xabir2005

1) Probably quite a number. I personally know of lay persons who realized emptiness. 2) Few yet not non-existing. 3) Stream enterer may need to realize anatta. Shunyata is more emphasized in Mahayana. The difference is Stage 5 and 6 of http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html

Forestofemptiness puts it well. The Buddha defines nirvana as the termination of craving, aggression and delusion. It is the end of grasping and suffering. It is not attaining or gaining something.

The Crystal and the Way of Light: Sutra, Tantra and Dzogchen first. http://www.atikosha.org/2010/12/crystal-and-way-of-light.html Jan 1 The Crystal and the Way of Light If you are really intelligent, you will understand the meaning of this title automatically and need nothing further. When I first read this book, back in 1987, back in the days of the Harmonic Convergence and so on, I had no clue what it meant, I was suspicious that it might be some new age book. And when I first read about "self-liberation" I was confused since I thought this was a book about Tibetan Buddhism. Well, I have learned a lot since then. This book was the book that broke the ice of the Dzogchen teachings in the Western World. Prior to the publication of this book, there were no accessible, easy to understand, writings about Dzogchen for the general reader. Even though this book is accessible, its contents are nonetheless profound and lay out the context of the Dzogchen teachings in a clear manner. Chogyal Namkhai Norbu has done more to bring the teachings of the three series of Dzogchen to the West than any master before him, or since. He has tirelessly circled the globe times beyond count teaching Dzogchen in nearly every major capital of the world in Asia, Europe, North and South America and Australia. He has labored over the years to clarify that the teaching of Dzogchen, the great perfection, is an independent Buddhist vehicle, a self-sufficient means to total liberation, one capable of taking a complete beginner to the stage of the final liberation into the body of light in a single lifetime. Masters such as Chogyal Namkhai Norbu are termed "second Vajrasattvas" in the terminology of the teachings of the great perfection. We find ourselves very fortunate indeed that Norbu Rinpoche chose to teach Dzogchen to willing students. Beyond Norbu Rinpoche's Dharma teachings, his commitment to preserving and fostering Tibetan culture is without parallel, having formed A.S.I.A, which funds the building of schools, hospitals and so on in Tibet and the Himalayas and Shang Shung Institute, which sponsors the first school of Tibetan Medicine in a Western Country, among other projects. As for Rinpoche's other activities, many people are largely unaware that Norbu Rinpoche has been busy with preparations of critical editions of the most important primary texts of the Dzogchen tradition. These texts, when published, will undoubtedly set the foundation for much future translation work. Those of us who are students of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu are fortunate indeed to have been graced to be in the presence of this master. Another great, if largely unknown, master of the Dzogchen teachings, Kunzang Dechen Lingpa, stated that Chogyal Namkhai Norbu was an "inconceivable" master of the Dzogchen teachings. Despite the presence in the West of such luminaries as HH Dudjom Rinpoche, HH Dilgo Khyentse, and so on, in my opinion there has never been a master quite like Chogyal Namkhai Norbu in the West, and there is likely never to be another master quite like him again for the foreseeable future. I recommend therefore, that those who have yet to meet him in person and receive the blessings of hearing him teach Dzogchen should do so right away. As Norbu Rinpoche himself is fond of saying, "Everything is in time, and time is passing..." May the life force of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu be firm, may his wishes be accomplished without effort, may the dakinis and dharmapalas guard him from every obstacle, may his teachings spread throughout the whole world, ensuring the ripe harvest of happiness, dharma, prosperity and good fortune for all sentient beings. Sarvamaṅgalaṃ Posted 1st January 2011 by Malcolm Smith

When an incredibly loud explosion wakes you up from sleep and your body jolts up, that too happens without a preconceived process, but not out of will. If you ever had one of those experiences you will know. It does not mean that anything to do with a brain has to be preconceived. It does not mean that anything conditioned is being preconceived. I wouldn't say they are entirely generated from the brain, but in this life it is dependent on brain (think about brain dead people), as it is also dependent on other factors like mental factors from the past, etc. Our every activity is entirely interdependent, and especially in this human life, brain is very important even though it is just one of those factors among many. Great. There is in fact never a center or a boundary... we merely conjured one. Creativity is spontaneous and fresh, but spontaneity does not contradict interdependence. (much like emergence) Interdependence does not bind us either - it is interdependence that makes this life/creativity possible (e.g. the food you eat, the things you wear, the computer you are using, just to use some gross examples). I like what Thusness said: "No transcendental 'unconditioned' being or 'state' exists by itself and of itself. The 'unconditioned' in Buddhism is the spontaneous perfection of all necessary conditions in the natural state. This is only realized after the direct insights of the 2 fold emptiness."

Let me put it this way: there is no brain within my will, nor a will within my brain. In the will is just the (phenomenal appearance of) will, in the brain is just the (phenomenal appearance of) brain - there is no you in terms of that. But whatever manifests are interdependent and causal. Will conditions action, and other factors also condition will. Just like in Bahiya Sutta - in seeing there is just the seen, in hearing just the heard. If there is a container, that implies duality - something (like a subject) containing an object. I have seen that metaphors of container is entirely false experientially, they are only for conventional communication (like when you tell a friend "I am on the first floor" or "I am in ..."). In reality there is no 'I am' nor an 'external environment containing me'. There is just lights, colours, rays, sounds, .... arising without a center or boundary. On a sidenote, I just saw this blog post by a friend, it's good: http://thassa.blogspot.sg/2012/07/there-is-running.html

Thusness (February 2006): From a conventional point of view, it is. If we feel, see, hear and think in terms of entity, then it seems that there is a self leaving the body. This is because all along, we experience all phenomenon appearances as solid things existing independently. Such conventional mode of comprehending our meditative experiences masked the true character of these experiences. If we treat consciousness to be an atomic-like-particle residing in our body somewhere, then we are making it as a self too. Do not do that. The true character of Consciousness is not a thing, it does not enter, leave, reside within or outside the body. Clear Luminosity is bonded by karmic propensities, causes and conditions. There is no need for a place within. Yes, there is a mental phenomenon arising but the sensation of entering and leaving is the result of associating it with a self. Just like it is illusionary to see a self succeeding from moment to moment, an entrance and exit is equally illusionary. Mystical experiences are extremely crucial during the journey of enlightenment. Do not discard them unwisely but assign them correct places. These experiences loosen karmic bonds that latent deep down in our consciousness where it is almost impossible to break through ordinary means. It is an essential condition for the awakening of penetrating insight. The main different between non Buddhist and Buddhist practitioners is that transcendental and mystical experiences are not molded into a self but correctly understood and purified with the wisdom of emptiness. This applies true to the Luminous Clarity Knowingness that is non-dual, it is not wrongly personified into Brahman. In perfect clarity, there are no praises for radiance bright, only the Dharma is in sight. The wisdom of emptiness is so deep and profound that even if one has entered the realm of non-dual, he/she will still not be able to grasp its essence in full. This is the wisdom of the Blessed One. The second level of Presence. .... (July 2006): ...Next is her experience of astral traveling, if she is in a stage of absorption and then out of a sudden awareness, the eyes of awareness may allow her to witness something that is altogether different from the physical place but this does not necessary mean that consciousness has left and re-enter the body. Consciousness is propelled by causes and conditions. According to her conditions of absorption and clarity, just IS...

Not only is 'presence' and 'will' inseparable, every event that is so called 'not related to will' is also presence. There is no partial non-duality. Non-duality means everything is the immediacy of presence. What is immediate, is a process, for I have clearly seen that there is no 'presence', or 'will', that is not an activity that arises and ceases. And yet what arises and ceases conditions the next moment. Therefore it is a causal process. What is immediate is the immediate arising and passing, what is immediate doesn't stay. What is immediate is totally interdependent with the entire universe, just like right now I am typing these words, a seamless activity of seeing the screen, hands typing, thoughts popping up (including of course the intention to type this), sound of keyboard, and so on... all happening as a seamless activity of dependent origination. There is no 'controller' at the center doing all these... it is just an activity of seamless interconnectivity. Will is an arising intention, it is a thought. You can never know what the next moment of thought will be. A thought does not 'touch' or 'know' or 'predict' or 'control' the next thought. When the next thought arises, it arises completely unbidden, not as a result of an 'I' or an agent. Yet it does not arise chaotically without a cause. For this moment of thought can condition the next moment of thought, yet it does not control, or predict, what unfolds next. And thought/will is something that is free (though not without causes) - like a wheel - it can turn in any direction, yet the turning does not 'turn' causelessly. There are causes which turns the wheel. So 'will', like a wheel, can be turned into a good and wholesome path (like the noble eightfold path), or it can be turned into an unwholesome path which leads to great suffering. Actions that follow 'bad' will leads to great suffering. Will, mind, intention, is the forerunner of actions, though not itself without causes. Presence (which is simply whatever manifest in all sense doors) arises and ceases, yet it is not 'coming from somewhere' or 'going somewhere'. It is a mere happening without movement. Movement requires duality - an unmoved observer seeing things coming from somewhere, abiding a little, and then 'leaving me'. This is not the true experience of impermanence from a non-dual perspective... and it is seen that reality has always been non-dual and empty of a self. There is just the painting on the water, vividly shimmering and disappearing without a trace. There is no 'I' that can be 'outside head and body', that would imply a someone who can dissociate, and that 'someone' is a delusion. However where out-of-body experience arises (I am not denying these experiences), that too, arises dependent on conditions without a someone. So I am not denying will, or the power of will, or out of body experiences, but an agent. The youtube video is quite interesting. Good and bad karma caused by craving, and these karma will result in samsara, be it in the lower or higher realms. Action (karma) caused by non-affliction is not susceptible to a karmic result in samsara. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.033.than.html AN 3.33 PTS: A i 134 Thai 3.34; BJT 3.34 Nidana Sutta: Causes translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu © 2001–2012 "Monks, these three are causes for the origination of actions. Which three? Greed is a cause for the origination of actions. Aversion is a cause for the origination of actions. Delusion is a cause for the origination of actions. "Any action performed with greed — born of greed, caused by greed, originating from greed: wherever one's selfhood turns up, there that action will ripen. Where that action ripens, there one will experience its fruit, either in this very life that has arisen or further along in the sequence. "Any action performed with aversion — born of aversion, caused by aversion, originating from aversion: wherever one's selfhood turns up, there that action will ripen. Where that action ripens, there one will experience its fruit, either in this very life that has arisen or further along in the sequence. "Any action performed with delusion — born of delusion, caused by delusion, originating from delusion: wherever one's selfhood turns up, there that action will ripen. Where that action ripens, there one will experience its fruit, either in this very life that has arisen or further along in the sequence. "Just as when seeds are not broken, not rotten, not damaged by wind & heat, capable of sprouting, well-buried, planted in well-prepared soil, and the rain-god would offer good streams of rain. Those seeds would thus come to growth, increase, & abundance. In the same way, any action performed with greed... performed with aversion... performed with delusion — born of delusion, caused by delusion, originating from delusion: wherever one's selfhood turns up, there that action will ripen. Where that action ripens, there one will experience its fruit, either in this very life that has arisen or further along in the sequence. "These are three causes for the origination of actions. "Now, these three are [further] causes for the origination of actions. Which three? Non-greed is a cause for the origination of actions. Non-aversion is a cause for the origination of actions. Non-delusion is a cause for the origination of actions. "Any action performed with non-greed — born of non-greed, caused by non-greed, originating from non-greed: When greed is gone, that action is thus abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. "Any action performed with non-aversion — born of non-aversion, caused by non-aversion, originating from non-aversion: When aversion is gone, that action is thus abandoned, destroyed at the root, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. "Any action performed with non-delusion — born of non-delusion, caused by non-delusion, originating from non-delusion: When delusion is gone, that action is thus abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. "Just as when seeds are not broken, not rotten, not damaged by wind & heat, capable of sprouting, well-buried, planted in well-prepared soil, and a man would burn them with fire and, burning them with fire, would make them into fine ashes. Having made them into fine ashes, he would winnow them before a high wind or wash them away in a swift-flowing stream. Those seeds would thus be destroyed at the root, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. "In the same way, any action performed with non-greed... performed with non-aversion... performed with non-delusion — born of non-delusion, caused by non-delusion, originating from non-delusion: When delusion is gone, that action is thus abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. "These, monks, are three causes for the origination of action." A person unknowing: the actions performed by him, born of greed, born of aversion, & born of delusion, whether many or few, are experienced right here: no other ground is found.[1] So a monk, knowing, sheds greed, aversion, & delusion; giving rise to clear knowledge, he sheds all bad destinations.[2] Notes 1. According to the Commentary, "right here" means within the stream of one's own "selfhood" (attabhava), i.e., one's own chain of rebirth. "No other ground is found" means that the fruit of the action is not experienced by any other person's chain of rebirth. 2. The Commentary notes that this verse refers to the attainment of arahantship, and that an arahant — in reaching nibbana — sheds not only bad destinations, but also good ones. The word "sheds" acts as a "lamp" in this verse — it appears only once, but functions in two phrases, as I have rendered it in the translation. On the use of the lamp as a literary figure of speech, see the Introduction to Dhammapada: A Translation. See also: SN 42.8; AN 3.99.

You didn't catch what I said.

I think creativity and choice does not contradict dependent origination but neither does it become a kind of determinism. Similar to Emergence: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence So what manifest as an act of creativity, or a choice, is a result of complex conditions including our very "own" thoughts and ideas and patterns. Now these patterns CAN be changed, for example if your mind is always afflicted by anger, by desires, through Buddhism we CAN remove those afflictions, or what Buddha calls the latent tendencies towards craving and aggression and delusion - we can terminate them forever. And there is a path which we can practice and reach that goal, which is the noble eightfold path. So it is not saying 'these conditions are fixed'. They are not determined or fated in the sense that "that's just what is going to happen and there is nothing you can do about it". As Richard pointed out, "Will, freed of the encumbrance of fear and aggression and nurture and desire, can operate smoothly, with actual sagacity." However, thoughts, including intentions, do not manifest as a result of an agent, thinker, controller, it is not independent of causes and conditions*. Everything including intentions and choices are the result of causes and conditions. Those causes and conditions can be changed, however, for were it not able to be changed, there would be no point in practicing anything including Buddhism or spirituality. (Tron: Legacy): Kevin Flynn: The Miracle...You remember. ISOs, isomorphic algorithms, a whole new life form. Sam Flynn: And you created them? Kevin Flynn: [Laughs] No, no. They manifested, like a flame. They weren't really, really from anywhere. The conditions were right, and they came into being. For centuries we dreamed of gods, spirits, aliens, and intelligence beyond our own. I found them in here, like flowers in a wasteland. Profoundly naive; unimaginably wise. They were spectacular. Everything I'd hope to find in the system; control, order, perfection. None of it meant a thing. Been living in a hall of mirrors. The isos, shattered it, the possibilities of their root code, their digital DNA. Disease? History! Science, philosophy, every idea man has ever had about the Universe up for grabs. Biodigital jazz, man. The ISOs, they were going to be my gift to the world. *Check this out: http://exploringthemind.com/the-mind/brain-scans-can-reveal-your-decisions-7-seconds-before-you-decide (Brain Scans Can Reveal Your Decisions 7 Seconds Before You “Decide”) "I wouldn't call it a hostage situation, because thinking about it as a hostage, implies a dualism between your conscious mind and your brain activity. But the conscious mind is encoded in brain activity, it is realized by brain activity, it is an aspect of your brain activity. Also your unconscious brain activity realizes certain aspects of you, it's in harmony with your beliefs and desires. So in most cases it is not going to force you to do something you do not want to do."

That 'appearing in Consciousness' is eventually seen through. Consciousness, once taken to be a substance and substratum of all things, is discovered to be just this present thought. Even the non-conceptual pure sense of beingness, consciousness and presence prior to senses or concepts, once reified into a background Self, that too is discovered to be a non-conceptual thought manifestation. In other words always only (foreground) manifestation, including seeing, hearing, etc. This is anatta. There is no agent, no background, no observer behind perception and thoughts. http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2007/03/mistaken-reality-of-amness.html "When consciousness experiences the pure sense of “I AM”, overwhelmed by the transcendental thoughtless moment of Beingness, consciousness clings to that experience as its purest identity. By doing so, it subtly creates a ‘watcher’ and fails to see that the ‘Pure Sense of Existence’ is nothing but an aspect of pure consciousness relating to the thought realm. This in turn serves as the karmic condition that prevents the experience of pure consciousness that arises from other sense-objects. Extending it to the other senses, there is hearing without a hearer and seeing without a seer -- the experience of Pure Sound-Consciousness is radically different from Pure Sight-Consciousness. Sincerely, if we are able to give up ‘I’ and replaces it with “Emptiness Nature”, Consciousness is experienced as non-local. No one state is purer than the other. All is just One Taste, the manifold of Presence."

I understand, but I am not the 'many folks'. When I say mind, I mean absolutely, consciousness. I don't mean a thought or idea in your head.

I use mind/consciousness synonymously but I do understand your terms and distinctions.

Yes it is about discovering the nature of mind. He does not want to talk about these things for some reason. Especially to me. (he actually told others more than he told me, lol) Though I briefly heard a bit. I don't understand what you mean by reconstruct from what one sees... reconstruct = forming a coherent image of things? I think the point in deconstruction is more about seeing through the falsehood of something... for example what was thought to be self, solid, is upon investigation a coreless aggregate, just like Vajira Sutta "What? Do you assume a 'living being,' Mara? Do you take a position? This is purely a pile of fabrications. Here no living being can be pinned down. Just as when, with an assemblage of parts, there's the word, chariot, even so when aggregates are present, there's the convention of living being. For only stress is what comes to be; stress, what remains & falls away. Nothing but stress comes to be. Nothing ceases but stress." .... now of course, knowing that there is no 'core' of the 'assemblage of parts' does not prevent us from knowing the names, conventions, and using them. At the peak of presence, there is no sense of self/Self, and this is similar to what AF calls PCE. But PCE does not necessarily result in insight of anatta. Insight of anatta requires you to 'see', to 'realize' the falsehood of an observer, a medium of agent, that is behind perception... it requires you to realize the truth of what is stated in Thusness's two stanzas of anatta. It requires you to see through the false constructs and views of an inherent self or subject in a moment of realization. Otherwise, PCEs can just come and go... as it had for many people (and arguably according to Richard, everyone has it before). Then it becomes a mere state or experience that one seeks to achieve, and nothing is realized, the false view of self continues. But after insight of anatta, PCE becomes natural, effortless, seamless. That is why Thusness gave me an advise years back, not to over-focus on the effect (PCE), but on the 'cause' - the insight (of anatta). A lot of people are cultivating the PCE/No Mind experience via non-conceptuality and being naked in awareness, but they overlook the 'cause' which leads to effortlessness and seamlessness. 'Anatta' is not realized through a purely conceptual process... it is not about 'figuring things out intellectually', but it does require a kind of experiential investigation that challenges the view of a self. As Thusness said a long long time ago: (9:12 PM) Thusness: no mind is an experience, it is not an insight (9:14 PM) Thusness: ppl that have experienced no-mind knows there is such experience and aims towards achieving it again. (9:14 PM) Thusness: but insight is different...it is a direct experiential realization. (9:14 PM) Thusness: that all along it is so.

You have different terminology of 'mind'. What I said is just a statement "Consciousness is all there is." "Consciousness alone is". i.e. Everything is only Consciousness, which isn't many. Advaita is reducing everything to Self.

No, by nothingness, I am referring to Thusness Stage 3, or what Nisargadatta, or what Bentinho, and many others are now teaching.

What you call One Consciousness is what I call One Mind (not mind as conceptual thoughts). I wrote an article differentiating One Mind and Anatta: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2011/08/substantial-and-insubstantial-non.html

Realizing the nothingness does not negate that consciousness is without subject-object duality.

In Thusness's words, there is no ultimate reality, but the ultimate truth in buddhism is emptiness. Everything is realized to be empty, including consciousness. There isn't even dependent origination (dependent origination is empty). Thusness: "No body, no mind, no dependent origination, no nothing, no something, no birth, no death. Profoundly deconstructed and emptied! Just vivid shimmering appearances as Primordial Suchness in one whole seamless unobstructed-interpenetration." What do you classify as beyond physical realm? I think in Buddhism only the 4 formless jhanas are considered beyond physical, (I am thinking that perhaps samadhi/absorption in oceanic I AM and in nothingness would correspond to jhana of infinite consciousness and nothingness) as well as utter cessation of nirodha samadhi. In these states, there can be utter oblivion of the body, the five senses may be shut, and yet there it is - infinite consciousness, nothingness, etc. Also he has plenty of experiences, including visiting other planes/realms, seeing Buddhas, etc, do you consider these beyond body and mind? Again he does not reveal too much to me, and even if he does, I cannot reveal too much as well. Let me put it this way: Anatta as a realization clears up all delusions, grasping, projection, confusion, views, etc... that which obscures the effortless, total, seamless experience of Presence. For, as long as there is the slightest view of duality, of inherency, there will be no seamless, effortless and liberating experience of Presence. Just an example: the holding on to a Self, a background (which is only a dead image of a previous non-dual experience being reified), prevents effortless experience of Presence as foreground sensations. (and this is only part of it, not all) Being very clear, luminous, present, may not necessarily lead to anatta realization... it also requires a certain form of investigation and contemplation. Non-conceptual presence isn't all there is to the path... even a conceptual right view can also help, in fact it is a good 'raft'.

It is not as simple as you think. For example: you can realize 1, then later realize 1+1 = 2. 1+1 = 2 does not deny 1. His new realization does not deny his previous realization. They are both true experience. Though his new realization does make him loosen his attachment to consciousness.

Greg's book based on Sri Atmananda teachings (anyway Greg is probabably Sri Atmananda's reincarnation) deconstructs objectivity and the Witness into One Mind... This 'consciousness' in One Mind is what gets even further deconstructed in Anatta - as what Zen priest Alex Weith so nicely put in http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2011/10/zen-exploration-of-bahiya-sutta.html

I would not say so. Anyway this is not new - Nisargadatta basically teaches the same thing, to discover the pure consciousness before moving beyond it into the Absolute which is the ultimate state of non-being, oblivion even of existence, the origin even prior to consciousness itself. Bentinho was teaching from true insight and experience previously, but he had new discoveries which made him change his position with regards to 'non-dual awareness'. Even though he did not deny 'non-dual awareness' (which he himself realized and experienced previously), he now treats a state 'beyond consciousness' as even more freeing. In other words, Bentinho is shifting between 1, 2, 4, to Stage 3 of http://awakeningtore...experience.html Thusness Stage 3 becomes most important to him now, more important than non-dual awareness. Stage 3 becomes treated as an ultimate to him (same for Nisargadatta and many others). To me and Thusness, these are true experiences, but the conclusions formulated about these true experience are wrong. The framework which substantializes - either awareness, or nothingness, into an ultimate, is wrong. There is no hierarchy. As Thusness pointed out recently (and in fact many years ago he said a lot of similar statements): 7/8/2012 11:32 PM: John: The intensity is focusing on the essence (clarity) of mind....it is important to understand for a practitioner to later let go of the grasping of presence and be natural. Otherwise practitioner will have sought after the state of oblivion to get beyond presence. A practitioner that releases the grasping of presence has no such issue. But to see how the grasping of ultimate One Mind is but an attachment that prevents clear seeing and releasing is crucial. Here are some quotations from him a few years ago which are relevant to Bentinho's (recent) issue: https://www.box.com/...21dfa62ccd0ca7b

But neither do I hold the belief of nihilism, which is that a self annihilates upon death, which you seem to be holding. I hold that there is karmic rebirth for those who are not liberated*. My view is the middle way: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2012/06/eternalism-nihilism-and-middle-way.html *Rizenfenix: Continuing consciousness after death is, in most religions, a matter of revealed truth. In Buddhism, the evidence comes from the contemplative experience of people who are certainly not ordinary but who are sufficiently numerous that what they say about it is worth taking seriously into account. Indeed, such testimonies begin with those of the Buddha himself. Nevertheless, it’s important to understand that what’s called reincarnation in Buddhism has nothing to do with the transmigration of some ‘entity’ or other. It’s not a process of metempsychosis because there is no ‘soul’. As long as one thinks in terms of entities rather than function and continuity, it’s impossible to understand the Buddhist concept of rebirth. As it’s said, ‘There is no thread passing through the beads of the necklace of rebirths.’ Over successive rebirths, what is maintained is not the identity of a ‘person’, but the conditioning of a stream of consciousness. Additionally, Buddhism speaks of successive states of existence; in other words, everything isn’t limited to just one lifetime. We’ve experienced other states of existence before our birth in this lifetime, and we’ll experience others after death. This, of course, leads to a fundamental question: is there a nonmaterial consciousness distinct from the body? It would be virtually impossible to talk about reincarnation without first examining the relationship between body and mind. Moreover, since Buddhism denies the existence of any self that could be seen as a separate entity capable of transmigrating from one existence to another by passing from one body to another, one might well wonder what it could be that links those successive states of existence together. One could possibly understand it better by considering it as a continuum, a stream of consciousness that continues to flow without there being any fixed or autonomous entity running through it… Rather it could be likened to a river without a boat, or to a lamp flame that lights a second lamp, which in-turn lights a third lamp, and so on and so forth; the flame at the end of the process is neither the same flame as at the outset, nor a completely different one…

Wonderful, thank you.

My experience/insight is that consciousness is indeed not eternal, consciousness is ever-changing, momentary, manifestations. Though there was a time when I treated Consciousness as the supreme Self, unchanging and ultimate. Just a few moments ago I was re-visiting something Thusness wrote 2 year ago shortly after my realization of anatta. (btw, there are some teachers, some of those following Nisargadatta (and Nis himself), and recently Bentinho Massaro, who had new experiences recently and moved on from awareness teachings and treated this 'non-experience black hole' as Absolute and treated non-dual consciousness as another passing dream. Thusness's message is not this: as he clearly states, even this 'non-experience black hole' is absolutely empty and passing, nothing ultimate as well) Thusness: "Yes, all PCEs, all NDNCDIMOP, all these will pass (not into some great void). The article Death, Reincarnation, Nonduality, and other dreams ( http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2010/10/death-reincarnation-nonduality-and.html ) in your blog by Jeff Foster talking about deep dreamless sleep as a form of psuedo death. He is talking about this ‘psuedo death’ that is a direct opposite of the NDNCDIMOP much like an absolute 'no experience' black-hole that even non-dual presence cannot escape. He urges practitioners to see it with an unbiased mind and not be overly attached to non-dual presence. Yet this 'pseudo death' too will pass. Similarly if we were to turn micro and practice vipassana, there are body sensations, fluctuation thoughts, beliefs, heart beats, sound, scent...no permanent agent that is owner of these arising and passing phenomena can be found. A ‘permanent unchanging witness’ is just simply 'a thought that claims ownership along this arising and passing stream. :-) The insight of no-self must not only realize the illusionary division of subject-object duality and turns non-dual experience implicit; it must also allow practitioner to clearly see the stream of ever becoming. When there is no permanent agent,there is just seeing, thinking, hearing; there is simply scenery, thoughts, sounds; there are still fear, emotion, anger…there is action, there is karma…just no self. What is the implication? The mind upon seeing anatta must not continue to live in a fantasy land and clearly see the workings of these arising and passing phenomena. There is no escape for there is just this and practitioners are always dealing with attachments, deeper dispositions, latent tendencies, supporting conditions, action, karma. Can you stop an arising thought from subsiding? Is the present moment of thought the same as the previous moment of thought? Can this moment of thought not affect the next moment of thought? Stabilizing the insight of anatta requires the realization of dependent origination. With the absence of ‘dualistic and inherent’ tendencies as the supporting conditions, experience turns non-dual and liberating; so do not mistake the ‘effect’ for ‘cause’ and focus too much on PCEs. :-)"