Your idea of an essence is a (formless) ontological essence. There is no such unchanging ontological essence. Buddha nature is empty of such an essence, there is no substantial reality at all. It is empty of inherent existence, it is not an ontological essence that is formless/attributeless...
When something arises due to conditions, then it cannot be said that 'awareness makes choice'.
Awareness is just awareness, it is just the quality of cognizance manifesting as everything. Making choice is an activity that arises due to conditions. Ever heard of the term "choiceless awareness?"...
He is talking about himself in terms of worldly parlance. He does not conceive of a self however - he understands he is merely using worldly parlance. This too, he has explained before.
In Anatta, there is no "who" or "what" at all, there is just discernment, grasping, releasing, suffering, cessation of suffering, etc. But before getting into all that...
First of all, your notion of awareness as having 'will', 'intention', 'choice' is itself not the refined or transparent...
The question "what" or "who" is wrong... as the Buddha explained in Phagguna Sutta (see Phagguna Sutta: To Phagguna ) you not should ask "what" or "who" (since there isn't a self-entity behind action and experience) but "with what condition?" There is influence, choice, intentions, which also...
When someone reports enlightenment, it doesn't necessarily mean the same type of enlightenment. There are many enlightenment, i.e. Awakening to Reality: Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment
As to Buddhas before Gautama, the answer is yes but the teachings of the previous Buddha...
Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche, from 'On Buddha Essence: A Commentary on Rangjung Dorje's Treatise':
"The ordinary mind is just the natural or uncontrived state or the essence of mind. For that reason, the buddhas, bodhisattvas, and siddhas, those who are realized, are not in any way improving...
From a post by Loppon Namdrol:
Listen -- you will have to forgive us. These endless discussions about rebirth are tiresome. We don't care. Either you accept it or you don't. If you don't fine. But there is no doubt that rebirth was the Buddha's teaching. People who cannot accept that, cannot...
There is teachings that does teach mental, and logical reasoning, and then it comes down to one's own experiential investigation.
Why don't you read Greg Goode's work on the Advaita teacher Sri Atmananda's teachings. There's a book out there called the Direct Path, but here's a short version...
I was not talking to apophenia.
"I know the truth" - I wonder where you see me said that? But anyway yes, whever I realized, I have realized and am undoubtable. This is again like I said, merely worldly parlance.
This is what the Buddha said:
Ariyapariyesana Sutta: The Noble Search...
There is no dualistic seeing at all. There is no 'I am seeing it'. There is no seer-seeing-seen. There is only BEING. This BEING is simply existence-consciousness-presence, an undoubtable certainty of Being. I wrote this in my book very clearly. What I describe as Self-Realization is exactly...
Originally there is no higher or lower, but a sentient being's delusion is deep - with different levels of dualistic and inherent view obscuring our true nature, the inseparability of luminosity and emptiness. Even having whatever glimpses of pristine awareness is not going to resolve these...
Yes, as I already said, the I AM is not seen as an object of observation but a pure subject. It can however be directly realized and is not an inferrential matter.
Different scripture and person has diferrent explanation of the term. "I Am" means the Self for Ramana Maharshi and myself, not mind or ego. It is seen as Turiya.
Turiya = I AM/the Witness. It is seen as the unchanging background behind three states. Then comes Turiyatita, when even the Witness...
I am very happy here and now, be it typing online or not typing online.
Every moment is luminosity-bliss, effortless and perpetual.
The transience is luminosity-bliss - but not that it is ever lost. (I wonder if you read my reply on previous page)
First mature the I AM realization-experience in terms of four aspects:
Impersonality (dissolving sense of personality can lead to the feeling like one is 'an expression of' or 'being lived' by a cosmic source), intensity of luminosity (until one can have an experience of seeing, hearing...
Atman is seen as all-pervading, and is also simultaneously held to be the Eternal Witness, or a One Mind depending on the person's insight.
I will not debate on Tathagatagarbha doctrine here - but Loppon Namdrol already made it clear that this doctrine has many explanation depending on which...
A view of self is not the same as Presence. They need to be separated.
Apart from the I AM, do you realize that a passing sight, a passing sound is as vivid, clear, present, non-dual, as the I AM? Do you then see that there is no ultimate state of Presence, but only Presence unfolding as...