It is said to understand the nature of the mind is to be enlightened. It is said to understand the nature of the mind is to be free from suffering and attachment. I want to understand the nature of the mind.
There is nothing the mind cannot make "real". Everything can be "real" in the mind: thoughts, emotional imagination, correct or incorrect views. The mind animates everything. Everything "real" in the mind is limited in time. Everything "real" in the mind passes. One who has a body is disillusioned by the mind. Is everything the mind animates exactly "real"? One who has a body certainly has images coming from the mind. But everything that emerges in the mind has no necessity. It can be that or the other. It is equal. Mind is infinite, as it can animate anything. The images that come from the mind have no rules. They are similar to dreams when one sleeps. And we are attached to these images, to these dreams. Attachment has great consequences.
To understand the nature of the mind is to look at consequences. The mind creates images. These images become demands. When images become demands, there is attachment. When there is attachment, there will be suffering. Images have no necessity. When one demands an image to be life or to be experience, one demands a dream to manifest, to exist. And one reduces life. Life is always more than a demand. One demands what should be. We somehow overlook our forceful nature. We do not seem to understand that our obsession and desire to exist led us astray. We deny life. We insist on existing, so we make images our demands for what is. There is now a duality between images and experience, images and life, conflict and harmony. And we live with this duality throughout our life.
Our life is lived through duality. We are trapped in cause and effect. We desire and we hope. Duality is everywhere. The images from our mind are not just images they are our demands.
When we demand existence, we demand to be. To be is to be permanent. To be is to be unmoving. To be is to be dead. We can only ever be one thing, which is dead. That is exactly to say that, while we are alive, everything is false. "All characteristics are false". "All phenomena are from the mind". The words, are just words. They are false too. The words are "rafts to reach the other shore", "to reach the opposite shore of the sea of existence". The nature of the mind is great. Its capacity is infinite. This is "the voidness of non-void". And attachment to existence is incorrect.
The source of the mind's animation is obscure. It has no logic, it has no predictability. Hence we say it has no necessity. It can be that or the other; it's equal. The agitation of the mind is an experience of alterity for one who has a body. The source of the mind's animation is unknown, and the mind is vast and infinite. To one who has a body, this source is the first alterity, as it is foreign, unpredictable, uncontrollable. This mysterious source gives birth to a frontier, to a fragmentation, to a duality.
As I examine and find this idea of duality. I am forced to question: what is looking? Is it still the mind and its images that are looking at itself, or is it something else that is looking? This idea of duality calls for a question: Is there something else other than the mind that can register what I examine? I feel there is a noticing energy that can register the mind's animation. The question here is: Is there something that can register the mind's nature in one who has a body? Or is consciousness the mind?
To investigate the nature of the mind is exploring what is looking.
If it is the mind that is looking at its own images by a dedoubling trick that has gone almost unnoticed, then when we look we never really leave the mind. The mind is commenting on the mind. And hence the mind is infinite. The mind is consciousness. Everything is mind. Any phenomenon is mind. And we said the image coming from the mind has no necessity, so the mind itself has no necessity. It is vast, and it is infinite.
If there is something else that is looking at the mind, this noticing energy, which I do not try to define yet. Then there is the mind and something that can look at the images of the mind. This energy registers all the animations of the mind and it is not the mind. If this energy is real, then I notice that I cannot go further in doubling the question "what is looking at the energy itself?". I've reached the bottom. Because if I ask "what is looking to recognize this energy? Is there another entity looking at the energy itself?" And without answering, we see that by this recursive thinking, we can ask the same question for ever. The question "What is looking?" becomes essentially endless. It will be echoed endlessly. We can endlessly add another level of "what is looking" which is false. Do not believe. Think with your body. You might want me to demonstrate every point as an equation which is a default of our culture.
This is not perfect mathematical reasoning, and I don't intend it to be. But these two considerations don't appear mutually exclusive. They're not mutually exclusive because the question "Is this energy an image of the mind as well?" is relevant. This noticing energy is an image of the mind. But it is also a reality. And therefore there is no duality between this energy and this image. This seeing energy is a reality, because one who has a body has already experienced the interval between two thoughts, the interval between two images. In this quiet interval, without image, without animation, without thoughts, there is no chaos, there is no demand. There is an energy that's still registered this interval, this moment, this instant.
So the nature of the mind is to create images that have no necessity. Images or thoughts are expressed with words.This is mentation. Words are false as they are images. Images are false as they are from the mind. Characteristic are false because they are from the mind. The mind "possesses things and is without things. It is a single thing, and it extends over ten thousand things". "This is the Mysterious Understanding." With this clarity attachment is not. And there is a noticing energy that can see it all. We cannot deny this noticing energy because we continue to see in between two images from the mind.
So our life is indeed suffering. We have images and we are so attached to them. But one can see and be liberated. Our life is a tsunami in a glass. And it can be seen for what it is. We live in duality, because we demand existence and non-existence. We demand frontier. What if there was a Way beyond any duality? Beyond "To be or not to be?" This is understanding or seeing self-nature for some. And to be liberated is to never stop seeing the nature of the mind. To be liberated is to see there is no liberation. When we endlessly see the nature of our mind, we meditate every instant and we understand the tempting simplicity of existence and non-existence. We have no self because there is nothing that is not ourselves. And "serenity is the final word of all teachings".
The mind gives images.
Images are turned in demands.
Hence duality is.
As one who has a body cannot fathom non-existence
Attachement emerges.
Conflict is suffering.
Seeing the nature of the mind is to transcend duality.
Devoid of duality there is emptiness.
Emptiness is liberation.
Emptiness is still an image.
Understanding happens mid-sentence.
Words are false.
Buddha said "there is no enlightenment"
They ask for an absolute? Give them the mundane.
They ask for the mundane? Give them an absolute.
This is or is not a rhythm