Non-doership is just one of the aspects of anatta, by itself it is not the anatta realization. (Thusness Stage 5: "...Phase 5 is quite thorough in being no one and I would call this anatta in all 3 aspects -- no subject/object division, no doer-ship and absence of agent...") One can experience non-doership during the I AM phase, or for some people even before the I AM realization. Hence non-doership is not equivalent with anatta realization.


Although the aspect of non-doership itself does not indicate the realization of anatta, this does not mean it is not important. Particularly, non-doership becomes clearly experienced when the John Tan's first stanza of anatta is penetrated and clearly realised. However, the first stanza of anatta is not merely non-doership, as explained in the conversation below. The first stanza of anatta conveys both absence of agent and non-doership, and not just non-doership. Commenting on someone's breakthrough, John Tan said, "More towards second stanza [of anatta], non-doership is equally important." and on someone else, "Non-dual but can't discern clearly the difference between conventionalities and ultimate. Did it talk about natural spontaneity? [In] The 2 stanzas of anatta, the non-doership will lead to natural spontaneity. Currently it is talking about freedom from observer and observed, but the second part of realising appearances are just empty clarity isn't there. Therefore effortlessness of vivid presence will not be possible without these 2 insights as base."


Session Start: Saturday, March 07, 2009


(1:47 AM) AEN:            i just read kiloby's article on no doer... his anatta insight is mostly on the Stanza 1 rite?


(1:49 AM) AEN:            i tink wat he said is like wat you said in stanza 1... except that its more on spontaneous arising but without mentioning conditions

(1:50 AM) AEN:            actually he did mention conditioning a bit also

(1:52 AM) Thusness:    yes more on that but only the no doership. not seeing that there is no agent as a phenomena. and not seeing DO

(1:53 AM) AEN:            oic..

what do you mean 'no agent as a phenomena.'

(1:54 AM) Thusness:    means seeing there is no agent, that is without the subject in experience. than there is no controller, no co-ordinator, no agent that links. means on phenomena. not only doership. that there is no agent and phenomena. only phenomena exist. get it? that is different from no doership. means one, just that doing. means seeing the actual phenomena that there is no agent, just phenomena. get it?

(1:57 AM) AEN:            oic..

ya i tink longchen realised no doer first rite b4 seeing non dual the no agent is the non dual?

(1:58 AM) Thusness:    no agent as no doership...means in terms of controlling, coordinating

(1:59 AM) Thusness:    means there can be an agent, but that agent has no control

this means no doership. the other is the absence of an agent in phenomena. usually there are 2, the subject and the object

(1:59 AM) Thusness:    get it?

(2:00 AM) AEN:            oic..

yea i remember

galen sharp talked about

u are the watcher, but there is no doer

so thats only seeing the no doer aspect rite

(2:00 AM) Thusness:    not no doer. no doership

(2:01 AM) AEN:            ya

(2:01 AM) Thusness:    one is referring to the phenomena as an entity. one is referring to whether we have control over anything that is different

(2:01 AM) AEN:            oic..

(2:02 AM) Thusness:    means i do not see 2, i only see 1, in no doer

(2:02 AM) Thusness:    while no doership is seeing spontaneity without control. get it?

(2:03 AM) AEN:            yeah

so no doer = no agent + no doership

(2:03 AM) AEN:            ?

(2:03 AM) Thusness:    yeah

(2:03 AM) AEN:            icic

(2:03 AM) AEN:            kiloby talks about an agent?

(2:04 AM) Thusness:    actually both but not clear.

[Soh: Scott Kiloby became quite clear about anatta in the following years]

In Soh’s I AM phase, John Tan told him not to mistaken anatta with [mere] non-doership:

“Not to talk too much about me, just focus on your experience. Also what you said about the no observer can be quite misleading. It does not mean there is 'no one doing anything' and 'everything is arising spontaneously'. You should understand anatta from below quotations taken from 'The Sun My Heart' by Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh:


"When we say I know the wind is blowing, we don't think that there is something blowing something else. "Wind' goes with 'blowing'. If there is no blowing, there is no wind. It is the same with knowing. Mind is the knower; the knower is mind. We are talking about knowing in relation to the wind. 'To know' is to know something. Knowing is inseparable from the wind. Wind and knowing are one. We can say, 'Wind,' and that is enough. The presence of wind indicates the presence of knowing, and the presence of the action of blowing'." ~ Thich Nhat Hanh, The Sun My Heart

"..The most universal verb is the verb 'to be'': I am, you are, the mountain is, a river is. The verb 'to be' does not express the dynamic living state of the universe. To express that we must say 'become.' These two verbs can also be used as nouns: 'being", "becoming". But being what? Becoming what? 'Becoming' means 'evolving ceaselessly', and is as universal as the verb "to be." It is not possible to express the "being" of a phenomenon and its "becoming" as if the two were independent. In the case of wind, blowing is the being and the becoming...." ~ Thich Nhat Hanh, The Sun My Heart

"In any phenomena, whether psychological, physiological, or physical, there is dynamic movement, life. We can say that this movement, this life, is the universal manifestation, the most commonly recognized action of knowing. We must not regard 'knowing' as something from the outside which comes to breathe life into the universe. It is the life of the universe itself. The dance and the dancer are one." ~ Thich Nhat Hanh, The Sun My Heart

Comments by John Tan in 2009 on these paragraphs from “The Sun My Heart” (see excerpts in Sun of Awareness and River of Perceptions),


" a verb, as action, there can be no concept, only experience. Non-dual anatta (no-self) is the experience of subject/Object as verb, as action. There is no mind, only mental activities... ...Source as the passing phenomena... and how non-dual appearance is understood from Dependent Origination perspective."

0 Responses