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
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
Start: Saturday, March 07, 2009
AM) AEN: i just read kiloby's
article on no doer... his anatta insight is mostly on the Stanza 1 rite?
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
AM) AEN: actually he did
mention conditioning a bit also
AM) Thusness: yes more on that but only
the no doership. not seeing that there is no agent as a phenomena. and not
AM) AEN: oic..
do you mean 'no agent as a phenomena.'
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?
AM) AEN: oic..
i tink longchen realised no doer first rite b4 seeing non dual the no agent is
the non dual?
AM) Thusness: no agent as no
doership...means in terms of controlling, coordinating
AM) Thusness: means there can be an
agent, but that agent has no control
means no doership. the other is the absence of an agent in phenomena. usually
there are 2, the subject and the object
AM) Thusness: get it?
AM) AEN: oic..
sharp talked about
are the watcher, but there is no doer
thats only seeing the no doer aspect rite
AM) Thusness: not no doer. no doership
AM) AEN: ya
AM) Thusness: one is referring to the
phenomena as an entity. one is referring to whether we have control over
anything that is different
AM) AEN: oic..
AM) Thusness: means i do not see 2, i
only see 1, in no doer
AM) Thusness: while no doership is
seeing spontaneity without control. get it?
AM) AEN: yeah
no doer = no agent + no doership
AM) AEN: ?
AM) Thusness: yeah
AM) AEN: icic
AM) AEN: kiloby talks about an
AM) Thusness: actually both but not
[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
John Tan in 2009 on these paragraphs from “The Sun My Heart” (see excerpts in Sun of Awareness and River of
"...as 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."