Conversation took place two years ago before Anurag realized anatta.
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
- Edited
- Reply
- 2y
- Reply
- 2y
Anurag Jain
"I
Am", if you mean it to be Self can never be an object of any perception
so it's strange how you see it as 'one of the ten thousand things'.
Self I that which witnesses the ten thousand things' including your
thought which says I Am is one of the ten thousand things.
Soh Wei Yu
Anurag Jain only after anatta it is realised to be another condition
Even consciousness without object, pure subjectivity is no longer seen as pure subjectivity
But at the I AM level it is indeed seen as pure subject that cannot be made an object of observation.
Pure I, not even am
Anurag Jain
Soh Wei Yu the one who is talking about Self as subject is object to the Self.
Soh Wei Yu
In I, there is only I. No subject or object.
Soh Wei Yu
After
anatta that too is another pure nondual condition. No different from in
hearing just sound. So there is no reifying pure subjectivity.
Anurag Jain
Soh Wei Yu. Who is the one who talks about it?
Soh Wei Yu
self enquiry is only for leading to self realization
Further realization requires other kinds of inquiry
Anurag Jain
All realizations of every kind are object to Self. There are infinite realizations possible but all are objects to Self.
Soh Wei Yu
Nov
18
Anatta and Pure Presence
Someone told me about having been through insights of no self and then progressing to a realisation of the ground of being.
I replied:
Hi ____
Thanks for the sharing.
This
is the I AM realization. Had that realisation after contemplating
Before birth, who am I? For two years. It’s an important realization.
Many people had insights into certain aspects of no self, impersonality,
and “dry non dual experience” without doubtless realization of
Presence. Therefore I AM realisation is a progression for them.
Similarly
in Zen, asking who am I is to directly experience presence. How about
asking a koan of what is the cup? What is the chirping bird, the thunder
clap? What is its purpose?
When
I talked about anatta, it is a direct insight of Presence and
recognizing what we called background presence, is in the forms and
colours, sounds and sensations, clean and pure. Authentication is be
authenticated by all things. Also there is no presence other than that.
What we call background is really just an image of foreground Presence,
even when Presence is assuming its subtle formless all pervasiveness.
However
due to ignorance, we have a very inherent and dual view, if we do see
through the nature of presence, the mind continues to be influenced by
dualistic and inherent tendencies. Many teach to overcome it through
mere non conceptuality but this is highly misleading.
Thusness also wrote:
The
anatta I realized is quite unique. It is not just a realization of
no-self. But it must first have an intuitive insight of Presence.
Otherwise will have to reverse the phases of insights
Labels: Anatta, Luminosity |
Anurag Jain
What you call anatta is nothing but avyakta Prakriti in Advaita.
Soh Wei Yu
No, what i call anatta is totally unknown in advaita
Soh Wei Yu
And
also 98% or more of buddhist “realised” masters and teachers do not
realise what I call anatta. They too do not go beyond I AM and one mind
Soh Wei Yu
In the whole of china and taiwan, only two teachers I can find have realised what i realised -
Zen Master Hui Lu and Zen Master Hong Wen Liang.
You can see how rare it is.
Anurag Jain
Soh Wei Yu you will have to do more than assertions
There is nothing unknown to Advaita because Self is beyond space and time.

Soh Wei Yu
Look,
we are arguing past each other. I have realised what you realised and
you have not realised what I have realised. Of course I understand you
are not convinced, so be it.
I rather prefer Buddha’s version of omniscience since it lines up with my current insight:

DHAMMATALKS.ORG
AN 4:24 Kāḷaka Sutta | At Kāḷaka’s Park
Anurag Jain
Soh Wei Yu I have realized that which has always been realized 

Anurag Jain
Soh Wei Yu
omniscience is a duality. In Self, which is partless, there is nothing
apart from itself to be known. Self is knolwedge itself.
Buddhism, by the way has come from the Vedas. It has commonalities with Sankhya.
Soh Wei Yu
Buddha
was a refuter of Samkhya, although he learnt from and attained what the
two Samkhya teachers he had taught him, he left them in pursuit of
further realisation.
See the commentary and discourse at:
Also:
"What
you are suggesting is already found in Samkhya system. I.e. the twenty
four tattvas are not the self aka purusha. Since this system was well
known to the Buddha, if that's all his insight was, then his insight is
pretty trivial. But Buddha's teachings were novel. Why where they novel?
They were novel in the fifth century BCE because of his teaching of
dependent origination and emptiness. The refutation of an ultimate self
is just collateral damage." - Lopon Malcolm
“The
Pristine awareness is often mistaken as the 'Self'. It is especially
difficult for one that has intuitively experience the 'Self' to accept
'No-Self'. As I have told you many times that there will come a time
when you will intuitively perceive the 'I' -- the pure sense of
Existence but you must be strong enough to go beyond this experience
until the true meaning of Emptiness becomes clear and thorough. The
Pristine Awareness is the so-called True-Self' but why we do not call it
a 'Self' and why Buddhism has placed so much emphasis on the Emptiness
nature? This then is the true essence of Buddhism. It is needless to
stress anything about 'Self' in Buddhism; there are enough of 'Logies'
of the 'I" in Indian Philosophies. If one wants to know about the
experience of 'I AM', go for the Vedas and Bhagavad Gita. We will not
know what Buddha truly taught 2500 years ago if we buried ourselves in
words. Have no doubt that The Dharma Seal is authentic and not to be
confused.
When
you have experienced the 'Self' and know that its nature is empty, you
will know why to include this idea of a 'Self' into Buddha-Nature is
truly unnecessary and meaningless. True Buddhism is not about
eliminating the 'small Self' but cleansing this so called 'True Self'
(Atman) with the wisdom of Emptiness.” - John Tan, 2005

DHAMMATALKS.ORG
MN 1 Mūlapariyāya Sutta | The Root Sequence
Anurag Jain
Soh Wei Yu the perceiver is an object to Self. And the Self cannot be experienced. Please convey this to John Tan 

Anurag Jain
And neither can the Self be known, because You Are Self.
Anurag Jain
Buddha gives a view of dependent origination which is different from Sankhya but like Sankhya he gives a reality to Prakriti.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain
you should read Boddhisattvacharyavatara chapter on Prajna. Samkhya
view is completely obliberated there. I reccomend "Nectar of Manjushri's
Speech" for easier read.
Anurag Jain
Robert, please answer me whether Buddhism denies reality to the world of phenomena.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
In essence Buddhadharma has no view. The tathagata has done away with views.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Oneness is just another view on the absolute.
Anurag Jain
Robert, are you talking about absolute?!
Robert Dominik Tkanka
There
are languages which don't have distinction between plural and singular
with regards to many phenomena. Clinging to one is just yet another form
of clinging to a concept - in this case a number.
Anurag Jain
Robert, to the Self all languages are objects. All views are objects, right view, wrong view or no view.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Also
Buddha calls teaching that all pertains to one self or all is one self
"completely" "a fool's teaching" in the Pali Canon. So even though
Buddhadharma arose in a Vedic world - it doesn't buy into central
ontological premise of the Vedas.
Anurag Jain
Robert, it is talking of emptiness which is very much part of the "fools teaching" Buddha was referring to
Please read Katha Upanishad. The Self is beyond emptiness, beyond being and non-being.

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain you don't understand emptiness clearly.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
So how about you read what I reccomended you and then I read that Upanishad? Then we can discuss, deal?
Anurag Jain
The Anatta experience is an experience located in space and time. It did not exist at one time and then the insight arises.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anatta is a seal - not an experience.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
You don't know what Anatta is, do you? 

Anurag Jain
Robert, call it a seal. It does not exist at some time and then it comes to be known.
Anurag Jain
Robert, I know that Anatta is known at one point and then it becomes known. I know that this knowing is an occurrence in time.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain haha the same could be said about the Self. It does not exist at some time and then it comes to be known xD
Anurag Jain
Robert, no that's not the same with Self. It exists at all times.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
So
claiming that about Anatta is as stupid as claiming that about the
Self. It's just a misunderstanding on the nature of these realisations.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
And Anatta is always already so.
Anurag Jain
Robert Self exist at all times. The insight happens in time.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Same with Anatta. So you have failed to prove your point. In the meantime I've gotta go so have a good day 

Anurag Jain
Yes. Who knows Anatta?
Anurag Jain
Robert. Have a good day 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain as a PS: Anatta is revealed when the illusion of the self - including the knower - is extinguished 

Anurag Jain
Robert and who knows that the knower is dropped:-)
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain doesn't apply. This question is based on an assumption which is baseless. Sorry. Ok really gotta go. All the best

Anurag Jain
Robert, just an assertion 

Soh Wei Yu
Robert
is very clear. Anatta is a realisation of what is always already the
case. Anyone who speaks of anatta as a stage or experience is deluded.
Anurag Jain
Soh Wei Yu my question was, who knows anatta? Clear and simple 

Soh Wei Yu
That is a wrong question to ask for anatta as it has hidden assumptions.
We discussed before.
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.BLOGSPOT.COM
Flawed Mode of Enquiry
Anurag Jain
Soh Wei Yu tell me the assumption.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain why are you walking naked on the street?
Anurag Jain
Robert, I am not walking naked on the street. If I will I would report the same.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
See? My question assumes you are walking on the street naked.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Your question assumes somebody who knows.
Anurag Jain
Robert, yes but it did not assume that I did not know.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Im
an not asserting nor assuming anything with regard to the concept of
self. I am not saying it exists. Im not saying it doesnt exist.
It is you who are trying to prove such a self exists. …
See more
Robert Dominik Tkanka
So Im free from positon regarding the self. You are not. Sorry.
Anurag Jain
Robert, my question remains unanswered 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
What happens when you let go of establishing existence or nonexistence of self?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Do this and your question will be answered.
Anurag Jain
Robert,and as regarding views and positions, I have already said that all these are objects to Self.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Conceptual answer will not do you any good.
Anurag Jain
All answers are concepts. All experiences are objects to Self.
Anurag Jain
But Self is not a concept in Self realization.
Anurag Jain
One can talk of Self as a concept of course.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
People
who think Jesus speaks to them are also sure it is not a concept. Or
people who are attached to materiality think its not a concept.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
So your experience does not prove anything as you are just assuming something and assuming its reality.
Anurag Jain
Robert talk to them, they are talking of forms.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
I could now say that mugzotopu is real beyond self. Or glubeehoo
Anurag Jain
My experience is that I exist.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
And some people experience Jesus.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Or material world.
Anurag Jain
Robert I am not talking about any form. You are speaking to yourself 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Our view conditions our experience.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Formless as well. People experience formless Jesus as well.
Anurag Jain
I am not talking about Formless as well.
Anurag Jain
I already stated this beyond,form and formless.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
In
any case your experience just proves it is an experience. Nothing more.
Its hardly any proof of anything else than you have a kind of
experience.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
People can have all kinds of experience - both sober, on drugs etc.
Anurag Jain
Robert let me know when you are over and available for dialogue 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain dialogue? You are trying to force your experience as an argument on me.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
So I just told you it doesnt make what you posit real.
Anurag Jain
Robert, no I am not. I did not even call you for dialogue or comment on you. I was talking to Soh 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
You could say even beyond beyond even beyond and that doesnt change anything.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Sounds dualistic btw. Like there is this beyond and whats not beyond.
Anurag Jain
Robert, I can share but I am sure you don't want to learn Advaita 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain I have no problem. Im open to learning new stuff.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Learning concepts is not a problem.
Anurag Jain
Robert, I have a group on Advaita study. I teach seekers. Would you like to join the group 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Though Ive received Advaita teachings and had experiences you describe. Nice and all.
Anurag Jain
You had a fake Advaita teacher Robert. Advaita is not about experience.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Though
the talk about oneness seems forced. I wonder how would they explain
their teachings to people whos languages do not make distinction between
singular and plural.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
First theyd have to invent for them the concept of one or singularity XD
Anurag Jain
Ok I shall wait, till you get over with your catharsis 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
So its seems like Advaita does not go beyond mathematics XD
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag thanks for being so understanding. Afterall you got plenty of space to preach your idea and experience of self here.
Anurag Jain
Robert, most welcome. I asked because you said you were ready to learn. No issues 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Ok
I do not know what self or one or many even means. Now please explain
to me without using these concepts what are you trying to prove exactly
Anurag Jain
Robert,
that would entail the entire teachings isn't it? The process of Advaita
is neti, neti. You have not been exposed to real Advaita. It does not
speak about experiences.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
So what do I do neti neti for?
Anurag Jain
Robert, join the group
All answers are there.

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Either you are able to do it here or it doesnt work.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Does realisation you speak of require joining a group? Seems like religion and belief.
Anurag Jain
I'll have to answer all your doubts and queries. The processes are shravana, Manana and Nidhidhyasana.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain simple question. What do I do that for? Tell me the goal first.
Anurag Jain
Yes Robert, you have to learn from someone right.
Anurag Jain
It takes years and years of shravana, Manana and Nidhidhyasana.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain what for?
Anurag Jain
Shravana
means listening. Manana means asking questions and resolving all doubts
and Nidhidhyasana is a contemplaton after all doubts are resolved.
Anurag Jain
Robert, learning about reality by eliminating all falsity.
John Tan
Anurag Jain, convey what to me?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Ok but what for? Tell me the goal. Im not looking for entertainment or filling time or learning just for the sake of learning.
All I told you is that I have nothing against learning new concepts and skills should you share any.
Anurag Jain
John Tan did you not go through the thread? Convey that Self cannot be experienced.
Anurag Jain
Robert, I am not going to teach concepts. I am going to teach elimination of all falsity (which includes all concepts)
John Tan
Anurag Jain, u cannot experience Self.
Anurag Jain
John Tan , absolutely. Soh shared some dialogue in which he talks about you talking of experience of Self. Please scroll up.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain but I have left the falsity already.
Anurag Jain
Robert, good then you don't need to learn from me 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Including all notions of self, one, many, existing or not existing.
Anurag Jain
Robert, good. So who am I talking to?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Are you asking in the absolute sense?
Anurag Jain
Tree stone, rocks ?!
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Or relative - for example like if a policeman asked me this question?
Anurag Jain
Robert, in the absolute sense.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
In the absolute sense your question does not apply.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
What a who is?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
You are assuming there is a who in this question.
Anurag Jain
Robert, am I speaking to Soh? Oh sorry.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
I dont assume there is a who therefore I cant answer your question without making assumption I dont hold.
Anurag Jain
Robert, oh I understand. We will get into an infinite regress
I will ask who is that "who does not assume" 


Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain relatively or absolutely?
John Tan
Anurag Jain,
knowing is relative. To know is to measure and compare. Knowingness
is beyond knowing. Knowingness is realized not by the relativity of a
conditioned mind. U need to leap out of the conditioned.
I-I or I M is a direct and gapless authentication.
Anurag Jain
John Tan absolutely agreed.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Im speaking relatively.
If you prefer I will use words "there is no assumption of who in the absolute truth"
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Obviously the language is based on words like who or selves.
John Tan
Anurag Jain an experience is an after thought.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
So with your attachement to "who" you are showing you do not go beyond linguistically enforced concepts.
Anurag Jain
Robert, I can always ask the same question. "Who says that there is no assumption of who in the absolute truth"?
Anurag Jain
John Tan absolutely.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain but thats just hammering your assumption based question like a broken record.
Anurag Jain
Robert, I said we shall go into infinite regress 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Why are you walking naked on the street?
John Tan
Anurag Jain to realize the I-I, a koan will b more appropriate to leap one out of the relative. As for Soh Wei Yu, yes. He knows what he is talking about...lol
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Yes the regress is caused by that concept of who. When you let go of it there is no regress.
Anurag Jain
John, I understand and agree to all that you are saying

Anurag Jain
Robert, I can really imagine you with a hammer ready to strike me now. But "Who let's go off the concept of who". Sorry 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain the concept relaxes and unties on its own.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Like drawing on water.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Nobody has to make it so.
Anurag Jain
And who knows that the concept is untied and has relaxed?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
And why you assume there is someone who knows?
Anurag Jain
Robert, are you talking without knowing you are realized??!!
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Without what?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Whats that?
Anurag Jain
Robert, without having realized anatta. You just said that
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Whats knowing?
Anurag Jain
Good question. Have you realized anatta Robert?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Relatively or absolutely speaking?
Anurag Jain
Robert, say both the ways. You know the relative and absolute levels. Right?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Relatively - I realised Anatta.
Anurag Jain
Robert, ok. So who knows that he has realized anatta?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Absolutely - no realisation or one realising can be found to exist or not exist.
Anurag Jain
And who knows all this 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Absolutely or relatively?
Anurag Jain
Robert Dominik both ways 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Relatively Robert. Absolutely no who knowing all this can be established as existing or not.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
You could say relatively also
Anurag Jain
So who knows that all this cannot be established as existing?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Relatively or absolutely?
Anurag Jain
Both ways 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Relatively Robert. Absolutely: unestablishable
Anurag Jain
So who knows that it is absolutely unestablishable? 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
For this and all your question till beyond infinity the answer is the same
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Besides what "who" is?
Anurag Jain
Great Robert. So you agree that there is an infinite regress 

Anurag Jain
Who asks the question, "who is what ?"
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Relatively speaking the body and mind complex gets release from tension clinging to who, what, where, when.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Obviously you will experience infinite regress because you can always ask that question.
Anurag Jain
Robert, and who knows that this complex is released? 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Relatively speaking you are attached to it and stuck with its assumption.
Anurag Jain
Yes, so who is the questioner?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
So Advaita is brainwashing people to assume there is who?
Anurag Jain
Robert, I ask all kinds of questions 

Soh Wei Yu
After
anatta, even the I-I is not seen as a “who”. It is not the subject
behind all objects. It is realised that there never was a subject. I-I
is just I-I, but not reified into a background. It is just another
foreground manifestation, another “occurr…
See more
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Doing this mantra over and over until they are programmed with the concepts of "who" and "knowing"?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain thats beside the point.
Anurag Jain
Robert, I am not teaching you Advaita. You did not give me the permission 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Anurag Jain but self enquiry doesn not lead to Total Release
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Neti neti also
John Tan
Anurag, the Self cannot b the perceiver nor can the Self b the percieved. Why then do u still ask "Who"?
Though
u may have the eureka authentication, If post authentication one is
still within the who, what, where, when and why mode of enquiry, he will
forever be playing hide and seek.
Anatta as Robert said, relook the entire matter in different way so happy exploring.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Neti
assumes that you will be left with that which cannot be negated. So
starting the search you already reinforce false assumption.
Soh Wei Yu
John Tan nice just as i was posting at the same time 

Soh Wei Yu
Robert realised anatta
Anurag Jain
John, the Self never asks questions 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
Self enquiry assumes "I". The version with asking "who knows" assumes who and knowing.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Questions based on assumption do not lead to truth. They only reinforce another false assumption.
Anurag Jain
John, you are assuming that I am inquiring. I am not. I am asking questions to others.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Is there a self though?
Soh Wei Yu
We are speaking the same realisations
Anurag Jain
Soh talk to Roberts about his experiences. I don't talk about experiences.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Me neither. Anatta is a seal
Soh Wei Yu
He already told you anatta is a realisation, not an experience.
Soh Wei Yu
Anatta is what is always already the case
Robert Dominik Tkanka
Now you are manipulating. When I asked you about self you said its your experience.
Anurag Jain
Soh, but I agreed to all the things John said in this thread at least.
Robert Dominik Tkanka
So you are saying contradictory things.
Soh Wei Yu
What John said and what I said concurs.
Anurag Jain
Robert,
may you please quote where I said Self is an experience. This whole
dialogue started by me saying that Self is not an experience.
Anurag Jain
Robert, please give proof 

Robert Dominik Tkanka
"My experience is that I exist"
Anurag Jain
Soh Wei Yu did you read the thread completely and my responses?
Anurag Jain
Robert,ha, ha that is not talking of Self as experience dear !
Soh Wei Yu
In
anatta, one realises that the experiencer-experiencing-experience
paradigm to be fundamentally flawed. This applies to everything, not
only I-I. Then in hearing, hearing is only sound without hearer, and so
on, is the same luminous taste as I-I
Anurag Jain
Soh Wei Yu, did you go through this thread?
Robert Dominik Tkanka
You werent clear on that. In any case what a "self" or "Self" is?
Anurag Jain
Robert, in Advaita they are different from an unenlightened view and same from an enlightened view.