xabir2005

p.s. wrote this over a week ago: If you say there is self... zen master's stick hit you 30 times. If you say there is no self... zen master's stick hit you 30 times. If you say all is one... zen master's stick hit you 30 times. In the process of contemplation, the 'dualistic' and 'inherent' framework begins to lose hold. After seeing through and letting go "self" via the teaching of "no self"... so too is "one", "no self", "emptiness" to be let go of in the process. "Self", "No Self", "One", "Emptiness" cannot be established - just as no "self" can be found, no "no self" can be found either. View and teachings are important but are also rafts to be let go in the end. And yet still nothing is lost. Sky is blue, grass is green, clear, obvious, undeniable, certain, actual. Drop my spoon, tinggg! The old pond, A frog jumps in: Plop! "Bhikkkhus, this view, so clean and pure, if you covet, fondle, treasure and take pride in it do you know this Teaching comparable to a raft, taught for the purpose of giving up and not for the purpose of holding? No, venerable sir. Bhikkhus, this view of yours so clean and pure, do not covet, fondle, treasure and take pride in it. Do you know this Teaching comparable to a raft, taught for the purpose of giving up and not for the purpose of holding? Yes, venerable sir." - Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta p.s. but right view is extremely important until you realise emptiness! otherwise even though non-dual is experienced it can turn into 'substantialist non-dualism'. only when emptiness is realized that the holding on to conceptual views dissolve on their own accord. don't throw away the raft too early

No, emptiness is not an ultimate ground. There is no personal self, no impersonal self, and also no emptiness. Emptiness is empty as well. Fully agreed here. Never did I imply something else. Everything is already empty - self is already empty, object is already empty. What is important is not a temporary experience, but the realization that this is and always is already so. In fact I want to add: dissolving the sense of personal self is not the realization of Anatta. It is simply that: an experience of dissolving the sense of personality. As I wrote before, ...First I do not see Anatta as merely a freeing from personality sort of experience as you mentioned; I see it as that a self/agent, a doer, a thinker, a watcher, etc, cannot be found apart from the moment to moment flow of manifestation or as its commonly expressed as ‘the observer is the observed’; there is no self apart from arising and passing. A very important point here is that Anatta/No-Self is a Dharma Seal, it is the nature of Reality all the time -- and not merely as a state free from personality, ego or the ‘small self’ or a stage to attain. This means that it does not depend on the level of achievement of a practitioner to experience anatta but Reality has always been Anatta and what is important here is the intuitive insight into it as the nature, characteristic, of phenomenon (dharma seal). To put further emphasis on the importance of this point, I would like to borrow from the Bahiya Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.10.irel.html) that ‘in the seeing, there is just the seen, no seer’, ‘in the hearing, there is just the heard, no hearer’ as an illustration. When a person says that I have gone beyond the experiences from ‘I hear sound’ to a stage of ‘becoming sound’, he is mistaken. When it is taken to be a stage, it is illusory. For in actual case, there is and always is only sound when hearing; never was there a hearer to begin with. Nothing attained for it is always so. This is the seal of no-self. Therefore to a non dualist, the practice is in understanding the illusionary views of the sense of self and the split. Before the awakening of prajna wisdom, there will always be an unknowing attempt to maintain a purest state of 'presence'. This purest presence is the 'how' of a dualistic mind -- its dualistic attempt to provide a solution due to its lack of clarity of the spontaneous nature of the unconditioned. It is critical to note here that both the doubts/confusions/searches and the solutions that are created for these doubts/confusions/searches actually derive from the same cause -- our karmic propensities of ever seeing things dualistically... I have realized this. Have you realized that there is simply the experience of typing but no agent or typer can be found? There is no self, and no 'no self' either. I did not imply that non-existence is ultimate. I am saying existence, non-existence, and so on simply cannot be established. Self cannot be found, but neither can 'no self' or 'emptiness' be found. Everything is empty even emptiness.

I see... yes, D.O. is certainly not purely linear and we can never comprehend its full dynamics. What you said sounds good.

You can never become your wife... why? Because there is no 'you' nor 'your wife', though there are unique experiences, unique mindstreams. There is simply an experience, apparently of merging with your wife. The dissolving of the sense of a personal self however does not mean there is a universal oneness or that "I am my wife" - that part is mere extrapolation. The absence of personal self is true, the extrapolation is false. In actual fact, there never were 'selves', only unique experiences and mindstream. Even though the sense of personal self dissolves, it does not mean you and your wife share the exact same experience - you can never share experiences, experience is intimate as you say. In particular, you had an experience of dissolving the sense of individuality, the sense of a personal self. Actually there is no personal self... but neither is there a unified or impersonal self. Once you dissolve the sense of personal self which manifests an appearance of barrier or boundary between 'me' and 'others', the danger is then to think that there is a unified or impersonal self. Both are illusions. That there is ultimately no 'me' and no 'other' does not mean we are one, or that we are a unified self - and the fact remains that 'we' are unique mindstreams. There just happens to be two mindstreams where the sense of a personal self dissolves at a single moment. In actual fact, in every moment there is simply the experience of sights, sounds, smells, thoughts, etc, each is a unique experience... but there is no experiencer of experience. There is no 'experiencer of my wife'... there never was, and there is also no 'I am one with my wife'. There is simply that experience arising according to conditions. In seeing wife, there is just that 'experience of wife' - the sight, the sounds, the smell, etc. There is no experiencer. And neither is there a 'unified self' where 'I am one with my wife'. In fact, our mindstreams remain unique, our experience remains unique, just that there never was an experiencer in any mindstreams. This is a fact of reality, not merely a temporary experience... There is no 'I am you, you are me', nor is there 'I am not you, you are not me' - there are only unique mindstreams and experience, without an experiencer, agent, self, etc. But what is conveniently labeled as 'me' is vastly different from what is conveniently labeled as 'a dog' - we just don't share the same experiences. In fact, each human also have unique experiences, lives, karma, etc. We aren't one.

The link works this way: When there is this, that is. With the arising of this, that arises. When this is not, neither is that. With the cessation of this, that ceases. ~ the principle of D.O. Yes, 'this' is not 'that', and yet without 'this', there is no 'that'. Dependent on 'this', 'that' arises as a new and complete phenomenon. Dependent origination works whether or not you are engaging in memory, karma ripens whether or not you are engaging in memory. For example, without a previous moment of consciousness, a new moment of consciousness cannot occur. Without a previous act of volition, this karmic ripening cannot occur. e.g. Dependent upon the karma of 'me' killing someone, I got knocked down by a car today. (ok, karma is much more complex than this but this is just an example!) Yes, there is no 'doer of deed' nor 'recipient of effect', the 'me' is said just for convenience sake - it just means this particular continuum of causal chain or body mind that is unique from all other mindstreams - no others had to die for killing someone today, only this particular mindstream, only this particular body mind conveniently labeled as 'xabir'. Also, because we may have led entirely different lives, 'xabir' is reborn in hell due to 'his karma', 'lucky7strikes' is reborn in heaven due to 'his karma'... It is this stream of volition, karma, that is unique from the rest, and this makes all the difference between heaven and hell - 'we' are thus, unique, conveniently speaking. There is causal link, or causal dependency, and it is in this way we establish the uniqueness of mindstreams: cause and effect happen uniquely in a single stream of experiencing. There is no unique 'selves', only unique experiences, karma, mindstream, etc. Our memories, tendencies, karma, experiences are all unique. We don't have cows' karma or experience. The causal link doesn't mix: I don't experience your causal link, you don't experience mine. My karma doesn't ripen in your mindstream, yours don't ripen in mine. Everywhere, in all the realms of existence, the noble disciple sees only mental and corporeal phenomena kept going through the concatenation of causes and effects. No producer of the volitional act or kamma does he see apart from the kamma, no recipient of the kamma-result apart from the result. And he is well aware that wise men are using merely conventional language, when, with regard to a kammical act, they speak of a doer, or with regard to a kamma-result, they speak of the recipient of the result. No doer of the deeds is found, No one who ever reaps their fruits; Empty phenomena roll on: This only is the correct view. And while the deeds and their results Roll on and on, conditioned all, There is no first beginning found, Just as it is with seed and tree. ... No god, no Brahma, can be called The maker of this wheel of life: Empty phenomena roll on, Dependent on conditions all. ~ Visuddhimagga The net of indra does not deny individual mindstreams nor conflate everything into a universal oneness. So there are countless universes, countless mindstreams, and each is interlinked. If you drop something, it is being reflected in all. It is a reflection in you and in all. "I feel" and "you feel" are all nodes reflecting. Each mindstream is interdependent with the rest of totality, and yet it is not the case that I am you and you are me, because mindstreams are unique (and interdependent). i.e. just because you hit the bell and both you and the cow heard the bell, doesn't mean you are the cow or that you and the cow are one. Each unique mindstream is simply dependently originated, and hence are each empty of inherent existence. It's emptiness does not however deny the uniqueness of expression/manifestation.

Yes, it does not belong to any 'one' as there is no 'one' - there is no self apart from the process of volition, ripening, etc. Agree. There is causal continuity, but the sense of 'something continuing' is a mere mental fabrication based on recalling and fabricating a 'someone'. What arises this moment is neither the same nor different from a previous and is 'linked' only by the causal chain. From waking to dream is also a causal continuity... it is part of the process... our waking life affects our dream, for example. Only due to comparison that we think there is some sort of discontinuity or that upon waking up we somehow 'continue our lives' while actually 'life' includes our dreaming and deep sleep as well and should be seen as a seamless process, not just the waking state. In reality there is just change and evolving experience but no 'changing things'... each moment is complete and whole as it is with supporting conditions. From waking to dreaming to deep sleep, the cycles go on and no state is more ultimate than another. Each state arises as it has to according to conditions and the process rolls on.

How can karma not remain unique in mindstreams? Volition is a mental phenomenon. How can mental phenomenon not remain unique? How can we, for example, share memories unless you describe your memory to me: and even then I am simply hearing a description of your memory, I do not have the memory of yours. I can never share 'your' memory. We both have unique memories. Karma is like this. We both have unique karmas which are 'unshareable'. Unless we created some karma together, that is the only case there can be 'shared karma' (for example: we both killed people together in past lives, and so in this life we got into a car accident together) in the same way that by experiencing/doing something together can we have 'shared memories'. Karmic deeds occur and its ripening occur - just that there is no doer nor recipient of them. As Thusness wrote 4 years ago: There is no ‘Watcher’ apart from the watching. There is no doer apart from the doing nor ‘own will ’apart from the volition. The ‘watching’, ‘doing’ and ‘action’ refer to the same process. This same process flows and continues life after life. The process reaps its own fruit. There is no escape. ~ Thusness No, karma continue to ripen even when you realized no-self. Even Buddha still has ripening of karma (and suffer physical hardship, pain, illness as a result) and also elucidated his past lives to explain why he got those pains. So he still experiences the effects of karma, just that he no longer creates them because the process of grasping and samsaric volition has stopped. Yes, karma is just one of the conditions. Therefore we cannot say everything is caused by karma. We can't say that the hurricane is entirely caused by our karma because there are lots of factors to be taken into account including the laws of nature, etc. Yes. A sound... vivid, clear, non-dual.... is radically different from a sight or a thought, also vivid, clear, non-dual. Even though both are vivid, clear, non-dual and shares the same taste, the luminosity IS the manifestation and thus is unique and radically different in every expression.

... which cannot be established as having inherently existed and thus is simply the empty nature of reality. The absence of inherent existence allows for all possibilities provided there are supporting conditions for their arising. i.e. if flower is inherently red, then a dog could not have seen it as black. but since flower is empty, a dog (dogs are color blind) can perceive black flower and a human perceive a red one. therefore emptiness is infinite potentiality

There is causal continuity but not a continuous thing. For example, I pass down a certain knowledge/skill of mine to you. It is so called 'reborn' in a new instance, in this case, a new mind moment in your mind-stream. My knowledge is not exactly same as yours (though similar it is a unique experience) nor is it different. Likewise, your karma and my karma is unique: and it is passed down (reborn) moment after moment and life after life (though subject to transformation along the way), but it remains its unique stream. Through 'my' unique karma, a unique mind-moment is reborn which is different from 'your' unique karma which resulted in 'your' unique mind-moment. In this way, there is uniqueness and continuity to mindstreams. Causal continuity cannot be denied, what is denied is simply a substantial continuous self or agent behind experience/perception/action. In Mil. it is said: "Now, Venerable Nāgasena, the one who is reborn, is he the same as the one who has died, or is he another?" "Neither the same, nor another" (na ca so na ca añño). "Give me an example." "What do you think, o King: are you now, as a grown-up person, the same that you had been as a little, young and tender babe? " "No, Venerable Sir. Another person was the little, young and tender babe, but quite a different person am I now as a grown-up man . " . . . "... Is perhaps in the first watch of the night one lamp burning, another one in the middle watch, and again another one in the last watch?" "No, Venerable Sir. The light during the whole night depends on one and the same lamp.'' "Just so, o King, is the chain of phenomena linked together. One phenomenon arises, another vanishes, yet all are linked together, one after the other, without interruption. In this way one reaches the final state of consciousnes neither as the same person. nor as another person.'' Also, in the //Milindapanha// the King asks Nagasena: "What is it, Venerable Sir, that will be reborn?" "A psycho-physical combination (//nama-rupa//), O King." "But how, Venerable Sir? Is it the same psycho-physical combination as this present one?" "No, O King. But the present psycho-physical combination produces kammically wholesome and unwholesome volitional activities, and through such kamma a new psycho-physical combination will be born." Also see: http://www.katinkahesselink.net/tibet/anatta_jagaro.html

What is potential? It means what manifests is empty - and therefore there is always the potential to change and manifest different experiences. However there is no 'the inherent potential/source' or 'the ultimate unmanifest which manifests things'. The unmanifest simply means emptiness - unestablished, and furthermore is simply the nature of the manifest (form is emptiness, emptiness is form) instead of some inherent essence, then I accept what you say. If however by 'the unmanifest' you mean an ultimate source behind experience, then I do not agree with you. There is no cosmic mind or shared potential behind all things... the only thing which all things share is their empty nature, which allows for change and infinite potential. By that I do not mean 'a great void in which things arise and subside from/to' - by emptiness I mean the non-inherent, unlocatable, ungraspable, D.O. nature of all arisings. p.s. why the notion of a 'Source' no longer apply after insight of Anatta is this... as I wrote yesterday: When we talk about the nature of reality, many of us think of a Source. What source? An ultimate source, an ultimate awareness that displays or manifests everything. In our mind, we picture awareness like an eternal sun shining on the passing clouds in the sky... the eternal sun is primordially untainted, pure, unaffected by the passing/transient stuff, yet it is also the source of all the manifestations/transient stuff. We picture a Source 'illuminating' and 'manifesting' things... We think of Awareness as an agent 'perceiving' and 'illuminating' objects... this can certainly appear to be the case even after transcendental experiences of I AM and Non-Dual, with the 'view of inherency' still strong. However the insight of Anatta removes the notion of an agent or source... why is this so? Anatta means this... in hearing, there is no hearer... there is simply the self-accomplishing process of hearing which is really the experience of sound, music, changing moment to moment, arising according to conditions. In seeing, there is no seer... it is simply a self-accomplishing process of seeing which is is simply the experience of sight, the shapes and colours, changing moment to moment, arising according to conditions. In thinking, there is no thinker or controller of thought... there is simply the self-accomplishing process of thinking which is thought, changing moment to moment, arising according to latent tendencies and other supporting conditions. So if there is no agent, no source, no ultimate Awareness - only awareness/hearing/thinking as a process of manifestation... this is not a denial of awareness, hearing, seeing, perceiving, but a denial of awareness/perceiving/etc as an 'agent' of experience - it is simply a process of experiencing without experiencer. If this is the case, is there a primordially pure Awareness? The answer is this... Awareness is simply the self-luminous appearance, and this self-luminous appearance is ultimately empty, unborn, and primordially pure. This arising sound... this arising sight... scent... thought.... This is it. It is not about the transient clouds obscuring or tainting the primordially pure sun and then trying to remove all the clouds to get back to that pure sun... rather, it is that, the passing cloud seen as it is, is primordially pure, empty, self-luminous and spontaneously perfected. And yet... undeniably, ignorance arise and we experience apparent duality and inherency where none can be found... this false view of reality is the cause of all our grasping and sufferings and problems. Yet the cause of liberation is not found by shunning the transience or sinking back into a Source... it is not about a 'freedom from appearance' or even a 'freedom despite appearance'... appearance is primordially pure! This appearance (seen rightly) alone is self-liberating! It is about a shift in view/paradigm... a shift from duality and inherency to a non-dual, non-inherent viewless view of transience. Liberation is thus not about abiding in an unborn ultimate essence... but seeing all appearances as luminous, empty, unborn, primordially pure and spontaneously perfected. Dzogchen master Longchenpa: ...All phenomena are primordially pure and enlightened, so it is unborn and unceasing, inconceivable and inexpressible. In the ultimate sphere purity and impurity are naturally pure and phenomena are the great equal perfection, free from conception. Since there is no bondage and liberation, there is no going, coming or dwelling. Appearance and emptiness are conventions, apprehended and apprehender are like maya (a magical apparition). The happiness and suffering of samsara and nirvana are like good and bad dreams. From the very moment of appearing, its nature is free from elaboration. From it (the state of freedom from elaboration), the very interdependent causation of the great arising and cessation appears like a dream, maya, an optical illusion, a city of the gandharvas an echo, and a reflection, having no reality. All the events such as arising, etc., Are in their true nature unborn. So they will never cease nor undergo any changes in the three periods of time. They did not come from anywhere and they did not go anywhere. They will not stay anywhere: they are like a dream and maya. A foolish person is attached to phenomena as true, and apprehends them as gross material phenomena, "i" and "self," whereas they are like a maya-girl who disappears when touched. They are not true because they are deceiving and act only in appearance. The spheres of the six realms of beings and the pure lands of the buddhas, also are not aggregations of atoms, but merely the self-appearances of beings’ minds. For example, in a dream buddhas and sentient beings appear as real, endowed with inconceivable properties. However, when one awakens, they were just a momentary object of the mind. In the same way should be understood all the phenomena of samsara and nirvana. There is no separate emptiness apart from apparent phenomena. It is like fire and heat, the qualities of fire. The notion of their distinctness is a division made by mind. Water and the moon’s reflection in water are indivisibly one in the pool. Likewise, appearances and emptiness are one in the great dharmata. These appearances are unborn from the beginning, and they are the dharmakaya. They are like reflections, naturally unstained and pure. The mind’s fabricating their existence or nonexistence is an illusion, So do not conceptualize whatever appearances arise...

: Oh btw, it is not the case that ‘we are individual multiple consciousness’, but that ‘there are unique/individual multiple streams of consciousness’. There is no ‘we are ...’. There just are unique minds, and mind is not self. But relatively/conveniently speaking, yeah, ‘we’ are different minds. Arising and disappearing experiences imply diversity – i.e. different experiences appearing according to different conditions and not something ‘shared’. Seamless presence is the luminous character of every phenomena, but each moment of seamless presence is a unique and complete phenomena that is distinct from the unique and complete phenomena of a different mindstream. We do not, for example, experience a dog’s experience. e.g. Due to human karma, in seeing, just shapes and colours. But for a dog, due to dog karma, in seeing, just black and white plus shapes. There are no ‘multiple selves’, or ‘multiple experiencers’, but there are different mindstreams/experiences. Experience is not denied, just the experiencer that is denied/cannot be found.

There are different types of contemplation being discussed in the book itself. Self-inquiry will lead to the I AM stage and I have had quite a number of conversations on the practice of that. What you quoted will lead to non-dual insight... The 'Pure Awareness' experienced in I AM can then be seen as being no different than the arising manifestation - non-dual, no subject-object dichotomy. The method that led me to the insight of Anatta was the contemplation on Bahiya Sutta, which I also mentioned in that e-book. http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2010/10/my-commentary-on-bahiya-sutta.html Other than the method, having 'right view' is also important for subtler insights like Anatta and Emptiness to arise.

In actuality, there is no agent and no 'no agent' whatsoever.Just this breathe, this passing scent, this arising sound Nothing can be established and yet nothing can be clearer then this/these obviousness.

What you said is true... as I explained before, there is no hierarchy of insights. Some penetrate emptiness first, followed by luminosity. Both are essential and one must eventually come to see the union and inseparability of luminosity and emptiness. Thanks for the welcome... have been busy, serving the army. Just came back from one week of jungle training... conditions were 'hell-like' but nevertheless still fun at times. Memorable experience definitely. I'm going back to camp now and wouldn't be booking out for another two weeks.

Sorry, you're right - I got the facts wrong. It was 3 months, not 3 weeks. Ananda recited most of the suttas, I think there were some parts recited by others. Hope this helps: Befriending the Suttas: Tips on Reading the Pali Discourses

Pali canon was recited in the presence of 500 enlightened monks about 2 or 3 weeks after Buddha's demise. Ananda was gifted with perfect memory of everything the Buddha taught (it might sound impossible but it is actually possible: there are several monks even today who had the ability to recite the entire Pali canon from top to bottom, and is even recorded in the Guinness World Records) - and he simply spout out whatever he heard in the 1st Buddhist Council. Furthermore Ananda at that time was already an Arhant - an enlightened monk, and as an enlightened monk he could not have misunderstood what the Buddha taught. Even so if he had said anything wrong, the others of the 500 enlightened arhants would have corrected him. That is the purpose there are so many witnesses to the event. The recited suttas are then passed down orally in masses (which is unlikely to result in any errors as such) and double checked time to time to prevent any loss of transmissions or errors. Then a few centuries later they are recorded in written form. Pali canon is very reliable if you want to know Buddha's original words.

Confucianism is not a religion as it does not deal with the spiritual. It deals with morality, ethics, way of living, etc.

Check out the Pali canon if you're after the original Buddha's words. Core teachings other than 4 noble truths and eight fold paths includes the three characteristics (impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, non-self) of phenomena, dependent origination (e.g. the 12 links of D.O.), karma, and so on.

I think what you're saying transcendent view gained after awakening... but before awakening, one can start developing the right view by right understanding and conviction - and this is also very important prior to realization. However, once awakening (directly seeing the nature of reality) happens... there is no more grasping on conceptual view, it is just directly seen and experienced. Totally agreed. The view is indeed transformative. I do not minimize this realization as I personally have went through this phase, and took around two years of self-inquiring to get to (and the insight I have documented in the document 'Who am I' at http://www.box.net/shared/3verpiao63 ). In fact, it is a profound insight into the luminous essence of Being/Awareness. This insight is not negated in the later phases... I AM is this Pure Presence/Pure Being/Pure Sense of Existence. It is non-dual and undeniably present when realized. It is touched directly and non-conceptually, without intermediary. It is immediate Presence. This realization gives rise to a certainty of Being. This is an insight into the Luminous (Aware) essence of Being. However, it is only the luminous essence... not the empty nature. Many have insight into their luminous essence but overlook the empty nature. So from this I AM insight... one must proceed to further insights. For example... the non-dual insight. Resting in I AMness, if you then look at, say, a mountain, you might begin to notice that the sensation of the I AM or Pure Being and the sensation of the mountain are the same sensation. When you "feel" your pure Self and you "feel" the mountain, they are absolutely the same feeling. You will realise that everything shares the same luminous essence. There is no observer-observed dichotomy! Everything reveals itself as non-dual Presence. It is equally Presence whether in the formless Beingness or in forms. There is no separation, no Witness apart from arisings. Then further insight arises... the Presence we are talking about is really just these arising and subsiding phenomena! This breaks the solidity of non-dual Presence... we no longer cling to a metaphysical essence but see the arising and subsiding nature of all dharmas. There is no agent - i.e. a seer, hearer, experiencer behind these arisings. This is then followed by insight into how all phenomena arises... they arise due to dependent origination without agency. So each insight is important, but must be complemented by further insights... the view keeps refining, even though the vivid luminous essence/presence is never neglected or denied as the view gets refined. Right view is primarily the right view of empty nature... and this serves as an important precondition for further insights into emptiness to arise. The experience remains, but the view of 'We Are God' from the I AM level gradually transforms into 'the entire universe arises due to seamless interdependence without an origin or center'. I have little experiences with OBEs apart from those occuring in lucid dreaming and sleep paralysis... however whatever view I have is not based on these experiences and my main concern is not with these experiences. Ultimately, the right view is like a raft... you have to get on the raft, but when you reach the other shore, the raft is left behind. This is the analogy given by Buddha. What's left? Vivid manifestation... sounds heard, sights seen, thoughts arising... everything happening but without self-reference. There is great freedom, with no structures, no need for conceptualization. Just This. I no longer speak from concepts... but a direct experiential seeing of this. I do not rely on any structures for this... What is more direct and simple than just This... sound of 'da da da' due to typing on keyboard, music from speakers, words appearing on screen... an ever-changing reality without a center/self-reference. Just this is truth.

MH, forgive me for my ramblings. Haha... the joy springs naturally from this arising insight of anatta.

Why grasp on something false, when there is a more accurate, clearer view of life? How does doing some contemplation screw up your life? I cannot see anything but benefits arising out of this. From contemplation, direct non-conceptual realization occurs that leaves no room for doubt and confusion. It is seriously much more direct and simple than our theorizing. That is why Buddha said: The Perfect One is free from any theory, for the Perfect One has understood what the body is, and how it arises, and passes away. He has understood what feeling is, and how it arises, and passes away. He has understood what perception is, and how it arises, and passes away. He has understood what the mental formations are, and how they arise, and pass away. He has understood what consciousness is, and how it arises, and passes away. Therefore, I say, the Perfect One has won complete deliverance through the extinction, fading away, disappearance, rejection, and getting rid of all opinions and conjectures, of all inclination to the vainglory of I and mine. - Majjhima Nikaya, 72

Hi Marble, I'm not suggesting you are an unhappy man. But the 'I am already boundless, free, and blissful. I even have peace and contentment in my life.' can be taken to a whole new level with true realization of Anatta. Sound arise without hearer, they arise and subside according to conditions. They are vivid, clear, pristine, undeniable. Sound does not arise in my mindstream because there is no such causes and conditions. But the fact remains that there is no hearer apart from sound/perception. It just so happens that a particular sound is arising within one mindstream and not another. But arisings happen without agent. Individual mindstreams are not denied in Anatta... a perceiving/controlling agent is denied. The word 'I' is simply a label for a conglomerate of arising and subsiding experiences, not a fixed locatable essence... much like the word 'weather' refers to a conglomerate of arising and passing phenomena but not to a fixed findable essence. Place your hand on your head... sensation arises, clear, vivid, undeniable! But the thought 'I felt it' is an after thought... an inference. I live in the undeniable vividness of manifestation... without the belief in self-hood. Self-hood is just that - a belief, an inference... nothing actual. What is actual is Life... in its wonderful diversity and manifestation... It is not a dead emptiness, it is Fullness itself. It is fullness shining and presenting itself (and vanishing) every moment without an agent, an experiencer.