Search the Community

Actuallly, Marblehead, I spoke basic spanish when I was in my 20s since I was around many spanish speaking people at that time. Later, I started learning Chinese and now I speak Chinese much, much better than I ever could Spanish (oh, I also took a college course in Spanish way back then). So, the dream is valid. Now, however, I have difficulty remembering Spanish because I've concentrated so much on Chinese in the last 8 years or so. What I was saying was in the dream Spanish came out freely but while awake, Chinese was dominant.

Greetings.. Pondering the 'dream' of a butterfly? wasted time, it was a dream.. you wake to the verifiable continuum of existence.. Life asks for your full presence and attention, not fantasy imaginings of passing dreams.. if the dream was an actual experience with the unified consciousness, its message will not involve imagining or speculation, it will apply directly to the continuum of existence.. The whole dream within a dream and butterflies that can't decide what they are thingy, has posed more obstacles to pure Clarity tham is barely imaginable.. the inclination to diminish the value of Life in favor of imaginary conjurings or poetic musings is not a result of Clarity.. Be well..

Its just a dream, boy! It looks so real just like life, popcorn and candy.

Only jesting about the deNiro remark Mud.. Stir fly eh? I'll give it a go... Stir fry beef sizzles.. Whats for dessert one wonders Its just a dream, boy!

Again, please don't underestimate the power of suggestion. By what you've been writing here you have mostly been programming yourself to be more of what's bothering you. Talk and think more about what you want to be, what you dream of, what strengths you know you have and how you're going to improve on them. You must have some willpower, for instance, since you've been vegan for some time in an environment that doesn't support it. YOU HAVE POWER

lol - Incredible you're still besides the point. Like i said, lifting weights is the "fastest" way to get lean, but not the most efficient. Even if you can clean jerk hundreds of pounds, the quality, efficiency, recovery, formation, durability, strength, flexibility etc. of your muscle is inferior. I don't lift weights, but when i accompany friends to the weight lifting section who have been training for years, i can lift more dead weight than they can, without prior weight training. The only reason i work out for that long is because i love it. How long i work out for has nothing to do with my results. I only mentioned it to prove "Regular" people can do it, since you insisted one would be required to "dream" in order to achieve such results. 40 Minutes a day doing bodyweight training will yield the same results. Also i pretty much only eat fruits, rice, fish and water. It's cheaper, healthier and the quality of the muscle is superior. "No shit a weightlifter isn't going to be able to do a planche push up because he doesn't train to do them.." My point exactly. Weight lifter's muscle formation is rigid and less efficient, due to the nature of their work out. The muscle is like a horse with blinders. A bodyweight trainer on the other hand can utilize the same muscle for task of much greater variety than the weight builder can and with greater efficiency, without requiring specific prior training. Bodyweight training as far as quality, muscle formation, costs and requirements go - is way, way more effective. I and someone else already said in prior post that some gymnasts weight lift, but it is not necessary to achieve those results. Making a post with a link about a weight lifter who weight lifts, after that, is somewhat.... i'll pass on commenting. The difference between you and me in this conversation, is that you are biased, while i am not. If you weight lift, as long as you do bodyweight training, and specific motor programing through movement simulation - You will have the best of both worlds. It's like having a huge block that has to fit through a circular doorway, it won't work. But if you take the block and chisel it, you get the best of both worlds. The circular doorway represents the variety of tasks we use our muscles for in the real world. If you only have a block, then you're just a big bag of inefficiently produced meat. But if you've molded and programmed the muscle with bodyweight and movement simulation, then you've built the best muscle you can. It's like giving that block a brain, instead of just leaving it to be dead weight with minimal productivity. Body builder's muscle formations are rigid. Thats just the way it is : ) You can't only do 1 thing. You're in a Tao forum for crying out loud. I would assume, telling people that results are only achievable through dreams and being totally biased in your opinion, would be beyond you. You have to go hard and soft - for the best results. Soft... just like with the internal arts, is stronger, but takes longer to cultivate depending on your efforts. You may be bigger than me, but don't think you have the advantage with only dead "bulky" muscle. The weight lifters muscle is like ordering a pizza from a menu that doesn't tell you what the ingredients are, for 10 people, all with different tastes. You get a pizza, thats it, and you will not satisfy all requirements. Bodyweight training and muscle programming on the other hand, is asking everyone what ingredient they want on the pizza. Then making the pizza at home while catering to all of those 10 people's requirements. Great power and strength without weights as the title of this thread goes, is best achieved through bodyweight training in combination with some weight lifting, or BODYWEIGHT training only, but definitely not weight lifting only. That's not strength, trust me. : ) - Thats just... lumpyness *giggle

So Master Sleeping Dragon tried to plead with Heaven to extend his lifespan but was interrupted and a lantern representing a Big Dipper star was knocked over by a commander rushing into the tent, so passed away. Gradually luck has been slipping away from the Western Kingdom and the remnant of the Han Dynasty... Two cool supernatural events are related to this: A northern kingdom commander who was fighting against Master Sleeping Dragon's Western Kingdom saw some evil clouds while invading the Western Kingdom and assumed it to be an ambush. Indeed, the scouting party sent to check it out suffered a huge ambush but surprisingly didn't lose any troops... they later figured out that this was the area that Master Sleeping Dragon's Temple was established and those were ghost troops. So the enemy commander makes offerings to Master Sleeping Dragon which calms down the clouds. Later, the Master visits the commander in a dream and thanks him for the offerings and tells him that the Western Kingdom and the Han Dynasty is doomed, that the commander's cause would prevail but admonished him to be very merciful towards the civilians which he agreed to do. The other event was that the Western Kingdom emperor calls in a channeler to give him strategic advice. The "goddess" in question gyrates the channeler around and puts on quite a show but the advice was completely wrong and sealed the dynasty's fate. This story fits in nicely with my belief that channelled entities are not to be trusted.

We have a Chinese teacher, but her English said is alright. Some schoolmate, his went to China last year, this year he goes home, his Chinese said very much fluently. My Chinese said too slowly. But I like writing really, studies the character. Is able to discriminate schoolmate, they already knew many Chinese, has the Chinese friend, every day practices with them I hope I was able to translate it.... thanks to babble fish With the advent of computers I don't even attempt to spell English properly anymore perhaps technology will one day make it all irrelevant. I know a small amount of Cantonese and would like to learn more, although I should probably learn Mandarin instead. I have a dream of one day going to china and teaching English as a second language, basically so that I can afford to go there for a few months. The Chinese section idea is interesting and worth thinking about IMHO. If anyone ever has any ideas for TTB just send us an email, always interested in continual product improvement

I always enjoyed his posts, and find his relating dream practice and sexual practice to be interesting and would always like to hear more of what he is up to. Bill

Life is absolutely meaningless. All values, goals, structure, the physical world, phenomena, the Buddhas, the immortals, etc. all amount to absolutely no true value or meaning. They are there and you see it because you have given it meaning and purpose. There are no gods, no self, no enlightenment, no end. On a blank space, forms are seen and given life and their characteristics. In this made up dream you create a story for yourself. You laugh in it, cry in it, realize in it. Everything is like thus. Everything has come before us because of this. Ok, now that sounds depressing. But really it isn't. Realizing meaningless unbinds you. Once anything is valued, you become chained by it. See it's very simple. In this meaningless there is great freedom. The Buddhist have decided to make compassion their eternal refuge. And rightly so, there is great happiness there. And this is NO TRUER than valuing anything else. It just leads to great happiness. But it is not any truer, because compassion too has no inherent meaning to it. In other words, you DONT HAVE TO be compassionate. You don't HAVE TO do anything. First understand that everything is really meaningless. Then cultivation doesn't become a disciplinary act, and meditation doesn't become a "Oh I have to go meditate to become enlightened" thing. It's kind of like what the existentialists say. You are the one giving meaning to life, how you create your reality, how you create your experience is all of your own doing. But existentialists think there is an objective world your are giving a false meaning to. But really, there is no objective world. There is only you and your intent traveling the endless path called existence. So yes, the only meaning there is is this meaningless freedom of existence. Don't limit yourself to anything else otherwise. Thoroughly realizing meaninglessness is important to getting you to the next step of "why not?" . Just thoughts today after meditation... ...

I second the Six Healing Sounds recommendation for the evening (sitting version), combined with a gentle Inner Smile. It is a very good way to de-stress and relax. Also, it is great for preparing the mind/emotions for the journey into the dream realm...

Thanks, N-m-t-n-m-t! Everything you interpreted is perfectly correct, to the utmost. It's rather freeing and amusing- if somewhat creepy- to note that my personality (what I always called I) is so very predictable. Also, oddly enough my grandmother always said that I was 'jowly' (though my big head sort of makes it unnoticeable, besides when I'm over weight). And, yes, my dream job is being a Psychiatrist- though I wouldn't give pills ever, as I don't believe in their use. Also, the esoteric and the humanitarian are of my most valued pursuits. p.s. I've noticed before that I become oddly quiet and shy around new people when they have the potential to become anything more than strangers. If they are only strangers, I am as open as I am with my own friends (as their opinion doesn't affect me). But if I like someone (as a friend or romantically), I close off a little- I guess it's a defensive mechanism or something. When I get to know them and trust them a bit, I open up, and people are shocked by the change.

"All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves." - Bill Hicks http://www.gaia.com/quotes/bill_hicks

Hello DC! Just a couple of questions regarding your observation above: 1) Are you saying that the experience of Enlightenment (if there is such a thing) cannot be discussed? At all? Why? *Jon Doe* just got a glimpse of what profound wakefulness is - Are you saying its wrong to verbalize his experience? This is a curious thought.. 2) Since we are all stuck in illusion, does this mean whatever we experience is also experienced within this illusion? Is it possible to remove oneself from this illusion? If yes, what do you think can help one towards awakening from the dream? Your thoughts would be appreciated. _/\_ Regards.

In my opinion, enlightenment cannot be discussed, it needs to be experienced. How can you experience what happens outside a dream when you are dreaming? Since this small fraction of the universe we are all stuck in is an illusion, a dream-state like many others which make up what Buddhism calls Samsara.

Well, I am certainly glad that your view is not depressing to you. And I am sorry that you still do not understand my arguement. Words fail me sometimes. But as long as we all remember to live I guess everything will turn our for the best. So you can go ahead and assume that "I", Marblehead, will continue to exist until he no longer exists. I really do enjoy being a physical being. I even get to dream, have illusions and delusions and even imagine myself in other realms and stuff like that. Peace & Love!

Very good post. I know it is a bit late now, just missed it when you first wrote it. When you start practicing Bagua and Vipassana then you realize about how deep the rabbit hole goes when cultivating the Buddhist and Taoist paths. I have seen in dreams the depth of Taoism and circle walking to the point of being in a higher astral plane where the practice was much higher than down here. I shared this dream with a very well-known IMA guy that happens to live in another continent (I live in Australia) even though we never met in real life and never discussed this topic either in public or using private messages.

Greetings.. The comedy is nearly overwhelming... two, or more, unique manifestations of the cosmos.. some aruging they 'exist', others arguing they don't exist.. and, in either case, it is a 'mind-game'.. there is the certainty that a uniquely manifested being is reading the posts of other uniquely manifested beings. The contrasting opinions contained in the posts are clearly formed by beings with differing perspectives.. somehow, linguistic and semantic word-games have been cobbled together is some fashion sufficient to convince rational beings they 'don't exist'.. the humor, however dark, is overwhelming.. Is there any doubt that there are individual physical bodies, humans, existing on this celestial body we call earth? Is there any doubt that no two of these uniquely individual humans will interpret any experience in an exactly identical manner? (hint: they won't).. Examine your 'dreams', do they return nightly in a flowing stream of related events, no.. they are fragments of glimpses into the 'non-local' you, the Cosmic Mind.. each day you wake to the actuallity of existence, a streaming continuum of inter-related events.. to equate the streamimg continuum of inter-related events to random fragmented and often unintelligible 'dreams', is a leap of faith unsustantiated by any measure of reason.. Yes, there is an 'I'.. no, it is not the constructed image of thoughts and beliefs.. it is that unique manifested being, the unique perspective the being generates simply by being unique.. it is the necessity of 'relationship', and.. it is relationships that drive this whole existence, the whole Cosmos.. the Singularity, in order to 'know' itself, set the process in motion that result in 'its relationship with itself.. the 'I' is also the Singularity, it evolves through interactive relationships with itself.. we/us/Life ARE those relationships.. we (a bunch of 'I's) construct the personas that reveal to the singularity what the Singularity IS.. This whole process is called 'Evolution', the principle of self-organization choosing its natural direction and revealing the nature of the Singularity to the Singularity.. Evolution is without design or constraint, the only way the the Singularity can experience its own 'truth'.. While the mental image, the thoughts, you believe about yourself are not tangible.. their effect is very tangible.. 'You', the unique being and its unique perspective, are quite real.. if not, simply cease your manifestation.. stop posting, stop the 'dream'.. you want a really good laugh? watch one 'not real' being trying to convine another 'not real' being they are 'not real'.. it's a hoot! AND, it's a pathetically insincere game.. i have not met even one of the proponents of the 'not real' existence that conduct themselves in manner consistent with their statements, nope, not even one.. and, i know a bunch of them.. what i see is people that think it's really cool to insist that they don't exist, i mean 'how cool is that'.. to look another human in the eye and say.. 'we don't really exist'.. that, my 'non-existent' friends, is precisely what P.T. Barnum was referring to.. Be well..

Hi GIH, I respect you and your opinions. It is just that sometimes we have different opinions on specific subjects. This does not make either of us wrong - only different. And I am sure you don't want to be me and I am sure I don't want to be you. Yes, I equate 'my' existence with 'my' physicality. You say this is a bad mistake. I say it is no mistake at all. We disagree on this point. This should have been very clear because V. has mentioned this to me at least seven times and each time he has mentioned it I have suggested that it is more likely that he is deluded. I rely on 'my' own standard of physicality. I do not rely on what others say. If "I" do not exist "I" cannot dream. It is just that simple in my mind. If "I" do not exist "I" can do nothing. The fact that "I" can dream is an indicator that "I" exist. The fact that "I" am placing "my" fingers on this keyboard and pressing various keys is an indicator that "I" exist. However, I can dream, both while awake and while sleeping and imagine all sorts of things. Yes, imagine! That is the important word: imagine! We should not confuse our imagination with our reality. This is called being delusional. And it is just fine that "you" have the opinion that "I" am greatly deluded. But "you" should understand that "your" opinion has absolutely nothing to do with "my" reality. So there "you" go. BTW I do like the way you used the word "I" in this phrase: but I still think you're greatly deluded. Peace & Love!

It seems you equate physicality with existence. Bad mistake. What is physicality to you? I have a feeling that you rely on a non-standard definition of physicality. When I appear as a dream body inside a dream, do I exist, even though the dream contents are not physical? You can think of me what you want, but I still think you're greatly deluded.

In the arena of spiritual cultivation , it is always difficult to claim anything clear cut . Our daily trivial mind is full of ups and downs , sorrows and ecstasies ... people are not accustomed to any status that they can assure themselves that they are in safe, they are in grasp of their own future , free of worries of aging ,accidents , illness and death . Maybe the only clear-cut status they are sure is that they are awaken , not in a dream ? Yet what Taoist cultivation gives us is totally different , anyway, what I claim "clear- cut " are in the following senses: 1) Relative to some Buddhist ways , which ask people to contemplate on problems such as "Who am I? " , " What is a mind neither thinking of evil , nor good ?" , for years yet without giving concrete criterion for what can be said to be accomplished , Taoist jing-qi-shen way of course is clear-cut. 2) The completion of each step in Taoist way is always clear : For example ,stop menstruation or stop of ordinary way of breathing , the practitioner herself clearly knows what she has achieved and its effect on both her body and mind.There is no ambiguity . Besides, what happen first and what happen later is so clear that there can't be any doubts or mixed . 3) The emergence of the pre-heavenly way of breathing or a much condensed and clearer Mind , for example , is always abrupt , not a continual process. At that moment, you fail to grasp it , you have to wait patiently for the next moment ...Yet once grasped it , you then know that a quality jump has happened in your life .

The sense or need to 'get rid of the I' comes precisely from the sense of being an 'I' who can 'get rid of I'. Who is it who can get rid of things? Is there an 'I' in the first place to get rid of, and is there an 'I' that can get rid of that? Are they not just another arising thought, arising and subsiding in lightning speed, insubstantial like a bubble? How can there be an 'I' in it? Is not the mind just another thought, unchosen, spontaneously manifesting of its own accord? Choice, thoughts, intentions arise spontaneously on its own, don't they? What is the evidence of an entity behind those choice? And is not even the idea that we are a self, or a thinker, or a controller of a thought, itself simply another thought arising on its own without a controller? It will not be obvious at first, it takes practice, observing, contemplation. This is not about getting rid of anything, but seeing clearly the nature of reality, beyond our mind's false assumptions and conceptual interpretation -- rather, the clear seeing is based on the evidence of our direct experience. Greg Goode explains very well: http://rogeringraham.blip.tv/file/2479869/ Here's something else to consider... Let's say it will be noticed that the body is out of shape. A thought may arise that the body could do with some exercise. Next a decision to go to the gym could come up. Nowhere in this 'chain of events' is there the need for an entity that takes the decision. If there was such an entity, it first would have to decide to take such a decision to be able to claim 'authorship.' It also would have to decide to decide to decide ad infinitum, thus creating an infinite regress. What I always say is that non-doership does not mean that you are helpless, but that the 'you-agent' is fictitious. We say "I live, I think, I breathe" and so on but living, thinking and breathing is not done by someone; it happens by itself. Let's have a look at thinking: Is there really a 'thinker of thoughts' independent of thought? Does this 'thinker' know what the next thought will be? Or is the thought only known when it comes along? This thought may get claimed in the next thought, which could goes something like "Oh, I just thought about such and such". But is the 'I' claiming to be the thinker of the thought- not itself part of the thought? Do not take this to literally please, as there actually isn't even a 'next thought'; only this thought right now. There is no past, which has led up to this moment. There is only THIS; including memories and other apparent evidence for such a past. Nevertheless, there is the unfolding of this dream in which "the Tao, without doing anything, leaves nothing undone." As such there may be the appearance of doing exercises, making decisions, planning your day, falling asleep, waking up, gazing at the stars, reading these words, or registering the sounds around you. It all happens by itself. As the Zen saying goes: Sitting quietly, doing nothing, Spring comes, and the grass grows by itself. - Leo Hartong And in case you're mistaking that realising no-self has anything to do with getting rid of intentions, thoughts, and actions, (or even getting rid of an 'I', which in fact cannot be found in direct experience) I believe the above passage should pretty much clear that up. When you see through the solidity of an 'I', you no longer defend something that never existed in the first place, nor waste effort trying to get rid of something that never existed in the first place, and in place of that fictional 'self' you have the entire universe at disposal -- mind, physical body, space, mountains, the rivers, the sky, are your Body, total freedom from the limitations of an illusory separate self confined to a body-mind. # There is thinking, no thinker There is hearing, no hearer There is seeing, no seer # In thinking, just thoughts In hearing, just sounds In seeing, just forms, shapes and colors. -- these are essential for contemplation to give rise to Anatta (no-self) insight, but all these must be understood as 'Always and Already so' -- it is not a state achieved in deep meditation. It is a fact of reality that can only be realised.

This is a common Western Dilemma, where the I is given so much importance, defined by personal identity for the sake of striving for the materialist dream and putting "me" out there in order to "get" that dream! In the East of course the I... until recent Western influence, was more defined by family and culture, religion, etc. Not that the Western mode of strong egoism is not a good and healthy balance, but it needs to be less stern I think and not so brick. Really, what the wisdom paths are getting at is just being flexible... when we hold on to a stiff definition of "I", we loose our flexibility to learn and re-evaluate ourself depending upon the situation at hand. We are to be more like water with this "I", formless and evolving, not stagnant, "This is who I am and damnit I ain't changin' for nobody!" We don't have to change for anybody but if we wish to evolve, we need to realize the our I originates dependent upon causes and conditions and if we reflect more the causes and conditions of the now, then we are more appropriate within the now, more in line with it, merged into the moment sort of speak and less contracted about being open to new and exciting challenges in life that will help us evolve and also please us, as life is really to be enjoyed. Being stagnant like a pond cut off from the ever evolving currents of the ocean is really boring. That's all... it doesn't mean not having an I per say, just being more flexible in handling ourselves is all.

It's because we see first-hand how important the contents of the mind are. You're using a computer to say this. The computer is product of mind. That's just one example. Ah, but the very same flimsy evidence supports the thesis that what you call "physical reality" is real. It's not fair to look critically at one side of the equation but then look favorably on another. Look equally critically at both, or look equally favorably at both, and see what happens. It's not easy to break the stereotypes. Expectations of cultures, the cultural norms, those are not trivial to ignore or to manipulate. Most people want to preserve their dream personality while in the dream too. If you're dreaming that you're being chased by a monster, don't you run away in the dream? People fear the dissolution of what it is they believe they are, and this "what it is they believe they are" does not have to be physical, and I will say, it's not physical. So this preservation instinct has nothing to do with physicality. It's like a painter who wouldn't enjoy another painter walking up to her favorite painting and splashing some paint on it. The fear isn't physical. It's a fear of losing identity.

To add on to my previous posts... Before we realise awareness, we think that objects have their own identity, and further, we identify ourselves with those objects -- body and mind. We roughly know that we are conscious beings with awareness, but we mistake awareness as something contained by an objective universe (our awareness being one thing among the others), contained by our bodies, and is somehow an illusory byproduct of this 'real' universe or body-mind. We do not have non-conceptual experience and realisation of what Awareness really is, hence the true face of awareness is obscured by our false concepts. After realising the luminous source we realise all these objects (the phenomena we experience) have no 'objective existence' and are only illusory, impersonal happenings happening within Awareness, without any existence apart from Awareness, yet that practitioner clings tightly to that source, that ultimate Subject, and reify it into a source wherein everything manifests and dissolves. Nothing 'is' without the clear light of awareness shining and revealing everything. Thus, this is realised as the luminous source of all that is, however one easily reifies the luminosity into an essence apart from phenomena. At the initial stage, Consciousness seems to be the unchanging witness, while phenomena simply arise come and go within it. Hence duality remains. At this level, consciousness is seen as real, phenomena illusory. At this level you know without doubt and without concepts what 'You' are. This is an important step - to experience this 'I' non-conceptually. You'll see through the illusion of Awareness as being in the objects or being apart from You, it is You, no separation at all. The first step is to know what Awareness is (non-conceptually), to experience this I. At this stage one realises that I am not an object (apart from me) -- and the so called 'awareness' or 'non dual experience' is not what I experience, it is what one is, or rather what simply IS. It comes with a tacit realisation that you are not merely a lifeless corpse, body or a machine. You know that you are more than an insentient object. Can a corpse be capable of activities and cognizance? No. The body by itself is incapable of cognizance -- they are instead, objects cognized within Consciousness. I am not those objects. I am alive. I am Life, Consciousness, Being. I AM. This I AM is never doubtable because it is more real than real -- it is so real you can never deny your own being, nothing can be more real than the pure presence of Being. From the perspective of someone who realises the I AM which is so real, all other phenomena are like an illusion (But it is dualistic since there is a denial of transient phenomena and establishment of the reality of consciousness seen as unchanging). At any moment even if doubting arises, I AM that clear knowing/presence in which doubting is arising in. This I AMness is Self-Knowing, it is known only by BEING it, it is not an observer observing something. When the practitioner realises beyond a shadow of doubt that this is who he is (rather than interpreted as something 'he' experiences), then this is no longer seen as a mere transient experience but a permanent Realisation of the nature of one's being. To realise this it is important to use methods like contemplating on the koan, "Who am I"? However this is only a partial, not complete realisation, and many more stages of realisations must unfold to clarify the non-dual, anatta, empty nature of Awareness. But this realisation is the initial glimpse of what Awareness truly is beyond theories and concepts, one knows by realising/BEING IT. This is only possible by dropping all our mental chatterings, conceptual understandings and notions of what Awareness is, and simply drop everything else -- mind, body, etc... only contemplate 'Who am I', and allow ourselves to be filled with only this sense of existence or presence until one realizes what existence is. Next, we realise that just manifestation alone is it, there is no other Subject or Source to fall back on. But at the same time we do not mistaken ourselves or awareness as located externally 'in objects' or 'in the objective universe' or being contained by this 6 foot body (cause the notion of yourself as being a tangible object of any sort is already thoroughly seen through in the 2nd step where we realise that the body and mind is 'contained' within this vast container-like awareness instead of being the other way around -- objects having their own objective existence and awareness being located in those objects. The 3rd step goes further and sees there is no container-contained dichotomy). At this level, consciousness is seen as not other than the illusion-like, dream-like display, which nevertheless is vivid and luminous. Consciousness 'feels' real and vivid but is without manifestation-transcendence essence or substance. Not only are you not separate from awareness (it is not an objective reality), awareness cannot be separated from all manifestations. The appearances are not seen as having objective reality apart from your awareness of it (it isn't 'yours', but language is dualistic), nor are they seen as manifestations of a pure subject, but rather, it is simply all non-dual awareness. In short: Sentient beings cling to/identify with objects. Dualistic practitioners cling to/identify with Subject. Enlightened practitioners cling to/identify with neither. Marblehead mentioned the zen koan: Before study and practise zen, I saw mountains as mountains, and waters as waters. When I arrived at a more intimate knowledge, I came to the point where I saw that mountains are not mountains, and waters are not waters. But now that I have got its very substance I am at rest. For it's just that I see mountains once again as mountains, and waters once again as waters. This is how I correspond it: 1) identification to objects 2) identification to subject, treating objects as illusion 3) no more subject/object, only pure manifestation as non-dual awareness