Tibetan_Ice

Er...yes you can... Ramana called it the "I-I"

Hi Dwai, When we observe the observer, it becomes apparent that the observer changes with each observation, yet what is observing the changing observer remains still. So, observing the observer is something called, in Buddhist terms, rigpa, the clear light, primordial awareness. In other terms, there is the object and the subject. The subject (the observer) does become still, but there is something else observing the subject which is not a subject. The rigpa does not become still, it was always still. It is the movement of consciousness that can become still revealing what is beyond, permitting the observer to see through. However, you have to shatter that consciousness, break through it to reveal what is beyond. If you don't, you might well be perceiving from consciousness instead of rigpa. Also, I think you are the victim, like most, whom think that emptiness is void, nothing perceivable, like space. Emptiness in Buddhism does not refer to a blank state, empty space or nothing. Emptiness is a term that denotes that everything does not have any inherent existence. When you are in rigpa, you still see objects and things and they seem like one taste, all the same. So if you are seeing nothing then you have a ways to go. Pure rigpa is often described as blissful, luminous and empty so people think that there is nothing to perceive, yet emptiness is full. Again, you aren't observing "no thing", instead, you should be not grasping at what you are observing. Let everything appear, remain and dissolve. Don't go searching for empty space or the conventional meaning of "emptiness" In Buddhist advice from the Dzogchen tradition, when you are resting and the mind has settled, yell out a "Pat" and shatter the stillness. It is a shock and it breaks through the consciousness revealing pure immaculate rigpa. Otherwise, you are just resting in the alaya like a marmot sunning on a rock. Now, I don't think you are Buddhist and that is ok with me. I thought I would give you my opinion so that you might see the subtle differences and where you diverge.

Steve, you said "Frozen time" could be the nature of mind and the actual experience and observation is the manifestation of mind. An interesting possibility." I would say that anything that is beyond time would appear to be frozen time. Just like the diamond mind, the clear light, primordial awareness... The diamond mind is clearly explained by the Dalai Lama in his book about Dzogchen called The Heart of Meditation - Discovering the Innermost Awareness https://www.amazon.com/Heart-Meditation-Discovering-Innermost-Awareness/dp/1559394536

You are confusing the preliminary practice of guru yoga with the treatment of the lama in Bon Dzogchen. Your statement that "Once we have successfully connected with that state of being, the state of union with the guru, there is no need to hold on to any thought, concept, or visualization - they simply dissolve into the base" misses the step of dissolving the visualization of the guru in order to enter the natural state. In the practice of guru yoga, you do not stay "connected to the mind created visualization of the guru". It is the dissolution of the visualization that reveals the natural state. This is the preliminar practice. The concept of Union with the lineage is a totally different matter. Connection to a lineage does not automatically dissolve any thought, concept or visualization into the base, as you have written. Union with a lineage is a broader more general form of guru yoga as explained in the following quote: From "Golden Letters, the Three Statements of Garab Dorje"

Your basic assumption here is incorrect. The observer and observed do not unite. Instead they both dissolve away. This is not oneness of observer and observed. Further, each object has its own observer. Just because the observer and observed object dissolve does not mean that the "self" is not there any longer. There are endless objects that the subject can observe and each one, as each pair of subjects and objects dissolve, can reveal a small portion of the natural state. However, that does not translate into "no self" until rigpa is realized and fortified to the point where one can remain detached from each subject and object as they rise, display and dissolve. One realizes that the self was just a temporary conceptual construct and that there is something beyond conceptualization. Your basic context is incorrect therefore any thing that follows would be a waste of time. Each sentient being has its own natural state and that natural state is void of self because self is a conceptual construct and the natural state is beyond conception. Each natural state creates its own universe and those manifestations are/can be quantumly entangled. https://youtu.be/WyA6zTc6W5I

And who do you suppose Shakyamuni united his mind stream with when he became enlightened? NOBODY! Further, if you could unite your mind with the guru's and the guru was enlightened you would become enlightened. But that is obviously not the case. Someone doesn't understand something here... https://youtu.be/hRpT4Y4MPLw

Oneness does not abound in those teachings, Tantric "transforming into" is not becoming one with a guru, it is not even becoming one with a deity which was outside of yourself. This point is very clear. You are already one with your manifestations but they are still your own manifestations. http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/39937-beyond-the-spiritual-heart/?p=661743 Maintaining a view of "oneness" with a deity, guru or yidam indicates that one does not yet understand emptiness or the purpose of Dzogchen Bon guru yoga. From Tenzin Namdak's Bonpo Dzogchen Teachings, page 33 There were never two and now there is "oneness". More from the same book: Tantra is about creation and dissolution. Sure you can be one with your creations, but you were never separate from your creations there to use the term "oneness" when referring to creations which were never separate from rigpa in the first place is kind of stupid and misleading. Question, do you feel guilty that you recommended that Manitou read Krishnamurti crap and now you feel guilty and have an obligation to support her erroneous non-Dzogchen usage of the term "oneness" in the Buddhist sub Forum?

There would be unlimited natural states, one per sentient being and their manifestations are quantumly entangled.

That is quite a leap there Steve.. The mind is not just 'oneness' or a singular entity because it manifests in manifold ways. It is not a plurality or many things, either, because these numerous manifestations all have one essence. No one can describe its nature saying, "It is exactly like this!" It is indescribable, unutterable, inconceivable, nonarising, unceasing, and nondwelling, like the essence of space. Mind nature is discovered within the experience of awareness and is cognized individually. - Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche, "Union of Mahamudra and Dzogchen" From Tenzin Namdak's Bonpo Dzogchen Teachings: But the Natural State is individual with each sentient being. We are not all "One Mind." Otherwise, if there was only one single Natural State, or One Mind, then when the Buddha attained enlightenment, all sentient beings would have become enlightened. But that is not our experience. ... Thigley Nyagchik (thig-le nyag-gcig) has been translated as unique essence, single point, unique sphere, and so on, with reference to the non-dual totality of being. But this does not mean that Dzogchen is positing the existence of a single substance out of which all forms are fabricated, like a series of pots all made of clay. Nor is it postulating a single ocean of being into which all individual selves, like so many raindrops, fall and dissolve upon their liberation from the cycle of rebirth. Nor is it postulating a great "One Mind" in which all partial minds participate. As the Lopon pointed out, if there existed only One Mind, then when the historical Buddha attained enlightenment, all sentient beings would have become enlightened. Or again, if Kuntu Zangpo is primordially enlightened as the One Mind, then diversity would have never come into appearance. Nevertheless, this reflects the perennial problem of the one and the many, and how the latter can be derived from the former. The Thigley Nyagchik transcends this dichotomy in the view of Dzogchen. On this problem in relation to universality and indi- viduality in terms of Buddha enlightenment, see the Appendix in Reynolds, Self-Liberation (1998).

Barbara, there is not One Mind otherwise we all would have become enlightened when Buddha did. There is no 'Oneness' in Buddhism.

Manitou, Krishnamurti does not belong in any Buddhist thread as he is a sad example of anything, even doesn't do advaita justice. I would suggest you research his personal history before you start taking him as an authority on anything. IN MY OPINION..

For a dedicated meditator there is nothing that is "below conscious awareness". Actually, even using the term "conscious awareness" is an oxymoron because it implies that there is also an "unconscious awareness" and you aren't talking about rigpa here. One of the purposes of meditation is to not be affected by subconscious energies, and to make the subconscious conscious. Again I have the feeling that you are just wasting my time.

http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/30012-a-path-to-enlightenment http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/30012-a-path-to-enlightenment/?p=450183

Emptiness does not mean that it does not relatively exist, it does not mean that something is an illusion, it means that it is dependently originated and therefore does not have any inherent existence. The illusory part is that we take all objects to be something other than ourselves and introduce separation. If you buy into Alan Wallace's idea that each one of us is creating our own universe and that the universes we create are quantumly entangled, it starts to make sense. The hardest karma to overcome is the fact that we think we are human, when it may be the case that we are the source of our universe. Anyway, here is a quote from "The Heart of Meditation", an excellent book by the Dalai Lama, which sheds some light on emptiness and the self, the "I" (ego is a modern term invented by psychologists). https://www.amazon.com/Heart-Meditation-Discovering-Innermost-Awareness/dp/1559394536 And Jeff, if as you've stated that ego and its energies are beyond consciousness awareness, how could the Dalai Lama say that you can separate yourself from the "I" and then observe it?

Gee, Jeff. You really should practice more, particularly the meditation of watching the mind. Maybe then you would realize that the trained meditator eventually passes into and through the subconscious where thousands of thoughts are continually forming, rising and dissolving. You would see how you "know" a complete thought before your inner dialog even starts to recite it. Further, there are ten levels of consciousness, each level having a finer and more subtle aspect. The level of consciousness which harbors the "I" is not even the highest most refined level of consciousness. The ego is a conceptual construct which falls away when the lower levels of consciousness fall away. When in pure rigpa, there is no more ego because there is no more consciousnesses to construct it. Dedicated meditators are aware of the subconscious and those whom realize pure rigpa or pristine awareness are also aware of the super sub conscious, the super consciousness and beyond. They are also aware that there is no more ego in that state (or non state). Pristine Awareness has no ego, no karma and is beyond space and time. If you became a dedicated meditator you would not post such ridiculous statements and then try to defend them by resorting to your misunderstanding of conceptual emptiness.

http://www.lionsroar.com/discover-your-innermost-awareness/

Already, I was going to just delete your post because it is off topic and from previous posts in other topics I can tell you have a bad attitude and you remind me of another ex-member who chose an elitist attitude to most posts. However, I will address your comments. But I might just delete your post(s) anyway because you reek of troll. First off, why is it that other people get to write about their experiences, sell books on the net about their experiences (like Tenzin Wangyal, Tolle, Dudjom Lingpa, Patrul Rinpoche, etc) yet for some specific reason you single me out? Are you jealous that I am succeeding and that you are not? Sharing my experiences helps not only me, but helps others identify the clear light, the natural state, primordial consciousness. It is a great benefit to have someone whom can explain some methods of realizing the clear water, who has an understanding of the kind of experience that results. My purpose is to help people, unlike your caustic remarks and false accusations. If you don't have the same level of realization that I have then you have no proper understanding and not enough bodhicitta to treat the topic with the respect. You haven't practiced for 44 years and you haven't spent the last few years trying to put some meaning into the clear water experiences. I would think that any true seeker would be very interested in what I am saying, especially others whom have had similar realizations. And if they are not interested, then they are always free to ignore the thread. May be true? Those experienced in Dzogchen would have had exactly the same experience because it is the experience of entering the natural state. It is the single most important aspect of Dzogchen. Without it you have nothing. Garab Dorge's three statements, obtain direct introduction, gain confidence in the view then maintain it, attest to that. If you think that the experience of entering the natural state, experiencing primordial awareness is not important, then you've closed the door to the practice and have nowhere to go. Further, you say that primordial state does not arise as something new and does not pass away. You have poor understanding. The experience of the primordial state DOES arise as something new to the relative mind for beginners and anyone whom has not had the experience before. Yes, the primordial state is permanent and always there but it is never recognized unless someone points it out to you or initiates you, or you recognize it through practices. The idea that the primordial state arises and then goes away is the wrong way to look at it because it is not the primordial state that arises and disappears, it is the relative mind with all its thoughts, feelings and sensations that disappears (revealing the primordial state) and then arises again covering up the primordial state. Further, Dzogchen teachings say that this "ignorance", the inability to recognize the primordial state, is based on the false sense of identity of self, the "I" thought. First the "I" arises and covers up the primordial state. When the "I" disappears the primordial state is revealed. Your last statement that this is only temporary and therefore of no import is nihilistic. If you want to shut the door and throw away the key, that is up to you. If you can't distinguish between entering the primordial state and some other thing you misunderstand to be just another experience, then that tells me you failed in your direct introduction. My Experiences are not private. I share them openly so that others may learn and assess their own level of understanding and progress. Please don't impose your value judgements on others or hand down value judgements passed on by those who wish to maintain secrecy as a way to protect their inadequacies. When someone gives "direct introduction" to thousands of people over the Internet and then tells you to keep your experience private it is because, except for maybe one or two people, it did not work. So, quit calling my experiences some kind of ego threatening circus show and recognize it for what it is. If you failed at direct introduction and have to rely on "level of understanding" or what someone else told you, I would suggest practicing more and achieving a higher "level of experience". Last remark. Telling someone it is all "empty" does not help most people. They have to realize it for themselves. Mixing high level statements with relative concepts like you are doing shows a lack of understanding of the two truths, and demonstrates that you do not take the time and effort to keep them separate. The next thing you'll be telling us is that there is nothing to do, no practice needed...

The second time it came out I was reading the book called "Experience and Philosophy". https://www.amazon.com/Franklin-Merrell-Wolffs-Experience-Philosophy-Transformation/dp/0791419649 I was sitting on a park bench reading. I read a sentence which said that "it" is so close to you that the moment you start to look for "it" you already passed it. So I sat up straight and receded back into myself. The clear water appeared again but this time it was not a shaft projecting outwards. It was much larger and it encompassed the whole park. The silence was glorious. I felt like I was everything, made of pure love and bliss. The strange thing is that there were two eyes looking back at me from the luminous watery envelopment. Like I was looking into a "face". I wonder if that is what they mean by the "face" of rigpa.? Then, my mind and thoughts fought their way back and it disappeared. Later, as I was walking back to the vehicle, it came out again. But try as I might it did not stay. Then, the next day, in the morning, I bent over while taking a shower and it came back! Glorious! The silence was so peaceful. The mind and all its thoughts resembled a little school of rainbow fish swimming in a school up above. Much love, bliss and the feeling that i was everything. It is quite the experience. I wish everyone here could experience that.

Here is the book! https://www.amazon.com/Heart-Meditation-Discovering-Innermost-Awareness-ebook/dp/B01C64RSG6/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=#nav-subnav This quote from the book means quite a bit to me because a few years ago I experienced a phenomenon where something came out of my eyes that resembled gushing water, like a fire hydrant gushing horizontally in slow motion. It was during a walk in the forest, when I was "loving" a newly forming leaf in springtime. I had been practicing shifting my attention every half second from leafy tree branch to the next, loving every scene, but not allowing the conceptual mind enough time to grasp before shifting to the next visual scene. I had spent about 1/2 hour doing that. Then, as I walked back to my vehicle, I stopped to admire a leaf bud and this clear luminescent water-like substance came out of my eyes and surged towards the leaf bud. It resembled a horizontal shaft of water, about 8 inches in diameter and about 6 feet long. The inside of the shaft was so bright and clear the it made the rest of the scene appear very dull. On one end of the shaft was the leaf bud and on the other end of the shaft was my eyes. I stood there, stunned. The effect lasted for about 30 seconds. Now, today, finally I read this: So yes, I can now say that I've realized the basic nature of mind. I've seen it. It can be grasped. Clear water. Thank you Dalai Lama

And if you go beyond that deep someone, surprise surprise, there was nobody there.

http://www.lionsroar.com/discover-your-innermost-awareness/ Direct introduction by the Dalai Lama... Phat... Pat... Breaking on through. Shock..

Actually, I wouldn't even say that AYP is Raja yoga, it is more like kundalini yoga without the shaktipat or personal guru that visits you in the astral plane, and TM thrown in just because...

Welcome to the forum. You have a mentality of transformation. You see things in terms of becoming, developing, creating, which is tantra. You still appear to have an identity and that identity is becoming bewildered. This is good. You need to get down to the root and realize that your essence is projecting your reality, not by transformation, but by reversing or tracing the flow back to the source in order to gain wisdom. The wisdom will set you free. You are very ripe for Dzogchen. Have you ever read "Buddhahood Without Meditation"? https://www.amazon.com/Buddhahood-without-Meditation-Lingpas-Visions-ebook/dp/B01G2DD4PG/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= Or "Heart of the Great Perfection? https://www.amazon.com/Heart-Great-Perfection-Lingpas-Visions-ebook/dp/B01AS3WJRK/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

Spotless, Here is a definition of enlightenment, for you who claim to have awoken and be enlightened. Do you know your countless previous lives? Do you know the minds of others? Can you manifest yourself into countless beings? https://youtu.be/m34izufsuQI

Swami Sivananda on Raja Yoga http://www.dlshq.org/download/mind.pdf