A Zen exploration of the Bahiya Sutta

"Now reading your lines, I am trying to abide as "the Witness" and -guess what-, it has become impossible, if not very difficult. What is difficult is actually to feel or apprehend any sense of pure consciousness beyond phenomena."

One thing I found helpful is to consider that the Witness is a particular kind of tension-sensation in the head. I then found it useful to compare what experience is like with this tension-sensation, with what experience is like without the tension-sensation. (Staying with the tension-sensation can temporarily suppress it, which makes the comparison easy.)

As the tension-sensation can be spread out, there are some intermediate stages in which one can also see what experience is like with the partial cessation of the Witness.

Is this perspective on the Witness (= a sensation linked with various forms of dualistic thought, not a transpersonal awareness) helpful to you?

I say all this because it's quite possible to experience this sensation in the head, without seeing the state of experiencing it as the state of being a transpersonal observer of experience.

Yes it is, thank you EndinSight. As a matter of fact, trying to abide as 'the Witness' (which used to be easy and almost natural) has simply become impossible. Trying to get there does generate a tension-sensation that doesn't feel confortable, followed by a bounce back sensation that collapses the Witness within "the seen", "the heard", etc.

There is still a flavor of being, but it has become very difficult to localize, as it is neither within one of the sense-consciousness, nor beyond them; neither within one of 5 aggregates, nor beyond them.

"There is still a flavor of being, but it has become very difficult to localize, as it is neither within one of the sense-consciousness, nor beyond them; neither within one of 5 aggregates, nor beyond them."

This "flavor of being" tends to recur in subtler and subtler forms once the grosser forms are eliminated (hence Khemaka sutta being the perennial favorite of many people here, *at so many different stages of development*).

"This "flavor of being" tends to recur in subtler and subtler forms once the grosser forms are eliminated (hence Khemaka sutta being the perennial favorite of many people here, *at so many different stages of development*)."

Until it's shadow even.

"This "flavor of being" tends to recur in subtler and subtler forms once the grosser forms are eliminated (hence Khemaka sutta being the perennial favorite of many people here, *at so many different stages of development*)."


Yes, this is true. If I remember well, the arhat compares it to a particular smell attached to cloths, saying that the sense of being eventually goes away after dilligent vipassana practice focused on seeing how it arises and passes away in relation with the five aggregates, which is basically what I am doing these days with a focus on the 'six-sense-spheres'. This is basically the 4th satipatthana, by the way.

"Until it's shadow even. "


I would be interested to know, Nick. Do you still feel the existence of things out there?

Why I am asking? Because I realized that what helps is to learn to shift persepctive about what is experienced as a sense of presence.

What I mean is that what we used to feel as our own presence-being-existence turns out to be experiences as the beingness-existence-actuality-aliveness of phenomena.

It is basically the same thing, but we had crystalized it around an imaginary subject, while it turns out to be the natural flavor of phenomena as they arise and manifest due to causes and conditions, what I call the natural luminous clarity of phenomena.

"Hi Antero, i have just tried experimenting with 'oscillating between subject/object, perceiver/perceived, and found that i could do it for a few seconds before the mind was not able to go there any more. This continues to be my experience ( last 5 mins ) This seems very similar to seventh stage when the mind could not form the ' witness ' as described above. Does this mirror your experience of post 7th stage?
- stephencoe"

In my experience the self contraction prior to 7th stage is just more gross version of the fast and subtle oscillation of the attention. If that oscillation / vibration is taken as an object of Direct mode practice, there is soon a release and when the afterglow has faded, the bounce is seen to be vibrating on a more subtle level. Interestingly the amount of mental images and proto thoughts arising seems to be in direct proportion to the strength of the bouncing. If this grounding of vibration is done repeatedly, one may get to the bottom of it where the mind is completely at rest and no thoughts are forming.

For more, see:
kennethfolkdharma.wetpaint.com/thread/47...Processes+of+Selfing

One can use a subtle pointer to continue this state by asking every now and then 'What is the Essential Nature of the Mind?' Reminding one during the day seems to result in fewer and fewer thoughts over time and stillness becoming the default mode more often.

i have noticed a tension in the eye muscles too. This may be adding to the overall feeling of oscillation and vibration while the attention bounce is going on.
It is definitely getting harder to create that dualistic bounce the more i try. More and more moments of essential nature of mind.

Thanks for this Antero. One more subtle layer of selfing noted.

Alex wrote: "There is no end to the process of awakening, but in Zen Buddhism there are steps and strategies. These introductory posts will explain my position, what I discovered so far, and how it unfolds.

Having got hold of the ox, one has realized the One Mind. In Zen literature this One Mind has often been compared to a bright mirror that reflects phenomena and yet remains untouched by appearances. As discussed with one of Sheng-yen's first Western students, this One Mind is still an illusion. One is not anymore identified to the self-center, ego and personality, yet one (the man) is still holding to pure non-dual awareness (the ox). Having tamed the ox, the ox-herder must let go of the ox (ox forgotten) and then forget himself and the ox (ox and man forgotten).

The problem is that we still maintain a subtle duality between what we know ourself to be, a pure non-dual awareness that is not a thing, and our daily existence often marked by self-contractions. Hoping to get more and more identified with pure non-dual awareness, we may train concentration, try to hold on to the event of awakening reifying an experience, or rationalize the whole thing to conclude that self-contraction is not a problem and that suffering is not suffering because our true nature is ultimately beyond suffering. This explains why I got stuck in what Zen calls "stagnating waters" for about a year.

This is however not seen as a problem in other traditions such as Advaita Vedanta where the One Mind is identified with the Brahman that contains and manifests the three states of waking, dreaming and deep sleep within itself, yet remains untouched by its dreamlike manifestation."

This is outstanding work Alex! You are a true blessing to the Dharma community! I completely concur.

Adam.

Alex wrote:"The whole universe is contained and expressed in a the "cypress tree in the court", simply because in the absence of a super Self in the background, the cypress tree brightly present in this very moment is the absolute reality made manifest in its suchness (tathata). Most Zen koans point to this realization, together with Hui-neng poem "Fundamentally no wisdom-tree exists, Nor the stand of a mirror bright. Since all is empty from the beginning, Where can the dust alight".

Surprizingly this deconstruction leads to a deeper level of non-duality. Huang-po's "One Mind' is starting to become Mazu's "No Mind, no Buddha"."

Again, outstanding and acurate...

This brightness is of profound vibrancy - both infinite emptiness and fullness. Thus, the unending deepening and realisation, recognition, exploration and discovery of this Suchness or Is-nss.

An epistemological unfolding and deepening into an ontological mystery that is entirely 'present' and paradoxical in nature. There is both similtanious process (change, impermanence), completion and perfection (luminousity).

Adam.

Alex, can you post a link to a good online source to the Chinese agamas?

Thanks mate!

Adam.

Thanks, Adam, glad to hear that you found this stuff interesting.

Unfortunately, I am not aware of any online sources with English translations of the Chinese agamas.

Jake wrote: "And yet... and yet! There does seem to be an unconditioned element..."

I would say there is most definitely an unconditioned element. This is, I would suggest, luminosity, in the technical sense of the term as found in Dzogchen and Mahamudra; that is, knowingness. That which knows. Sentience. Aliveness. Existence itself. However, it would be wrong to reify it. To confuse it with a '˜thing' that knows. A witness. A person. A god. A substance. A self. It is simply knowing. Entirerly impersonal and yet entirerly full, complete, transcendent, immanent, perfect and real. That which knows all arising / phenomena / experience.
There is no dualism - phenomena arise out of, and is inseparable from, this knowingness. Knowing is one of the two basic features of Suchness - the other being emptiness. Phenomena are the natural display of the inseparability of luminosity and emptiness. All three are inseparable and are really artificial, constructed and imposed dichotomies up what appears to be the essential nature of reality or existence itself. Non-duality. Our true nature.

[cont]

Knowingness remains unconditioned because it is empty. It is not a thing. Has no ground. It is just this, right here right now. What is this? Just this. It remains the great mystery while ever undeniably present. If not none of us could have sentience / aliveness / awakeness. It remains unconditioned and untouched because phenomena / conditions are not separate from it, because they themselves are empty and none other than the luminous appearance of reality.

Knowingness is the reason why Buddhism does not fall into nihilism. As Alex said, confusions around its and our nature lead to eternalism. Buddhahood is to realise reality as it is - luminosity inseparable from emptiness as and none other than intrinsic to phenomena. The unconditioned and conditioned are one and the same. Nirvana and Samsara. To directly realise this beyond intellectual rhetoric with deep and permanent penetration is the end to suffering and the realisation of Buddha nature and Buddhahood, in my opinion. To have glimpses for greater or shorter lengths of time is to realise Rigpa and practice towards its stabilisation over time.

In my opinion there is no end to suffering without a deep penetration into this view and real time experience. Suffering is none other than failing to recognise reality as it is - failing to realise the view. Alex has explained it perfectly.

Adam. edited for typos and clarity.

Alex, I too relate to it, but only for periods of time during meditation and spontaneous periods out.

These are moments when the obscuration's fall away and reality is revealed as it is. Like clouds in the sky - the sky does not change, however, the view is temporarily unobscured.

Thanks for your outstanding work in sharing your experiences and supporting understanding of a vast view.

I too, however, am hesitant to speak to reality as a dream. As this metaphor seems to create an ontological dualism - separating true reality from false.

Adam. edited for typos.

Alex: "Was the rope suppressed, erradicated, uprooted, extinguished? No.
Was the snake suppressed, erradicated, uprooted, extinguished? Yes, but only in the sense that one has clearly seen that there never was a snake in the first place.

The functioning of the six senses is a *rope*, while the ego, the sense of self, the belief in a super primordial non-dual inherent awareness standing beyond the five aggregates while containing them within its boundless numinous nature, self-referencing passions, kleshas and other fetters are *snakes*, reason why they can be extinguished through deep insights into impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, selflessness, emptiness, suchness and dependent origination. The more insights, the deeper the insights, the lesser fetters remain."

a few months ago?"

Outstanding analysis and use of traditional analogy! Hence the true concern for our practice is to see reality clearly, as it is. This occurs spontaneously when the conditions are set via practice.

Thank you!

Adam.

Thanks, Adam. Talking about "luminosity" in relation with thoughts, the following Mahamudra instructions may illustrate what have been trying to describe in terms that may be easier to understand for those who are not familiar with Mahamudra and Dzogchen:

'When you see that the nature of thought is a bright, clear awareness, then look to see whether there is any difference between the bright, clear awareness you saw previously with respect to the settled mind and the bright, clear awareness you see now with respect to a thought'.

Prior to that, we should note that the common Buddhist strategy to dissembled from thoughts is to observe their coming and going in a calm detached way. One may even note them with labels such as 'planning thoughts', 'worrying thoughts', etc. This is great in the beginning as it will gradually dissembed 'clear awareness' from the thoughts arising and passing away within awareness.

However, at a certain stage, the same strategy will become counter-productive, simply because becoming the passive observer of thoughts will solidify the illusion of separation between a pure eternal witness on one side and impermanent empty thoughts on the other side.

The solution propose by Mahamudra and some early Ch'an/Zen traditions is therefore to realize that this 'clear awareness' is not a clear luminous witness (bright mirror awareness) detached from impermanent and empty thoughts (dust, phenomena), and in other words to realize that this 'clear awareness' is not separated from empty phenomena, simply because the very nature of phenomena is this brightness, this aliveness or this luminous clarity.

When this is seen and realized, thoughts, the absence of thoughts, the calm and moving mind, the subject and the objects, the witness and the witnessed as not anymore separated. Self and phenomena are both empty and luminous: bright, alive, luminous, yet ungraspable, insubstantial and groundless.

Practically speaking, this means moving from the the impression that 'I am a pure impersonal bright and clear presence-awareness untouched by impermanent phenomena' to the realization that this sense of presence-awareness does not refer to a Self, Witness or eternal inherent Primordial Awareness separated from phenomena, but is in reality the luminous presence of phenomena coming forth experiencing themselves in a continuous flow of experience.

This shift of perspective is beautifully expressed by Dogen in the Genjokoan chapter of the Shobogenzo:

- 'to carry yourself forward and experience myriad things is delusion. That myriad things come forth and experience themselves is awakening'.

And this is how it feels: the seen, the heard, the thought, the sensed-touched-felt, the smelled and the tasted "come forth and experience themselves" in the absense of a subject, knower, Self or even a inherent eternal primordial awareness out there.

In his "The Story of Chinese Zen", Master Nan Huai-Chin wrote:

"But you should not take this condition to be the clarification of mind and perception of essential nature to which Zen refers! And you should not take this to be the enlightenment to which Zen refers! The reason for this is because at this time there exists the function of radiant awareness, and you still don't know its comings and goings, and where it arises. This time is precisely what Han-shan, the great Ming dynasty master, meant when he said, 'It is easy to set foot in a forest of thorns; it is hard to turn around at the window screen shining in the moonlight.'

This Han-shan quote puzzled me for years. What does it mean?

What this means is just what I have just tried to explain.

Realizing primordial [non-dual] awareness is a great achievement, no doubt. But for Han-shan and Master Nan, it can also become "a forest of thorns" if we then assume that this primordial awareness is our eternal True Self, taking this realization for enlightenment. What is needed (but hard to understand) is that we must then "turn around at the window screen shining in the moonlight".

What does it mean? Irt simply means that we need to shift perspective to realize that phenomena are themselves self-luminous, self-aware, empty and void, in the absence of a radiant awareness taken as a transpersonal eternal inherent True Self.

Alex:" What does it mean? Irt simply means that we need to shift perspective to realize that phenomena are themselves self-luminous, self-aware, empty and void, in the absence of a radiant awareness taken as a transpersonal eternal inherent True Self."

Yup!

More, please sir!! ;-P

Nice discussion guys, thanks.

"Jake wrote: "And yet... and yet! There does seem to be an unconditioned element..."

I would say there is most definitely an unconditioned element. This is, I would suggest, luminosity, in the technical sense of the term as found in Dzogchen and Mahamudra; that is, knowingness. That which knows. Sentience. Aliveness. Existence itself."

The Pali suttas say that there is an unconditioned element, and it is not a sense-experience. As "knowingness" for you is inseparable from sense-experiences, it appears that what you identify as unconditioned is not what the Pali suttas identify as unconditioned.

Do you believe that the Pali suttas are wrong, or that they are talking about this using different terminology, or what?

(Not looking for a debate, just curious to hear what you think.)

The notion of a 'primordial awareness', 'knowingness' or 'buddha-nature', seem to find its origin in the 'tathatagarbha' (Buddha's embryo) described in the Lankavatara sutra that soon became very popular in China, Korea, Japan and Tibet, in relation with Yogachara (Vijnanavada, mind-only) Buddhism that strongly influenced the Zen (that used to be called the Lanka school), Mahamudra (also called the 'Mind Seal') and Dzogchen traditions.

Scholars agree to find its root in the Anguttara Nikaya, where the Buddha talks about the 'luminous mind' ('pabhassara citta' in Pali):

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements".

As mentioned above -at least as far I am concerned- there is nothing wrong with it, provided that we clearly understand that the Buddha did not talk about a permanent unconditioned entity untouched by phenomena. There is a "luminous is the mind" and "the triple world is mind-only" (Avatamsaka sutra), yet this mind is empty [of an abiding essence]. This mind is a more like a stream of interdependent luminous phenomena, a flow of seeing, hearing, sensing, thinking, etc.