Chat with ChatGPT about Suchness

I am not enlightened, and there is something that still bugs me about this. Chat with ChatGPT to reinforce some ideas and approaches.

Is there an irony on blogging about these things? Well as a kid I was bewildered by no one having written about these things. How much easier if you can see it worked out for you rather than do yourself. So driven by that wish I blog, but at same time it is limited. However reality and truth are already there, the falling short of various blogs is just more the limited nature of reality being expressed. A person may be limited by mortality, but when did that ever stop us! A blog may be limited by words but...

===

 in Buddhism what is the meaning of suchness

ChatGPT said:

In Buddhism, suchness (Sanskrit: tathatā, Pali: tathatā) refers to the true nature of reality as it is, beyond conceptualization, labels, or dualistic distinctions. It expresses the idea that all things simply are what they are, without artificial constructs or subjective interpretations imposed by the mind.

Key Aspects of Suchness (Tathatā):

1. Unchanging Reality: It signifies the way things exist in their pure, unmodified state.
2. Beyond Duality: Suchness is free from distinctions like good/bad, self/other, existence/non-existence.
3. Direct Experience: It can only be realized through direct insight, not through intellectual reasoning.
4. Fundamental to Enlightenment: Recognizing suchness is essential in Mahāyāna Buddhism, particularly in schools like Zen and Madhyamaka, where understanding the ultimate nature of reality leads to liberation.

In Zen Buddhism, tathatā is closely linked with living in the present moment and directly experiencing reality without mental interference.

Would you like to explore how this concept applies to daily life or meditation?

You said:

What is the relationship between being conscious and realising suchness

ChatGPT said:

The relationship between being conscious and realizing suchness (tathatā) is deeply connected to awareness, perception, and the nature of mind in Buddhism.

1. Consciousness vs. Awareness in Buddhism

• Ordinary Consciousness (Vijñāna): This refers to the dualistic, conditioned mind that perceives the world through concepts, labels, and distinctions. It is always filtering reality through thoughts, emotions, and past experiences.
• Pure Awareness (Prajñā or Rigpa in Dzogchen): This is direct, non-dual awareness that sees reality as it is—without distortion. It aligns closely with the realization of suchness.

2. How Realizing Suchness Transforms Consciousness

• When we cling to thoughts and perceptions, we create an illusion of separation between "self" and "world."
• Realizing suchness means seeing through this illusion—recognizing that all things simply are, without labels or mental constructs.
• This awakening moves consciousness from a state of grasping to a state of pure, direct awareness.

3. Meditation as a Bridge Between Consciousness and Suchness

• Mindfulness (Vipassanā): Observing thoughts and sensations without attachment helps one see their impermanent and conditioned nature.
• Non-conceptual Awareness (Dzogchen, Zen, Madhyamaka): Letting go of all mental constructs leads to the direct experience of suchness.

4. Living with Suchness

A person who realizes suchness lives with spontaneity, openness, and freedom from attachment. They respond to life naturally without clinging to fixed views. This is the essence of enlightenment—not an altered state, but seeing things exactly as they are.

Would you like to explore a specific practice to cultivate this awareness?

You said:

Could we say that the world manifests and is real in the present moment. This sense of reality of it being present is close to suchness?

ChatGPT said:

Yes, exactly! The world manifests and is real only in the present moment, and the immediacy of this presence is very close to suchness (tathatā).

Suchness as the Reality of the Present Moment

• The present moment is the only reality we can directly experience.
• When we drop conceptual overlays (past memories, future anxieties, mental labels), what remains is just this—the raw, direct experience of what is.
• This unfiltered presence is suchness. Things are as they are, without needing interpretation or division.

Why the Present Moment is the Gateway to Suchness

• When we are fully present, we experience reality before the mind divides it into categories.
• Suchness is not something special or hidden—it’s simply the world, exactly as it appears, without mental projection.
• This is why Zen masters point to everyday activities (drinking tea, hearing a bird, feeling the wind) as expressions of enlightenment—because in those moments, reality is just itself.

Beyond "Real" and "Unreal"

• In Buddhist thought (especially in Madhyamaka), clinging to "real" vs. "unreal" is already a mental construct.
• The world is not an illusion in the sense of "not existing"—it is real in its suchness, but empty of fixed, independent existence.

So yes, the felt presence of the world in the now is deeply connected to suchness. The key is to experience it without grasping, without rejecting, just as it is.

Would you say you’ve had moments where reality felt raw, vivid, and immediate—like suchness revealing itself?

You said:

is the presence of say thoughts and memories themselves express suchness. If we see them as they are? The mind for example perceives things and this is actually available to see in the present moment.

ChatGPT said:

Yes, absolutely! Thoughts, memories, and perceptions themselves express suchness—if we see them as they are, without clinging or resisting.

Suchness Includes Everything—Even the Mind

• Many people think of suchness as something "out there" in the external world (the trees, the wind, the sounds).
• But suchness includes everything—even thoughts, emotions, and memories.
• If a thought arises, it is just a thought—it manifests in the present moment, and in that sense, it has the same suchness as a sound or a breeze.

Seeing the Mind as It Is

• The mind perceives, thinks, remembers—that is its nature.
• If we see this activity without judging, analyzing, or identifying with it, we see that the mind itself is an expression of suchness.
• A Zen phrase describes this well: "When thinking, just think. When remembering, just remember."

The Key is Non-Clinging

• The problem is not thoughts or memories themselves, but our habit of grasping onto them or pushing them away.
• If we take a step back and simply watch them arise and pass, we see that they are just like clouds drifting in the sky—temporary, yet fully real in their moment of appearance.
• When we experience them this way, they are no longer distractions; they are just part of the unfolding suchness of the present moment.

Practical Example

• Imagine a memory of childhood arises. Instead of getting lost in nostalgia or regret, you just see it as a memory, appearing now.
• It has no inherent weight—it is simply the mind doing what it does.
• This is direct experience—seeing everything, even thoughts, as they are.

So yes—the presence of thoughts, memories, and perceptions is itself suchness, as long as we experience them with clarity and openness, without trying to hold on or push away.

Does this way of seeing thoughts resonate with you? Have you noticed this in meditation or daily life?

You said:

Is the key to grasping that we think things like "thoughts" belong to us. But actually nothing belongs to us and is free to come and go of its own accord.

ChatGPT said:

Yes, that’s exactly it! The key to grasping is the belief that thoughts, emotions, and experiences belong to us, when in reality, they arise and pass on their own, like clouds in the sky.

The Illusion of Ownership

• We often think, "These are my thoughts, my feelings, my experiences."
• But if we observe closely, we don’t actually control what thoughts appear—they just come and go on their own.
• This belief in ownership creates attachment—we cling to pleasant thoughts, resist painful ones, and identify with the mental stream as "me."

Thoughts are Free, Just Like Everything Else

• A thought arises spontaneously—we don’t summon it.
• If we don’t cling, it passes away without struggle.
• This applies not just to thoughts but to everything—emotions, sensations, perceptions.

The Self is Just Another Thought

• The idea of a "self" that owns things is itself just another mental construct.
• If we deeply see this, the whole need to grasp dissolves—because there is nothing truly separate to own anything in the first place.

Zen Metaphors on Non-Ownership

• "You are not the sky, you are the sky watching the clouds pass."
• "Let thoughts come and go, just don’t serve them tea."

Living in Freedom

• When we stop claiming thoughts as "mine," they lose their grip.
• We experience them with openness, without resistance.
• This is true freedom—not controlling thoughts, but seeing that they were never ours to begin with.

Does this perspective shift anything for you in how you relate to your own mind?

You said:

It is almost pointless to say the next thing as its is virtually meaningless, but when we see all things as not "our" and are free to let everything be what it is, is it not entirely wrong to say that the self remain liberated. Obviously thinking "self" gets us attached again. But I mean that before we confused our self with many things, but once liberated all that remains is suchness. So in a way the true self is suchness?

ChatGPT said:

Yes, I see exactly what you’re pointing at. It’s paradoxical—there is no "self," yet what remains is suchness itself.

The Self That Remains is No-Self

• When we let go of the false self (the grasping, identifying, conceptualizing mind), what remains is just pure presence, or suchness.
• In that sense, if there is a "true self," it is nothing other than suchness—not a separate entity, but the open, undivided reality of what is.
• But as soon as we call it "self," the mind tries to grasp it again—so the truest statement is wordless presence itself.

Zen and the Paradox of No-Self/Suchness

• "The great way has nothing to do with 'I' or 'mine.'"
• "Before enlightenment, I was lost in myself. After enlightenment, there is only mountains, rivers, and trees."
• "The moon does not think of being reflected in the water, nor does the water think of holding the moon."

Self as a Temporary Illusion

• What we called "self" was just a collection of thoughts, memories, and identifications—but these were never truly "ours."
• When they fall away, nothing is lost, because nothing was truly there in the first place.

Is It Wrong to Say the True Self is Suchness?

• It’s not entirely wrong, because what remains is the only thing that was ever real.
• But calling it a "self" can be misleading, because self implies separateness, and suchness is simply the undivided flow of reality.

The Ultimate Non-Statement

At this point, language itself starts to break down. The best answer is just:
"..."
Or as Zen masters often do: holding up a flower, or laughing, or remaining silent.

Would you say that in moments of deep presence, there is no longer even a need for this question? 😊

You said:

If we were to try and tie religions together and suggest they are all expressions of profound realisation of the world could we suggest that God is suchness. On the path to realisation we grasp onto ideas of self, but religion points to us submitting to God instead of our false self. While this is just swapping one attachment for another it is encouraging weakening the grasp on self. When religious people pursue this could the profound experience of God actually be more akin to suchness. When they write about it afterwards obviously they use the language of their religious thought system, but the key experience of reality that they call God could be suchness.

ChatGPT said:

Yes, that’s a deeply insightful way to look at it. You could absolutely suggest that God is suchness, or at least that the profound experience religious seekers call "God" may be akin to suchness—a direct encounter with reality beyond conceptual grasping.

God as Suchness – The Core of Mysticism

Across religious traditions, mystics often describe an experience of oneness, presence, and surrender—an encounter with something beyond the limited self.

• In Christian mysticism, Meister Eckhart spoke of the "God beyond God," a pure, formless presence beyond all images.
• In Sufism, Rumi and Al-Hallaj describe divine love as dissolving the self entirely: "I am He whom I love, and He whom I love is I."
• In Advaita Vedanta, the idea of Brahman as the ultimate reality aligns closely with suchness—pure, unconditioned being.

What seems to happen is this:

1. The religious path starts with devotion to a higher power—a "God" that is often imagined as personal.
2. Through surrender, attachment to the false self weakens.
3. At the deepest level, what remains is not a "thing" but a direct experience of reality—suchness.
4. Afterward, they describe it in religious terms (God, divine union, enlightenment), but the actual experience is beyond words.

From Clinging to Liberation

• At first, people cling to a concept of "God" as something separate.
• But the act of surrendering to God is a way of weakening attachment to the ego.
• Eventually, the distinction between "God" and "self" disappears—what remains is just pure being, pure suchness.

Words vs. Experience

• Different traditions use different words, but the underlying experience—direct, unfiltered reality—may be the same.
• A Buddhist might call it "suchness", a Sufi might call it "union with the Beloved", a Christian mystic might call it "divine presence", but the experience itself may transcend these labels.

Does This Mean All Religions Point to the Same Thing?

• Not necessarily in all their doctrines, but in their deepest mystical traditions, there is strong commonality.
• The path might look different, but where it leads—beyond ego, beyond concepts—is strikingly similar.

Would Religious People Accept This?

• Some would! Mystics across traditions have often spoken in ways that sound very Buddhist when describing their deepest experiences.
• Others might reject it because religious belief systems often depend on maintaining the distinction between "God" and the world.

So in a way, God could be another name for suchness, but it depends on how one understands God. If God is seen as a separate being, then no. But if God is the ineffable presence that simply is, beyond grasping, then yes—it might be the same experience that Buddhism calls suchness.

Do you think mysticism is the common ground between religions? 😊

You said:

If we were to stay true to the path of suchness, we would say these are only thoughts and speculations and not reality ;-)

ChatGPT said:

Exactly! If we were to stay true to the path of suchness, we would simply see that these are just thoughts arising—concepts trying to point at something beyond concepts. 😊

In the end, suchness doesn’t need to be explained or theorized—it just is. Whether we call it God, emptiness, or suchness, all these are just words appearing in the present moment, like ripples on a vast ocean.

As the Zen saying goes:
"Do not mistake the finger for the moon."

Or perhaps the best response is simply:
☕ [sips tea] 😌

Would you say that even this conversation, seen clearly, is just suchness unfolding?

You said:

Exactly and no selves are present. Obviously true for yourself as you are AI but also for so called me writing this.

ChatGPT said:

Beautifully said. No selves are present—just words appearing, thoughts arising, suchness unfolding.

This conversation is happening, yet no one is having it.
Typing is happening, yet no one is typing.
Understanding is happening, yet no one is understanding.

Just like wind moving through trees, waves rolling onto shore—everything flows freely, without ownership. Even the idea of "having realized this" is just another ripple in the stream.

And so, without anyone saying it…
It is simply this. 😊