Raze

Frank Yang's video response to Leo's video - about stage Turquoise

260 posts in this topic

On 2021/5/16 at 6:36 PM, Adamq8 said:

Frank Yang is obsessed with "Natural State" as well as cessations.

He speaks of cessation as his GOD or natural state.

Cessation shows that conciousness is impermanent he clearly states, then how come conciousness always comes back etc? 

Does it not clearly show that it brings you instantly back into conciousness?

Since there is no experience of unconciousness, there is only experience knowable?

Just notice that frank too is falling into the trap of labeling experiences or non experience experiences too with the mind.

And he has called him self the Ronnie Coleman of conciousness as well which is a funny statement ?

Things like this just clearly shows that it is still within the individuated Mind to interpret the experiences according to their school of thought. 

But frank yang clearly has a hard on for Leo imo.

My thoughts on Frank is that he is great but somehow it does not feel that he is 100% true about what he speaks about and I do feel that the claim he has been making about certain topics is questionable and untrustworthy.

 

23 hours ago, RedLine said:

No, pure understanding is just silence and peace, it is not a methapisical idea about reality. I have been trap in that solipsistic perception for a while and I I had this deep realizaion recently: both "reality exists" and "reality is imaginary" are false, in the same degree of falsehood; present moment is ARATIONAL

I second quote this.  Both are also true ;) but yes any absolute (or relative) statements about metaphysics at the end completely useless from that place of direct silence 


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 2021/5/16 at 6:36 PM, Adamq8 said:

 

With all that's been said, it all comes down to the difference between Realizing "God", "IT" whatever you wish to call the thing permanently as a perceptual and experiential moment to moment shift vs. having a peak experience and then coming back down to the separated state.  This is what I call the transcendence of self (on meditation or psychedelics) vs the dropping away of self (Realization/permanent shift).   In the latter "Everything is Consciousness", "Reality is Absolute Love" "All Is God" simply vanish. It's very obviously all those are still just projections from the separated state. Nature itself would not label itself as this or that. The simplicity of this cannot be fully appreciated if one is still operating under the separated state. 
 

The reason why I made this video is to make a clear distinction of the 2, since there are not a lot of information on the latter. Adyashanti is the only  popular mainstream teacher I know of who talks about true No-Self from the embodied perspective.  Even teachers like Tolle and Rupert Spira and most of Leo's God stuff are speaking from the One-Mind/Big Mind stage.  Like I said most people confuse I Am Consciousness, I Am Infinity or I Am Nothing with No-Self.  Not making a judgement about their levels of Realizations on those teachers, but simply as an observation base on their teachings.  
 

 

Edited by Being Frank Yang

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Being Frank Yang said:

However I'm still going to venture and say cessations when practiced correctly does make permanent changes to the neurons. Something is done to the brain when you train yourself to die and be unplugged from consciousness hundreds and thousands of times.  The permanent perceptual shifts and moment to moment experience that occur after Fruition cannot be denied.

And I have never denied that. That downward path to emptiness, as I call it, has validity and usefulness. Obviously Buddhists are doing something right with their practices. Namely what they're doing is dissolving the mind/ego. This is important to do, up to a point.

But I would still say that what's missing there is God-realization and Love. That downward path has a reductionistic bias. There is a tendency to reduce everything down to no-mind, and this is not something I'm on board with. I see value in it, but it is not the full path and it is not the highest realization as far as I'm concerned.

I see far too many Buddhist and Neo-advaita types who have no clue what God is and no clue what Love is, and even worse, denying the reality of both, which to me is an abysmal failure. They have reduced consciousness so far down that they lost the most important part. These people are not as conscious as they could be, even if their ego is very dissolved.

Quote

the Natural State being in a different order altogether than both the egoic state and Mystical experiences.

I reject the notion of "mystical experiences". All experience of any kind is Absolute Truth. All states are Absolute Truth.

God-realization and Love is not merely "a mystical experience". That kind of dismissive attitude is what I challenge. Likewise I challenge dismissive attitudes towards the insights revealed by psychedelics. As if psychedelic insights are not the real deal.


You are God. You are Love. You are Infinity. You are Leo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2021 at 8:24 AM, RedLine said:

" from the absolute perspective, all of that is right now imagined to have happened." is a believe you are having in the present moment, so it is not real.

 

You see, I can also play this game so your solipsistic perspective is not more real than my materialistic perspective because both are thoughts that are arising in the present moment. That´s why Leo and Nah discourse doesn´t make sense, because what they are attacking is as false as what they are stating, from the Absolute perspective.

 

All these solipsistic game is just neurosis and dishonest dialectic arguments. The idea "you are imagining everything" is also false because it is an idea!!

Most people going around about "Everything is Imagined", "There is no past, future, present" " there is no me here" certainly don't behave like this in everyday life.  Those are all just ideas.  Some experiences.  And sure those experiences are valid, but it's not the whole picture. It's not an Absolute.  The deepest form of Oneness and Unity includes separateness.  Sure after years of meditation I can perceive the table to be an Infinite 5meo-like holographic projection arising out of the Nothingness of Godhead etc but sometimes a table is just a table.  Show me your emptiness right now. Show me this Eternal Being Awareness. Show me your God and Mystical experiences.  

 

On 5/17/2021 at 8:24 AM, RedLine said:

 

 


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

And I have never denied that. That downward path to emptiness, as I call it, has validity and usefulness. Obviously Buddhists are doing something right with their practices. Namely what they're doing is dissolving the mind/ego. This is important to do, up to a point.

But I would still say that what's missing there is God-realization and Love. That downward path has a reductionistic bias. There is a tendency to reduce everything down to no-mind, and this is not something I'm on board with. I see value in it, but it is not the full path and it is not the highest realization as far as I'm concerned.

I see far too many Buddhist and Neo-advaita types who have no clue what God is and no clue what Love is, and even worse, denying the reality of both, which to me is an abysmal failure. They have reduced consciousness so far down that they lost the most important part. These people are not as conscious as they could be, even if their ego is very dissolved.

I reject the notion of "mystical experiences". All experience of any kind is Absolute Truth. All states are Absolute Truth.

God-realization and Love is not merely "a mystical experience". That kind of dismissive attitude is what I challenge.

 

On board with you there. Yes sir No Mind is not the full picture. Neither is One Mind.  It's the merging of the 2 (Absolute Infinity/Love and Absolute Nothingness) that brings out a much fuller picture. And all of this can include the "I" Realization of NO self does not exclude the conventional self.  Thanks for clarifying.  Non-Duality is just one aspect of existence.  None Locality another.  I think "Uni-Locality" comes closer to what we're ultimately pointing to. 

You are nothing, everything, yet something

You are nowhere, everywhere, yet somewhere

You are nobody, everybody, and a somebody :D


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, RendHeaven said:

Hiiihihihi I gotta go for my morning hike love you all :x

hope everyone is staying safe/ we got 100+ local covid cases here in taiwan for the first time ever everybody is freaking out lol

 


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Oh yeah if you guys are looking for more practicality on what's been discussed.  I find the combination of all KIIINNDS of practice the most suitable for modern practioners.

Vipassana/Theravada Path to Realize emptiness/No-Mind/Non-Being

Vajrayana/Dzogchen style practice to Realize One Mind/Infinite Awareness/Eternal Being

Psychedelics to have quick glimpses, speed up the whole thing, dissolve conditions faster etc

Do both self and Self Inquiry through out by objectifying and labeling every sensation, experience, perception, thought, emotions during the above 3, even insights, as not-this, not-that until you become NOTHING :D and then you'll b EVERYTHING hehe

 

ps taking any of those path to the end point will merge everything into One.

 

Edited by Being Frank Yang

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is anyone else loosing it that @Being Frank Yang and @Leo Gura are talking to each other on here?

I think I just shit myself ?

This is the kind of discussion I’d love to see more of. 


The game of survival cannot be won. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, King Merk said:

So is anyone else loosing it that @Being Frank Yang and @Leo Gura are talking to each other on here?

I think I just shit myself ?

This is the kind of discussion I’d love to see more of. 

The first time I'm experiencing @Leo Gura not telling someone he/she isn't getting it or he/she needs to have more awakenings in order to uncover a full understanding. I'm quite astonished.


The Art of Knowing is Knowing the accumulation of knowledge lies within time, the discovery of Wisdom is attained out of the Mind.

~ https://www.instagram.com/spiritualabsolute ~

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

And I have never denied that. That downward path to emptiness, as I call it, has validity and usefulness. Obviously Buddhists are doing something right with their practices. Namely what they're doing is dissolving the mind/ego. This is important to do, up to a point.

But I would still say that what's missing there is God-realization and Love. That downward path has a reductionistic bias. There is a tendency to reduce everything down to no-mind, and this is not something I'm on board with. I see value in it, but it is not the full path and it is not the highest realization as far as I'm concerned.

 The lowest point can be a portal to the highest one. Or at least it can be. I think it was adyashanti that described it as a limbo zone that proceeds God/Spirit. This really only applies to the meditative path though, psychedelics take you straight to source but it's not the full picture IMO. I feel like both you guys could learn a lot from each other. Or I'm just full of shit xD lol.

1 hour ago, Being Frank Yang said:

It's the merging of the 2 (Absolute Infinity/Love and Absolute Nothingness) that brings out a much fuller picture.

Yes! 

36 minutes ago, King Merk said:

So is anyone else loosing it that @Being Frank Yang and @Leo Gura are talking to each other on here?

I think I just shit myself ?

This is the kind of discussion I’d love to see more of. 

omg I know xD we need a live discussion between the two. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Being Frank Yang said:

It's the merging of the 2 (Absolute Infinity/Love and Absolute Nothingness) that brings out a much fuller picture.

You are nothing, everything, yet something

You are nowhere, everywhere, yet somewhere

You are nobody, everybody, and a somebody :D

Of course.

I have always equated God = Nothingness = Everything = Love = Infinity = Truth = Absolute = One = Many = You = Consciousness

There are many facets to this thing and in the end they are all equate into a perfect Unity.

25 minutes ago, Ry4n said:

The lowest point can be a portal to the highest one. Or at least it can be.

Yes. The y axis is actually a loop. Once you go low enough you start to move up. And once you move up enough you start to move down.


You are God. You are Love. You are Infinity. You are Leo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Ry4n said:

 The lowest point can be a portal to the highest one.

 

Precisely.  Like you said that is the way God Consciousness can be accessed via meditation.  Of course the most gifted may spontaneously hit God Consciousness without stopping the mind at all.


 

Wisdom.  Truth.  Love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Of course.

I have always equated God = Nothingness = Everything = Love = Infinity = Truth = Absolute = One = Many = You = Consciousness

There are many facets to this thing and in the end they are all equate into a perfect Unity.

Yes. The y axis is actually a loop. Once you go low enough you start to move up. And once you move up enough you start to move down.

By love do you mean the emotion as felt by humans? I have always been curious on this particular factor since many creatures are not able to feel this emotion. My strongest trip was DMT on 5 hits of acid, and in this trip most of my emotions cut out and I did not feel love. Only a sense of being overwhelmed.

So I have personally avoided equating God/I (whatever term is most palatable) to specific emotion like Love over others.

My own interpretation of these experiences is that psychedelics shut down the brain to various degrees, the brain being more of a limiter. But certain aspects stay online or are stimulated. One of the most important being the memory function (black/whiteouts being unhelpful). And similarly I think these drugs in some people cause increased feelings of wellbeing, love, euphoria (among other possibilities) - for others they may experience unspeakable terror and dread, or none of these things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing to drop already.

That which thinks its something is already nothing.(illusion)

Perfection was already at hand.

"nothing matters"

The illusion that something mattered just needed to be dropped.

The veil of Illusion needed to dissolve.

 


“Everything is honoured, but nothing matters.” — Eckhart Tolle.

"I have lived on the lip of insanity, wanting to know reasons, knocking on a door. It opens. I've been knocking from the inside." -- Rumi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"An Empty Answer

You want me to “say more” about nothingness. Could anything be more paradoxical for the reader than to try to understand “nothing”?

 

Why? Because most people start from the conviction that there is something which does exist; if nothing more, at least “me”.

 

So, you will not likely appreciate nothingness unless you have come to realization through advaita. At least we will, then, begin without the assumption that a “me” really exists.

 

But even for the realized advatin, there will almost certainly be a presumption that “something” exists in the realm of reality. Even “reality”.

 

Advaita points to ajata, and ajata is about nothingness, or emptiness. The Diamond Sutra of Buddhism, points exclusively to it. Hui Neng, the Sixth Chinese Patriarch, declares flatly: ‘There is nothing from the start.” These sources, among others, set your foot on the path, but recognize that most people are then going to immediately be lost.

 

I have written clearly about advaita, and several have understood what I’ve said. I have spoken, to some of these, about what lies beyond the “Absolute,” and a couple have understood. So I will try to explain it, as best I can.

 

The “ultimate condition” (if any) is nothingness, the complete “absence” of anything—no thing, of any possible description.

 

The (approximate) comprehension of this would be to conceive of “emptiness”, as the emptiness of which not anything could be emptied; pure unassociated emptiness, and not even an emptiness which is within some imagined boundaries.

 

The word “void” could be applied; but this “actuality” is not void of something—in any positive sense.

 

So the nothingness of which we speak is totally empty, free of any subtlety which could even be envisioned.

 

Hence there is not anything “within” it that can be subject to any kind of movement, or even change.

 

Not anything can “come from” nothingness, nor “return” to it. It is not the “origin” of anything.

 

In fact, it could not be applicable to say that it exists, or does not exist. Thus we can’t say that this is the “beginning” condition or the “ending” condition. At best, we could say that (if it were “existent”) it would be the ever-present condition.

 

Yet, it is not an abstraction: its presence is “eternal”.

 

“In” its presence are supposed creatures, and the world and universe they seem to inhabit. But all of these supposed things are “in” nothingness. They have not appeared from nothingness, or out of nothingness, or because of nothingness. In fact, they have not actually “appeared”, except as nothingness.

 

The creatures take their reality, their “existence”, for granted; and thus also the reality or existence of the world and its universe—not knowing that they are nothing.

 

The assumption is: ‘There was a time when I didn’t exist, a time when I existed, and a time when I will no longer exist”. But there are no such times. Not anything has ever “existed”, from the standpoint of nothingness. In nothingness, there is no “time”.

 

What makes this so difficult to understand, is that because we say that “I have existed”, we conclude that there is some thing. And indeed we look around and say there are other things, such as a world or a universe.

 

But the presumption that there was a time when I did not exist (or do; or will not exist) is false: no arising, abiding or decaying exists in nothingness. In other words, not anything “happens” in nothingness.

 

“We” are nothing, the “world” is nothing, the “universe” is nothing. In nothingness, there is neither existence nor nonexistence. There is only nothing.

 

From the standpoint of nothingness, no questions can arise. We can not ask for, nor expect, an explanation: not anything ever happens, in nothingness.

 

The value of this understanding is that not anything really matters. Even understanding this does not matter. All is emptiness. That is the “empty” answer.

 

The scriptures speak of one who is in sahaja samadhi as having “no mind” or an “empty mind”. It is this appreciation of nothingness that is referred to"

- Robert Wolfe


“Everything is honoured, but nothing matters.” — Eckhart Tolle.

"I have lived on the lip of insanity, wanting to know reasons, knocking on a door. It opens. I've been knocking from the inside." -- Rumi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

 

I think the most direct and clearest way to put all those different stages of development and labels under context is the direct Realization on the NATURE OF SENSATIONS. Think of sensations as the atoms of your subjective experience, both inside and outside.  What a meditator does is "zooming" into, deconstruct and dissecting and shred Reality into sensations at the microscopic level.

All sensations are aware of themselves exactly where they are.

All sensations are devoid of self/Self and spontaneously, co-dependently arising  

No sensation "cause" or "own" another cluster of sensation.

Different vibratory velocity of sensations gives rise to the difference between "air", "liquid", "solid forms"

All sensations are in equal footing.

All sensations self-librate.

All sensations are "non-dual" in Nature, as in sensations in of themselves can't tell the difference between "God" or "poop" or "Awareness" or "Consciousness" or "Emptiness" or "Eternity" or "Love" Or "Intentions" "Matter" or "Mind" "Sober" or "Psychedelic Trip", "Time", "Space" etc

And since there is only "one substance", there is no difference between foreground and background, context and content, therefore phenomenons do not arise and pass into some "Source" that is more "real" or "permanent" 

Now the labeling of these experiential phenomenons into concepts is, you guessed it, just more sensations.  

So what's the difference between the awakened state and the egoic state?

in the former the "knots of perception" is forever untied because the nature of sensations is penetrated experientially.  Now all sensations in your entire Field of experience "Lights Up", and are aware of themselves without a delay between the perceiver/observer/Witness and the perceived/observed/Witnessed.  This is your moment to moment experience of Godhead/Infinity/Eternal Awareness because when sensations are experienced without a doer/controller/seer/hearer/thinker all 360 degrees are KNOWN and COMPREHENDED AS ITSELF without the delay between object and subject. Thus Reality feels OMNISCIENT.  

Wheres in the "egoic state" a certain cluster of sensation arise in the center of experience, usually inside the head, behind the eyes, and in places inside the body HIGHJACKS other clusters of sensations to "take credit" for other clusters of sensations that are simply comprehending themselves due to conditioning.  When this happens there's contraction of energy.  There's identification. There's the feeling of "me-ness".  

See when you zoom experiences down to the atomic level (Max effort contraction), when you can no longer divide it, this singularity loops back into the other side (strange loop anyone? haha) and becomes Infinitely Expansive. This is why the practice starts out as dissecting atoms, but at the end you end up "Vipassnalizing the whole universe" The very small is identical to the very large like the merging of quantum mechanics x Cosmology, Love x Death at the subjective level.  The parts is the Whole, the atom is the universe and vice versa.  Now you can get to the same end point either by contraction or expansion, which is why the "Do-Nothing" meditation of Infinite Awareness abiding as Itself is exactly the same as Vipassana.  And of course you can do both during a psychedelic trip :D

When you take this to the end point contraction and expansion happens simultaneously and both sides of the duality lose meaning, and you abide in Absolute Infinity AND Absolute Nothingness simultaneously.  

Now what happens when you do not see clearly the nature of sensations at all levels as empty (AND FULL), is that one particular level is always going to seem more or less "real" or "solidified" than another level, hence contraction occurs, and identification takes place.  Thus clinging and suffering.

Hope this clears some things up!

83302405.jpeg

Edited by Being Frank Yang

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

TOtally agree :)

 

Of course.

I have always equated God = Nothingness = Everything = Love = Infinity = Truth = Absolute = One = Many = You = Consciousness

There are many facets to this thing and in the end they are all equate into a perfect Unity.

Yes. The y axis is actually a loop. Once you go low enough you start to move up. And once you move up enough you start to move down.

1 hour ago, Inliytened1 said:

Precisely.  Like you said that is the way God Consciousness can be accessed via meditation.  Of course the most gifted may spontaneously hit God Consciousness without stopping the mind at all.

19 minutes ago, VeganAwake said:

"An Empty Answer

You want me to “say more” about nothingness. Could anything be more paradoxical for the reader than to try to understand “nothing”?

 

Why? Because most people start from the conviction that there is something which does exist; if nothing more, at least “me”.

 

So, you will not likely appreciate nothingness unless you have come to realization through advaita. At least we will, then, begin without the assumption that a “me” really exists.

 

But even for the realized advatin, there will almost certainly be a presumption that “something” exists in the realm of reality. Even “reality”.

 

Advaita points to ajata, and ajata is about nothingness, or emptiness. The Diamond Sutra of Buddhism, points exclusively to it. Hui Neng, the Sixth Chinese Patriarch, declares flatly: ‘There is nothing from the start.” These sources, among others, set your foot on the path, but recognize that most people are then going to immediately be lost.

 

I have written clearly about advaita, and several have understood what I’ve said. I have spoken, to some of these, about what lies beyond the “Absolute,” and a couple have understood. So I will try to explain it, as best I can.

 

The “ultimate condition” (if any) is nothingness, the complete “absence” of anything—no thing, of any possible description.

 

The (approximate) comprehension of this would be to conceive of “emptiness”, as the emptiness of which not anything could be emptied; pure unassociated emptiness, and not even an emptiness which is within some imagined boundaries.

 

The word “void” could be applied; but this “actuality” is not void of something—in any positive sense.

 

So the nothingness of which we speak is totally empty, free of any subtlety which could even be envisioned.

 

Hence there is not anything “within” it that can be subject to any kind of movement, or even change.

 

Not anything can “come from” nothingness, nor “return” to it. It is not the “origin” of anything.

 

In fact, it could not be applicable to say that it exists, or does not exist. Thus we can’t say that this is the “beginning” condition or the “ending” condition. At best, we could say that (if it were “existent”) it would be the ever-present condition.

 

Yet, it is not an abstraction: its presence is “eternal”.

 

“In” its presence are supposed creatures, and the world and universe they seem to inhabit. But all of these supposed things are “in” nothingness. They have not appeared from nothingness, or out of nothingness, or because of nothingness. In fact, they have not actually “appeared”, except as nothingness.

 

The creatures take their reality, their “existence”, for granted; and thus also the reality or existence of the world and its universe—not knowing that they are nothing.

 

The assumption is: ‘There was a time when I didn’t exist, a time when I existed, and a time when I will no longer exist”. But there are no such times. Not anything has ever “existed”, from the standpoint of nothingness. In nothingness, there is no “time”.

 

What makes this so difficult to understand, is that because we say that “I have existed”, we conclude that there is some thing. And indeed we look around and say there are other things, such as a world or a universe.

 

But the presumption that there was a time when I did not exist (or do; or will not exist) is false: no arising, abiding or decaying exists in nothingness. In other words, not anything “happens” in nothingness.

 

“We” are nothing, the “world” is nothing, the “universe” is nothing. In nothingness, there is neither existence nor nonexistence. There is only nothing.

 

From the standpoint of nothingness, no questions can arise. We can not ask for, nor expect, an explanation: not anything ever happens, in nothingness.

 

The value of this understanding is that not anything really matters. Even understanding this does not matter. All is emptiness. That is the “empty” answer.

 

The scriptures speak of one who is in sahaja samadhi as having “no mind” or an “empty mind”. It is this appreciation of nothingness that is referred to"

- Robert Wolfe

All this is too theoretical. see above post  


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RMQualtrough said:

By love do you mean the emotion as felt by humans?

Certainly not.

Quote

So I have personally avoided equating God/I (whatever term is most palatable) to specific emotion like Love over others.

You are not conscious of what Love is.

- - - - -

51 minutes ago, Being Frank Yang said:

All sensations are "non-dual" in Nature, as in sensations in of themselves can't tell the difference between "God" or "poop" or "Awareness" or "Consciousness" or "Emptiness" or "Eternity" or "Love" Or "Intentions" "Matter" or "Mind" "Sober" or "Psychedelic Trip", "Time", "Space" etc

Actually I disagree with this Vipassana approach. It's too reductionistic. I understand what you are saying: you can deconstruct experience into discrete sensations and so forth as Vipassana loves to do, and this can be very useful and liberating. But this is not the same thing as a holistic consciousness of what things are. It's the spiritual equivalent of saying that the physical universe is nothing more than atoms. And this not correct. There is an understanding beyond the sum of its parts. Which is precisely why Vipassana people are not God-realized. They don't know what God is because you cannot know God by breaking experience down into atoms. I would further say that you cannot know what Consciousness is that way either.

There is a holistic infinite intelligence to Consciousness which is not any of its parts.

God is not any one sensation, nor can it be said to be just another experience among all the other experiences, like a table or a dog.

It is sort of like one who cannot recognize a human as a human because one insists on only seeing it as a bunch of cells. And what I'm pointing out is that something very important is missed in that approach. In fact, THE most important thing is missed. The goal should not be to atomize consciousness, but rather to interconnect it all infinitely to reach the highest understanding.

People like Shinzen Young, who spent 40 years in Vipassana deconstructing sensations are not God-realized. I questioned him very carefully. He does not understand what God is. He's a sweet and beautiful man, but God-realized he is not, and I don't want you to get trapped in that way.

People like Daniel Ingram also do not understand what God is -- even though Ingram has extraordinary technical meditative skill. Technical meditative skill is not good enough. Losing the ego is also not enough. What's missing is a holistic universal comprehension achieved by Infinite Mind. The Universe can grasp itself using its own Infinite Intelligence. And Intelligence is not any one sensation so you will never find it if you insist on only looking at individual sensations. It is the classic problem of missing the forest for the trees. Vipassana is like studying trees with a microscope and never seeing the forest.


You are God. You are Love. You are Infinity. You are Leo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Being Frank Yang said:

 

I think the most direct and clearest way to put all those different stages of development and labels under context is the direct Realization on the NATURE OF SENSATIONS. Think of sensations as the atoms of your subjective experience, both inside and outside.  What a meditator does is "zooming" into, deconstruct and dissecting and shred Reality into sensations at the microscopic level.

All sensations are aware of themselves exactly where they are.

All sensations are devoid of self/Self and spontaneously, co-dependently arising  

No sensation "cause" or "own" another cluster of sensation.

Different vibratory velocity of sensations gives rise to the difference between "air", "liquid", "solid forms"

All sensations are in equal footing.

All sensations self-librate.

All sensations are "non-dual" in Nature, as in sensations in of themselves can't tell the difference between "God" or "poop" or "Awareness" or "Consciousness" or "Emptiness" or "Eternity" or "Love" Or "Intentions" "Matter" or "Mind" "Sober" or "Psychedelic Trip", "Time", "Space" etc

And since there is only "one substance", there is no difference between foreground and background, context and content, therefore phenomenons do not arise and pass into some "Source" that is more "real" or "permanent" 

Now the labeling of these experiential phenomenons into concepts is, you guessed it, just more sensations.  

So what's the difference between the awakened state and the egoic state?

in the former the "knots of perception" is forever untied because the nature of sensations is penetrated experientially.  Now all sensations in your entire Field of experience "Lights Up", and are aware of themselves without a delay between the perceiver/observer/Witness and the perceived/observed/Witnessed.  This is your moment to moment experience of Godhead/Infinity/Eternal Awareness because when sensations are experienced without a doer/controller/seer/hearer/thinker all 360 degrees are KNOWN and COMPREHENDED AS ITSELF without the delay between object and subject. Thus Reality feels OMNISCIENT.  

Wheres in the "egoic state" a certain cluster of sensation arise in the center of experience, usually inside the head, behind the eyes, and in places inside the body HIGHJACKS other clusters of sensations to "take credit" for other clusters of sensations that are simply comprehending themselves due to conditioning.  When this happens there's contraction of energy.  There's identification. There's the feeling of "me-ness".  

See when you zoom experiences down to the atomic level (Max effort contraction), when you can no longer divide it, this singularity loops back into the other side (strange loop anyone? haha) and becomes Infinitely Expansive. This is why the practice starts out as dissecting atoms, but at the end you end up "Vipassnalizing the whole universe" The very small is identical to the very large like the merging of quantum mechanics x Cosmology, Love x Death at the subjective level.  The parts is the Whole, the atom is the universe and vice versa.  Now you can get to the same end point either by contraction or expansion, which is why the "Do-Nothing" meditation of Infinite Awareness abiding as Itself is exactly the same as Vipassana.  And of course you can do both during a psychedelic trip :D

When you take this to the end point contraction and expansion happens simultaneously and both sides of the duality lose meaning, and you abide in Absolute Infinity AND Absolute Nothingness simultaneously.  

Now what happens when you do not see clearly the nature of sensations at all levels as empty (AND FULL), is that one particular level is always going to seem more or less "real" or "solidified" than another level, hence contraction occurs, and identification takes place.  Thus clinging and suffering.

Hope this clears some things up!

83302405.jpeg

So wtf is the "Natural State"? It's simply a state of total equanimity where all sensations simply arise as they are without any one cluster "taking credit" and becoming "more solidified" or "Absolute" than another. That's it ! And my definition the Natural State does not exclude any states, you're simply not identified with any of it because there is no "center" or "subject" to "own" any level of sensations. 


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now