substrate awareness, (by this I mean Jhana) is not rigpa! Alan Wallace said, and Sogyal Rinpoche agreed with him, when he sent him a letter covering these points. &lt;br /&gt; Rigpa takes, either Shamatha Jhana or at least a Path to be recognised. This becomes clear, in the book, &amp;#039;Stilling the Mind,&amp;#039; which is a commentary on Dudjom Lingpa&amp;#039;s text Vajra Essence. Also as Wallace explains, Path doesn&amp;#039;t necessarily dispose one to the realisation of Rigpa, but is one of the requirements for its recognition. One interesting point is that the Arhat, when entering pari-nirvana, has their consciousness destroyed, and at that point all the remains is primordial awareness, or rigpa awareness.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When you talk about availability, be aware that you are talking about the availability of the enlightened state (as that is the definitions of rigpa I have found). While is abundantly available to all beings, it is the goal at the end of a long path, and is not likely to be found by accident. So in other words, just because it&amp;#039;s not easy to reach doesn&amp;#039;t mean it&amp;#039;s not available. It is most definitely available, but to reach it, you will have to overcome literally all of your dualistic confusion. That is the meaning of enlightenment.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;When you talk about requirements to recognize rigpa, again, keep in mind what you are talking about recognizing (ultimate nature, aka enlightenment). What Wallace said about path being a requirement to recognize rigpa, which does not create a predisposition, is accurate in the sense that the attainment of path may be just a stage on a greater journey, with many more stages through which one must pass on the way to recognition of your ultimate nature.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;As for those talks below, and a difference between rigpa and nirvana, based on the definitions I have found, it seems they are the same thing. Though I disagree, I would be interested in what Wallace says about it, do you know where in the talk he discussed it? I tried to listen to them, but could not find clear discussion of rigpa vs. nirvana.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Cheers!</description> <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2014 20:49:03 GMT</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dharmaoverground.org/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=&amp;messageId=5101210</guid> <dc:creator>T DC</dc:creator> <dc:date>2014-01-02T20:49:03Z</dc:date> </item> </channel> </rss> 