Dzogchen/Awareness

[Ground]

The themes of ineffability and openness and the corresponding similes mirror and space have to be seen in the context of what has been said earlier here: That the natural mind as ground of being is located in the heart (thus 'heart mind' may be an adequate expression too) and connected with the center of eyes by a light channel.
This means that the eyes are very important already in the context of trekchod because the 'seeing that does not see anything' has to witness what has been said before about ineffability and openness and mirror and space. This is necessary because it is the brain that does synthesize concepts and intuitions and 'pure seeing' with 'heart mind', the natural mind which actually is the ground of being, which is empty of concepts and empty of intuitions, can only be established through bypassing the secondary channels that originate from the brain and that do add the brain's products concept and intuition.
Only the eye's seeing being empty of anything is also empty of all kinds of imaginations and can authentically witness and thus foster certainty. If the view is based on ordinary mind then the view is conditioned and wavering and transient since it is stained with transient inauthentic intuitions.
Since the view of trekchod is authentically based on the eyes' seeing there is actually a smooth transition from dzogchen trekchod to dzogchen thodgal and stable establishment of trekchod will necessarily entail thodgal. Thus trekchod and thodgal are neither inherently different nor inherently identical but only 'two sides of the same coin'.

[Ground]

What is essential with trekchod thus is to not fall into the trap of meditation. Meditation is produced by ordinary mind and has nothing to to with awareness as the ground of being. Actually meditation is the opposite of awareness. That is why one has to see with one's own open eyes that nothing at all is seen and that it is not even oneself that is seeing. There is utter expansive openness in the sphere of ineffable absence of all and everything incl. oneself.

This shows that awareness can only shine through by chance although it is continuously present. If one tries to force it with methods like e.g. meditation one is bound to fail.
It is not to be cultivated, there is absence of any kind of acceptance or rejection too, there is no transition or change, no distraction or non-distraction.
Usually it is encountered through direct introduction and that which may directly introduce may be any phenomenon or explicit information at the right time and in the right place.
Conducive may be but not necessarily are total relaxation and absolute non-doing which not to be confused with rejection of or conciously avoiding doing.

[Ground]

One might wonder 'Why is the eye sense so important? There are still the other senses of hearing, smelling, tasting, touching.'
The answer is that the eye sense is the dominant sense which conditions the appearance of physical body and the outer sphere outside of the body and thus conditions the impressions of the other senses and their alleged 'outer' causes.
Therefore when the seeing does not see anything this affects the other senses too in that these do not sense anything either. The light as kind of 'carrier' of all senses is the same pristine cognition.
In this way openness and ineffability reveal the inseparable three dimensions of the ground of being: dharma-kāya as emptiness, saṃbhoga-kāya as the spontaneously present nature lucidity and nirmāṇa-kāya as continuous self-manifestations of that nature.

[Ground]

Now having mentioned the three kayas and the spontaneously present nature of all and everything this would be the point to go on to the third essential theme of dzogchen which is spontaneous presence and the corresponding similes of crystal and space which formally belong to dzogchen thodgal.

However liberation already comes about with the themes ineffability and openness of dzogchen trekchod and the realization of these views.
Everything is already perfect and wholly positive from the outset and so there is nothing to do and that has been revealed by the information about ineffability and openness.

Once the themes ineffability and openness and their interconnectedness are realized there is immersion in awareness as a state of imperturbable rest not cultivated in meditation and the view of thodgal will be naturally and effortlessly revealed too - all the more as the simile of the crystal has already arisen above.

One has to be careful to not fall into the trap of a conditioned view of a graded path where first there is trekchod and then comes thodgal because this would be totally at odds with authentic dzogchen.

[Ground]

Originally Posted by Ground

However liberation already comes about with the themes ineffability and openness of dzogchen trekchod and the realization of these views.

What is this liberation in dzogchen?
It is self-liberation which means that all phenomena be they sense objects or feelings or emotions or thoughts self-liberate.
In the very moment sense objects appear they self-liberate into ineffable absence and openness like space.
Therefore feelings of like and dislike and emotions cannot arise in the aftermath of the arising of sense objects.
In the very moment thoughts are on the verge of arising they self-liberate into the space of natural mind.
Natural empty lucidity.

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by Ground

What is this liberation in dzogchen?
It is self-liberation which means that all phenomena be they sense objects or feelings or emotions or thoughts self-liberate.
In the very moment sense objects appear they self-liberate into ineffable absence and openness like space.
Therefore feelings of like and dislike and emotions cannot arise in the aftermath of the arising of sense objects.
In the very moment thoughts are on the verge of arising they self-liberate into the space of natural mind.
Natural empty lucidity.

So this natural empty lucidity, are your saying that one is liberated from feelings/emotions meaning they are not engaging them at all? Or more experiencing them but liberated from them because the natural empty lucidity doesn't contain itself as right/wrong/like/dislike in that space or open state? It seems to read to me like you become the awareness and in the natural mind and openness, that space allows you to expand more open, without attaching to anything.

Can you do an example of how one would in the experience something and how it would be experienced through the process of that point with this awareness your showing above?

[Ground]

Originally Posted by naturesflow

So this natural empty lucidity, are your saying that one is liberated from feelings/emotions meaning they are not engaging them at all? Or more experiencing them but liberated from them because the natural empty lucidity doesn't contain itself as right/wrong/like/dislike in that space or open state?

If authentically immersed in awareness which is not cultivated in meditation there simply are no feelings and emotions.
This is similar to buddhist dependent origination where 'contact' (phassa) is the prerequisite for feelings on a scale from 'like' to 'dislike' to arise. And only on the basis of such feelings can emotions arise.
The absence of feelings and emotions does not mean any emotionally 'negative' state because emotions are merely absent. It is not that 'good' or 'nice' emotions would be replaced by a kind of depression because depression as an emotional state of course is impossible too. On the contrary occasionally there may arise - but not necessarily do arise - kind of 'blissful states' beyond emotions and beyond someone experiencing them.


Only in the sphere of inauthentic awareness which is ordinary consciousness is it possible for feelings/emotions to arise. Then there may arise a recollection based on conceptuality similar to 'Oh wait it is like this ...' which may - with more or less effort - entail a dissolution of feelings/emotions, so that they are let go of once they have arisen.

Originally Posted by naturesflow

It seems to read to me like you become the awareness and in the natural mind and openness, that space allows you to expand more open, without attaching to anything.

Similar to what you say, but actually there is no becoming of anything, not even my'self' becoming anything because awareness is nonconceptual timelessly empty knowing spontaneously present.

Originally Posted by naturesflow

Can you do an example of how one would in the experience something and how it would be experienced through the process of that point with this awareness your showing above?

Example? Better to take another simile ... the sun and its rays. Ths sun and its rays are neither inherently different not inherently identical. The ground of being which is awareness may be likened to the sun. Phenomena are seen merely because the rays of the sun illuminates them. So the rays of the sun and phenomena are neither inherently different not inherently identical as is the case with the sun and its rays. Therefore in a sense phenomena are the light of the sun, are the sun's self-manifestations.
However the energy of the rays of the sun may also cause fog and clouds due to humidity. In the context of the simile these clouds are feelings/emotions. Phenomena become kind of blurred by feelings/emotions so that their context of being the sun's self manifestation gets blurred.

[Ground]

Originally Posted by Ground

If authentically immersed in awareness which is not cultivated in meditation there simply are no feelings and emotions.
This is similar to buddhist dependent origination where 'contact' (phassa) is the prerequisite for feelings on a scale from 'like' to 'dislike' to arise. And only on the basis of such feelings can emotions arise.
...

just noticed ... above I should have written:

'This is similar to buddhist dependent cessation ...' because in authentic awareness no feelings or emotions arise whereas feelings and emotions arise similar to buddhist dependent origination in the context of ordinary mind, i.e. inauthentic awareness.

[Dependent origination:]
"... From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. ...
...
"And what is contact? These six are classes of contact: eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, intellect-contact. This is called contact.
...
[Dependent cessation:]
...From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. ..."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....002.than.html

'Cessation of contact' seems to be a matching expression due to the ineffable absence of spontaneously appearing sense objects.

This quote nicely matches too

Originally Posted by Longchen Rabjam, The Precious Treasury of The Way of Abiding, Padma Publishing 1998

One implication is that equipoise constitutes a state of imperturbable
rest in the 'interval' between objects and mind.

'interval' implies that there is no contact but a kind of 'gap' between mind and sense objects and this 'gap' between mind and sense objects is a kind of metaphor for spontaneously present authentic awareness.

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by Ground

If authentically immersed in awareness which is not cultivated in meditation there simply are no feelings and emotions.
This is similar to buddhist dependent origination where 'contact' (phassa) is the prerequisite for feelings on a scale from 'like' to 'dislike' to arise. And only on the basis of such feelings can emotions arise.
The absence of feelings and emotions does not mean any emotionally 'negative' state because emotions are merely absent. It is not that 'good' or 'nice' emotions would be replaced by a kind of depression because depression as an emotional state of course is impossible too. On the contrary occasionally there may arise - but not necessarily do arise - kind of 'blissful states' beyond emotions and beyond someone experiencing them.

Got it! Thanks.

Only in the sphere of inauthentic awareness which is ordinary consciousness is it possible for feelings/emotions to arise. Then there may arise a recollection based on conceptuality similar to 'Oh wait it is like this ...' which may - with more or less effort - entail a dissolution of feelings/emotions, so that they are let go of once they have arisen.

That is clear now.

Similar to what you say, but actually there is no becoming of anything, not even my'self' becoming anything because awareness is nonconceptual timelessly empty knowing spontaneously present.

Yes, I can now see how this is and can be. My question about this to you. How would one determine themselves coming from the place of timelessly empty knowing spontaneously present awareness? I mean if you are noticing yourself as all this, what would you be noticing in yourself in the relating side of this awareness?

Example? Better to take another simile ... the sun and its rays. Ths sun and its rays are neither inherently different not inherently identical. The ground of being which is awareness may be likened to the sun. Phenomena are seen merely because the rays of the sun illuminates them. So the rays of the sun and phenomena are neither inherently different not inherently identical as is the case with the sun and its rays. Therefore in a sense phenomena are the light of the sun, are the sun's self-manifestations.
However the energy of the rays of the sun may also cause fog and clouds due to humidity. In the context of the simile these clouds are feelings/emotions. Phenomena become kind of blurred by feelings/emotions so that their context of being the sun's self manifestation gets blurred.

Ok that is much clearer now. So in the question I asked above I suppose the awareness is always present, but the feeling and emotions form a veil over what just is "aware".. How does one know the difference in themselves if they are coming from clarity or coming through the veil clouding and blurring. Or doesn't it matter? I liken this to the awareness of oneself in process for example. If you are aware of yourself no longer needing to process emotions but rather consciously aware of yourself beyond them, I imagine this balance of being, would give a more clear picture of oneself as all this relating..

[shiningstars]

Originally Posted by naturesflow

Ok that is much clearer now. So in the question I asked above I suppose the awareness is always present, but the feeling and emotions form a veil over what just is "aware".. How does one know the difference in themselves if they are coming from clarity or coming through the veil clouding and blurring. Or doesn't it matter?

Yes, it matters. Only practice (and in this Sub-Forum context, Buddhist practice) reveals, tests and affirms genuine clarity.

For eg. emotions do not always create a veil, but in the preliminsry stages they do.

shiningstars