The Clarity Aspect in Buddhism

[MIchael80]

1 hour ago, forestofemptiness said:

 

"Experience" is another way to say awareness. If there is experience, if there is knowing, if there is anything at all (even a blank void, or nothingness, etc.) this is all arising in awareness. Usually when people talk about going "beyond" awareness, they mean some sort of reified state of consciousness. Even in the link you provided, the person talks about a "perspective" beyond consciousness. The word "perspective" implies awareness, so this is just playing word games. Usually people confuse a "sense" of awareness or a "state" of consciousness with awareness (even here, the so-called "Supreme Reality" is a "sense of Being Consciousness or Self"). If it has a sense, a feeling, a flavor or anything graspable at all, no matter how subtle, it is an arising. 

 

 

How should that be described other than with words?

It is only word games because you are closed to that shift....that is the word used...not perspective but shift. That word implies a change in our self perception. First being an individal, then presence,  then pure awareness and then that which lies beyond.

 

And with Supreme reality ..the same ...it has nothing to do with self or awareness. (And the article states that very clearly)

Read it more slowly....all you describe is what in that article is called self realization.

Beyond awareness is no void, no self, no knowing, no perception.....as there is no awareness. 

 

Besides that i have provided different sources....like the vids from David Buckland where he talks with Andrew Hewson about those shifts.

Edited August 15, 2021 by MIchael80

[forestofclarity]

5 hours ago, freeform said:

Which tradition is right? I guess we get to find out at some point

 

I'm curious, because based on what I've heard, Daoists have largely taken the Buddhist ideas and modified them. Tibetan Buddhists tend to ground their teaching on the experiences of people who have nearly died, who have recalled their past lives, and who have the ability to travel to post-death realms (i.e. delogs). Interestingly, if you look at the actual testimony, it seldom conforms as nicely to the traditional view. This is especially the case with non-religious children who recall past lives--- there is a lack of the karmic causality between one's life and rebirth (i.e. people who die as robbers and murderers are reborn as humans).

 

Just curious how the Daoists ground this, and whether there is a brief overview or commentary generally available. 

 

https://www.scholarsage.com/series-3-9-meditation-vs-qigong/

[Apech]

54 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

 

I'm curious, because based on what I've heard, Daoists have largely taken the Buddhist ideas and modified them. Tibetan Buddhists tend to ground their teaching on the experiences of people who have nearly died, who have recalled their past lives, and who have the ability to travel to post-death realms (i.e. delogs). Interestingly, if you look at the actual testimony, it seldom conforms as nicely to the traditional view. This is especially the case with non-religious children who recall past lives--- there is a lack of the karmic causality between one's life and rebirth (i.e. people who die as robbers and murderers are reborn as humans).

 

Just curious how the Daoists ground this, and whether there is a brief overview or commentary generally available. 

 

https://www.scholarsage.com/series-3-9-meditation-vs-qigong/

 

Daoism is older than Buddhism, especially if you include the shamanic and oracular roots.  However Buddhism did have a significant influence on Chinese thought and practice - and so because some Daoist ideas and Neo-Daoist/Confucian ideas are similar to Mahayana philosophy (such as xuanxue school) Buddhism was quite easily assimilated.

 

Tibetan Buddhism is largely an inheritance from Medieval India where the vajrayana had become predominant with the Mahasiddhas - but what is largely ignored is the influence also from China of both yogacara Buddhism and Daoist practices.

 

Very little if anything is based on 'people who nearly died'.

[freeform]

1 hour ago, forestofemptiness said:

based on what I've heard, Daoists have largely taken the Buddhist ideas and modified them.

There’s definitely a lot of cross-pollination - but it’s not as neat as what you’ve been told.

 

The important thing to understand is that the ‘living’ lineages in Daoism are kind of hierarchical - the head is almost always an immortal or an enlightened master, who continues to ‘broadcast’ the lineage transmission and keep it alive.
 

There are certainly scriptures, but they are not as important - what’s more important is to be taught by a teacher who has experience in what they’re teaching. Teachers are not allowed to teach those things that they have no experience of. Their experience has to be verified by someone with more experience etc.

 

As weird as it is, one with enough ‘insight’ and ability can track the dying process and perceive what happens at the moment of death.

 

Someone going through the death process will experience it subjectively. One who has insight can sit by a dying person and track the underlying ‘mechanics’ of what is happening.

 

In my experience what happens in a near death experience completely matches what my teacher has explained… but it’s just from a first-person perspective.

 

 

[dwai]

15 hours ago, freeform said:

We have different definitions of unconscious. For me it’s where ones consciousness cannot reach.

There is nowhere that consciousness cannot reach. I think you mean the mind — which is a limited reflection of consciousness. 

Quote

 

Specifically these are the karmic seeds hidden within the Hun - your soul.
 

The Hun has three aspects - individual soul, family line soul and collective soul. This is where the deeper karmic seeds reside and this is how they continue through the many lifetimes.

It just seems like splitting hairs to me.  
There really is no “soul” — though many have incorrectly translated “Atman - Self” as “soul”.
 

There is a subtle body that transmigrates if one is stuck in duality. But that is also at a subtle relative/transactional level. 

Quote

Not how it’s been explained to me. I certainly don’t have the insight to directly perceive this process in action myself - but my teacher does.

It is very possible (and likely) to misunderstand the teacher’s words based on one’s own internal filters (many at a deep subconscious level). Or sometimes teachers’ understanding can be driven by their own filters as well (not saying that’s the case with your teacher — I can’t know without meeting the teacher, fwiw). 

Quote

 

At the ‘mysterious gateway’, latent karma is awoken. 
 

What happens after the awakening (after walking through the mysterious gate) is crucial.

 

This is why it’s considered the beginning of spiritual practice in Daoism.

 

Either you illuminate what has been laying latent and unconscious (making it ‘conscious’), allowing it to drop away…

 

Or if you become mesmerised  by the ‘light’ of awakening and consider this the end of spiritual practice, you can easily start to give expression to the karmic seeds allowing them to flower into action. Usually in ways that corrupt in a very ‘hidden’ way. At least hidden to the awakened one.

Then I’d say it is not true awakening  

 

Quote

Interestingly, ‘not returning’, in several Daoist traditions is said to only happen to the highest level immortals. Even the most divine beings like Jesus are on a course to return… even if it’s tens of thousands of ‘earth years’ away.

 

Awakening at least in the northern Daoist traditions creates the possibility for one to ‘die well’ and not be ensnared by the web of the most sticky of ones karma upon transition - and therefore gives one a good chance at having a very fortunate incarnation the next time round.

 

Which tradition is right? I guess we get to find out at some point

indeed  

Quote

 

Not many disgraced alchemists in the public eye - have you heard of any? I’ve certainly met a few dodgy types.

most of the “fallen guru types” are typically those playing with energetics and alchemy. 

Quote

 

There are plenty of awakened Moojis, Rajneeshes, Chongyams, Ram Rahims and thousands of others…

Mooji 😁 - I don’t consider him “awakened”. But I know it’s hard to tell the fluff from the stuff these days . Ram Rahim and thousands like him are no where near realization. 

 

No idea about the Tibetan ones. 
 

P.S. I’d missed the Rajneesh reference. He was certainly a very high level yogi. But in words of my spiritual mentor, he was of a very rajasic level.

There is a certain type of yogis who are “janma-siddhas” (have been born with yogic Siddhis due to past life efforts). Such people can do miraculous stuff — see the past and future, material objects from the astral plane, have very strong shaktipat etc. And they might have a large following too — mainly laypersons without ability to discern between a truly jnani and a yoga-siddha. Such people can fall prey to these yoga-siddha types who’ve not had what is called “tadatmyam” (or realization). Also these yogis (I’m extending this to include equivalents from other non-Hindu traditions as well) are themselves susceptible to corrupting influences of lust, anger, greed - especially when they realize how they are able to influence people  (and manifest material wealth etc). Yoga siddhis don’t a jnani make — a jnani can be fully realized and liberated and still not show a single yogic Siddhi. 
 

Typically when a yoga-siddha doesn’t continue to move their development further, or uses up the power that drives their siddhis, can end up depleted. Siddhis don’t last forever — and therefore either require diligent practice and upkeep, or the yogi needs to develop enough wisdom to let go of the siddhis and work on/towards Self-realization. 

 

What may remain in jnani (who has realization) is called lesha avidya (a very small degree of ignorance/attachment) - something that allows them to retain this physical form, in order to help others toward their liberation. But that is determined by their proclivities, or as part of their dharma vows (such as bodhisattva vows among Buddhists). 
 

 

Edited August 16, 2021 by dwai

[dwai]

6 hours ago, MIchael80 said:

 

Beyond awareness is no void, no self, no knowing, no perception.....as there is no awareness

How does one know what lies beyond awareness without awareness/consciousness?

Is it possible to “know” without awareness/consciousness? If yes, then how?   
 

Is absence of subject-object duality the same as absence of consciousness or awareness? Certainly not. One experiences the absence of subject-object duality in deep sleep every day. 

Edited August 15, 2021 by dwai

[forestofclarity]

6 hours ago, freeform said:

There’s definitely a lot of cross-pollination - but it’s not as neat as what you’ve been told.

 

I mean mostly talking about post-death states. The only thing I've heard is about the 6 realms. 

 

6 hours ago, freeform said:

There are certainly scriptures, but they are not as important - what’s more important is to be taught by a teacher who has experience in what they’re teaching. Teachers are not allowed to teach those things that they have no experience of. Their experience has to be verified by someone with more experience etc.

 

You get this in Buddhism also. There's the yogis and the panditas. The yogis won't teach what they haven't accomplished. The panditas will discourse on everything under the sun. 

 

6 hours ago, freeform said:

Someone going through the death process will experience it subjectively. One who has insight can sit by a dying person and track the underlying ‘mechanics’ of what is happening.

 

You can see this with the Tibetan bardo type teachings as well. Some people who have more experience with dying people are better at tracking it. 

 

6 hours ago, freeform said:

In my experience what happens in a near death experience completely matches what my teacher has explained… but it’s just from a first-person perspective.

 

Is there anything you can share?

 

 

 

 

[forestofclarity]

7 hours ago, Apech said:

Tibetan Buddhism is largely an inheritance from Medieval India where the vajrayana had become predominant with the Mahasiddhas - but what is largely ignored is the influence also from China of both yogacara Buddhism and Daoist practices.

 

Not sure about that. The Samye debate seems to suggest that the Indian gradualists were faced with the Chinese non-gradualists, and defeated them, yet you still have Mahamudra and Dzogchen. There is something parallel with these teachings and Daoism, at least to me. But I'm no scholar. 

 

7 hours ago, Apech said:

Very little if anything is based on 'people who nearly died'.

 

Maybe for you, but different teachers have different approaches. 

 

[Bindi]

13 hours ago, Apech said:

Worth a listen if you have time:

 

 

Many interesting points, not least being that we who are interested in channels and chakras and knots are the fortunate ones - we just have the knack knack knack! Thanks for the link  

[TranquilTurmoil]

Spontaneously stumbled into Chan Master Sheng Yen's commentary on Song of Mind.... It seems relevant to the discussion. 

Edited August 16, 2021 by TranquilTurmoil
Autocorrect typo

[Apech]

7 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

 

Not sure about that. The Samye debate seems to suggest that the Indian gradualists were faced with the Chinese non-gradualists, and defeated them, yet you still have Mahamudra and Dzogchen. There is something parallel with these teachings and Daoism, at least to me. But I'm no scholar. 

 

 

Maybe for you, but different teachers have different approaches. 

 

 

These books will explain some of this if you are interested.

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Tibetan-Zen-Discovering-Lost-Tradition/dp/1559394463/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=tibetan+zen&qid=1629105800&sr=8-1

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Origins-Yoga-Tantra-Religions-Thirteenth/dp/0521695341/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=origins+of+yoga+and+tantra&qid=1629105872&sr=8-1

 

 

[MIchael80]

12 hours ago, dwai said:

How does one know what lies beyond awareness without awareness/consciousness?

Is it possible to “know” without awareness/consciousness? If yes, then how?   
 

Is absence of subject-object duality the same as absence of consciousness or awareness? Certainly not. One experiences the absence of subject-object duality in deep sleep every day. 

That is why it cannot be talked about dwai. 😊

Even less then about awakening....

It is still seldom and as you have seen i do not much talk about what is here. I use links to people much better with words than i am.

 

I invite you again to Davids blog or his talks with Andrew Hewson on YouTube (they discuss that to the best of their ability there). You can also write David .... he has taken years to put that into words and he always answers questions. 

Or read Davids book. You could read Lornes book also (he wrote the Link i posted)

 

To answer your question....which cannot be answered .... you cannot and being/SELF absolute awareness cannot...only by realizing / becoming that which lies beyond ... it is "known" only by itself.

 

With that i end that here.

 

All the best on your way! 

😊

 

 

[dwai]

1 hour ago, MIchael80 said:

To answer your question....which cannot be answered .... you cannot and being/SELF absolute awareness cannot...only by realizing / becoming that which lies beyond ... it is "known" only by itself.

Thanks Michael. This is precisely what I’ve been calling (along the entire nondual traditions of India) as Self-realization. One doesn’t need to “experience” to recognize/realize this.
 

What you’ve described as “cannot be talked about” is actually due to the fact that in nirvikalpa samadhi, there IS no experience — everything stops, the world literally disappears, time disappears, space disappears, knowing disappears, and even sense of “I am” disappears.

 

But that is really of not much use to the limited being who needs to fully comprehend their true nature. That is why one has to go beyond nirvikalpa samadhi — into the realm of what is called Sahaja samadhi. 
 

I’ll certainly check out David’s blog and see if I find anything interesting therein. 
 

Good luck to you too on your path.

 

Best,

 

dwai 

[Creation]

On 8/14/2021 at 3:26 AM, MIchael80 said:

 

https://www.lucialorn.net/states-of-consciousness

Here they try to describe this unfolding starting from the 4th state through absolut awareness, to awareness recognizing itself to be the same as the appearances within it to beyond absolute awareness.  Hope you enjoy it.😊

 

Hi Michael, 

 

I appreciate you sharing about Lorne and David.  People with clarity about the different stages the process of non-dual awakening goes through is something I'm always happy to find.  

 

If you have any interest, here are some other clear mappings of the process:

 

http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html

https://digitalcommons.ciis.edu/conscjournal/vol8/iss8/1/

[dwai]

6 hours ago, dwai said:

I’ll certainly check out David’s blog and see if I find anything interesting therein. 

I did check it out. Interesting, also, unfortunately (or vice-versa), as I was expecting -- nothing new to learn there.

 

I remember @MIchael80 or someone else had posted the 4 stages narrative a long time ago on another thread. I consider this kind of categorization akin to splitting hairs, and unnecessary. At least that is what it feels to me, FWIW. But if the 4 stages narrative works for someone, more power to them.  There is absolutely nothing in lorne's blog post that actually differs from the traditional Advaita Vedanta perspective, just some additional sub-categorization.

 

Not everyone goes through the same sequence of "experiences" (if one can even call them that). IIRC @Spotless used to often talk about precisely how no two people go through the exact same set of "stages"...

 

 

Edited August 16, 2021 by dwai

[freeform]

23 hours ago, dwai said:

There is nowhere that consciousness cannot reach.

Yeah - so the interesting part is that in my tradition, if your consciousness can indeed reach the deepest parts of the Hun fully, you’re able to get effortless insight into all aspects of the Hun soul - including all your incarnations (past and future)… all your family line’s incarnations… and the collective soul of humanity.

 

Practically, this means that you gain access to all human knowledge from all time. Meaning that if your consciousness does extend that far, you should be able to name the birthplace of my grandad (for instance). It should be a pretty simple affair - like retrieving the name of your best friend from your memory.

 

In my tradition, if you can’t access this, then there are indeed areas where your consciousness cannot reach. These areas, I personally call ‘unconscious’. (This is specifically tested for eventually.)

 

23 hours ago, dwai said:

There really is no “soul” — though many have incorrectly translated “Atman - Self” as “soul”

I don’t really know what that means to be honest. Different traditions have different understandings. 
 

23 hours ago, dwai said:

most of the “fallen guru types” are typically those playing with energetics and alchemy. 

I’ve certainly come across quite a few - it’s true… but they tend to come across as assholes quite quickly, so in reality the majority of people know to avoid them. 

 

I’ve met far more people who have been damaged by neo-advaita type teachers that claim to be ‘awakened’. Including teachers like Mooji and countless similar ones. Maybe it’s the nature of satsangs that impacts those numbers, I don’t know.

 

Whether you or I consider Mooji or anyone else awakened or not doesn’t really matter - they peddle the same nondual neo-advaita stuff that sounds credible and convincing to hundreds of thousands of people.
 

And without a solid tradition that differentiates true attainment, anyone is free to learn the language and start getting followers.

[freeform]

18 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

Is there anything you can share?

just the same boring ‘light at the end of a tunnel’ stuff, loud wooshing, feeling profound peace, my life replaying in front of me before getting revived.

 

That was the subjective experience… but from someone who has insight into the energetic mechanisms at play - things are a little different.

 

For instance the ‘tunnel’ with the light at the end is actually part of the central channel… the light is shining from the depths of the middle Dantien… 

 

I rather not talk in depth about this though.

[dwai]

1 hour ago, freeform said:

Yeah - so the interesting part is that in my tradition, if your consciousness can indeed reach the deepest parts of the Hun fully, you’re able to get effortless insight into all aspects of the Hun soul - including all your incarnations (past and future)… all your family line’s incarnations… and the collective soul of humanity.

In the dharma traditions, these are yogic siddhis and have nothing to do with realization/enlightenment. Though I have accessed some of my previous lives during meditation, I can't say I care to know about them. 

Quote

 

Practically, this means that you gain access to all human knowledge from all time. Meaning that if your consciousness does extend that far, you should be able to name the birthplace of my grandad (for instance). It should be a pretty simple affair - like retrieving the name of your best friend from your memory.

 

In my tradition, if you can’t access this, then there are indeed areas where your consciousness cannot reach. These areas, I personally call ‘unconscious’. (This is specifically tested for eventually.)

None of this is the domain of "consciousness" per se. These are all functions of the mind, in the dualistic mode of operation. It has no significance (except for the shock and awe factor). Many of the so-called "Fallen Guru types" you mention had the ability to do this. 

Quote

 

I don’t really know what that means to be honest. Different traditions have different understandings. 
 

I’ve certainly come across quite a few - it’s true… but they tend to come across as assholes quite quickly, so in reality the majority of people know to avoid them. 

 

I’ve met far more people who have been damaged by neo-advaita type teachers that claim to be ‘awakened’. Including teachers like Mooji and countless similar ones. Maybe it’s the nature of satsangs that impacts those numbers, I don’t know.

It is not a good thing for charlatans to cheat others, period -- whether they are neo-advaita or tantric sex gurus or "hang-weight-off-your-junk" alleged daoist alchemy masters. At the same time, it is not wise to throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. There is power in satsangs. When we go to spend time with our teachers, for instance, we are in satsang. When we spend time with fellow seekers (even on an internet forum) also we are in satsang. 

Quote

 

Whether you or I consider Mooji or anyone else awakened or not doesn’t really matter - they peddle the same nondual neo-advaita stuff that sounds credible and convincing to hundreds of thousands of people.
 

And without a solid tradition that differentiates true attainment, anyone is free to learn the language and start getting followers.

I think it is also true for the Mantak Chia types in the Daoist traditions. The allure of powers and mystical abilities is not a new phenomenon. For every genuine sage, there have been, throughout history, many more charlatans who learn to talk the talk, but can't walk the walk. And if there's anything that people love the most, it's a short-cut. 

Edited August 16, 2021 by dwai

[Piyadasi]

9 hours ago, dwai said:

In the dharma traditions, these are yogic siddhis and have nothing to do with realization/enlightenment.

Do they not? Then why is virtually every great sage of the past said to have had a variety of incredible siddhis?

I'm only more or less familiar with Buddhism, but by dharma tradition, I suppose you include that. Starting from the Buddha himself, and his closest disciples, virtually all of them are said to have 'psychic' powers. Even Sariputta the archetypal sage of the Wisdom aspect of training has them in plenty. Then a few generations down you have people like Upagupta and his disciples (3rd centruy BCE). In the Mahayana you have the great scholar/philospher Nagarjuna... who btw. is associated with Nagas(Dragon power), and external alchemy and in some sources is said to have lived ~300 years. All of these powers show up as fairly key elements in the lives of Asvaghosa, Fotudeng, Asanga as well (1st - 4th century CE.). In the Theravada you have Buddhaghosa (or other similar commentary writers from that tradition) who writes extensively about how powers are a result of mastering Jhana practice, in modern times you have the Thai forest tradition which is not even slightly associated with esoteric, 'yogic' or energetic practices(at least by the public), yet virtually all of the great masters are said to have one power or another. I doubt I even have to mention the Vajrayana lineage of the 84 mahasiddhas or of people like Milarepa, Padmasambhava and so on.

And these are just the people who were famous enough to have enough texts written about them that they actually survived and permeated into the public. Funnily enough I only had trouble finding accounts of these miracles from later Chinese/Japanese masters, maybe the state control there made them a bit shy about stuff like this, or maybe my quick search was not adequate feel free to drop them in if anyone has any.

I have heard this narrative quite a few times within Buddhism as well, but when you look at the actual lives of the great sages... it's almost as if the tradition is pointing to something here... in my opinion.

[freeform]

11 hours ago, dwai said:

None of this is the domain of "consciousness" per se. These are all functions of the mind, in the dualistic mode of operation. It has no significance

I thought everything is consciousness?! 

 

Just highlighting the differences in tradition. You call it insignificant, in my tradition ‘realisation’, though significant, only marks the first step into spirituality.

 

We’re shooting for realisation - then step by step ‘actualisation’.

 

Realise there’s a magnificent mountain -> climb the mountain.

 

1 hour ago, Piyadasi said:

Do they not? Then why is virtually every great sage of the past said to have had a variety of incredible siddhis?

 

People tend to denigrate that which is beyond their capability.
 

Spoiler

 

[C T]

Milarepa was loaded with yogic siddhis at the time when he unleashed despicable revenge on a whole village.

 

Could be wrong, but I think Dwai's point was somewhat misunderstood.

Personally, I think siddhis and the enlightening journey can be cultivated exclusively. Or inclusively, if so wish.

But one who's a siddhi adept is not necessarily enlightened, and an enlightened being could just be someone who's adept at very ordinary things, which often leads to a natural, gentle and authentic ability to let others close by to glimpse how the mundane and the profound are not two different things. The Flower Ornament Sutra (aka Avatamsaka Sutra) speaks to this quite succinctly ~

 

"Endless action arises from the mind; from action arises the multifarious world. Having understood that the world's true nature is mind, you display bodies of your own in harmony with the world. Having realized that this world is like a dream, and that all Buddhas are like mere reflections, that all principles [dharma] are like an echo, you move unimpeded in the world." 

 

Key word being 'Unimpeded", and to what end this unimpededness is directed. Motivation/intent is worthy of attention.

Carrying water by one who's unimpeded v another who is... the difference can be quite palpable to those who see more, not less, but the interest to marvel at deeds does not perturb the one who's carrying water, unimpeded. So, mundane or profound does not concern the enlightening individual - its the observers that marvel at the constant unfolding of dualistic phenomena. Where siddhis are found by those who seek.

Edited August 17, 2021 by C T

[Piyadasi]

48 minutes ago, C T said:

Milarepa was loaded with yogic siddhis at the time when he unleashed despicable revenge on a whole village.

I don't quite agree with your points, but as far as I understand Milarepa's story there has to be made a disclaimer on this one in particular. I believe the texts make a point of saying that Milarepa was a practitioner of magic essentially, they'd probably call it black magic. The more properly yogic practice he learned later from Marpa and his lineage. There is a distinction in the type of Siddhi after he became a yogic sage. Most traditions, as far as I know, make a big distinction in the type of 'borrowed power' or the type of power that entangles you in more karma, coming from magic and shamanism, and the type coming from internal cultivation, even if sometimes results can seem similar from the outside in some things.

Just my 2 cents on this point.

[old3bob]

any misuse of powers will answer to inductive reactance. (using an electrical term analogy)  Whereas zero resistance to the working of Spirit will have zero reactance...which would be at 100% purity.  (thus not unlike a super conductor in using another electrical analogy)  

 

 

 

 

Edited August 17, 2021 by old3bob

[old3bob]

On 8/15/2021 at 10:09 PM, TranquilTurmoil said:

Spontaneously stumbled into Chan Master Sheng Yen's commentary on Song of Mind.... It seems relevant to the discussion. 

 

I appreciate the quote below to un-blow a blown mind:

 

"Teaching of "Non-form" indicates non-attachment to form.

Misinterpreted, it is adopted as holding to absence of form.

Abiding in no forms at all, one falls into the abyss of void.

Only in no grasping to form or non-form lies true liberation".

 

 

 

Edited August 17, 2021 by old3bob

[TranquilTurmoil]

32 minutes ago, old3bob said:

 

I appreciate the quote below to un-blow a blown mind:

 

"Teaching of "Non-form" indicates non-attachment to form.

Misinterpreted, it is adopted as holding to absence of form.

Abiding in no forms at all, one falls into the abyss of void.

Only in no grasping to form or non-form lies true liberation".

 

 

 

I think your quote as apropos to what I posted to an extent, but my intention wasn’t to negate the Clarity aspect/the awakened mind, but more to express that I think there is good reason to believe that awakening to Self-nature is not the last step on the journey.

 

I certainly find the last line In your quote poignant.