- Remove Preview
- Remove Preview
- Remove Preview
Very good. I have never understand rebirth, nor want to comment on it, bc the idea of rebirth has never sync with direct experience of anatta but this paragraph says it all..
“Here we get to the heart of the matter, which is one of the most subtle aspects of the Buddhadhamma. Simply stated: when ignorance ceases, belief in self simultaneously ceases. And when there is no self to be found, then there is no self to die or take birth. This right here is “death-free.” And it is precisely this that the Buddha is declaring when he says to Mogharāja:
Look at the world and see its emptiness Mogharāja, always mindful,
Eliminating the view of self, one goes beyond death.
One who views the world this way is not seen by the king of death.”
Soh Wei Yu
I never saw any incompatibility between anatta and rebirth though
But the hindu idea that souls reincarnate is indeed refuted
The anatta understanding of dependent origination is more like candle lightning another candle ad infinitum
So it depends on how it is defined
Acarya Malcolm Smith replied:
One, whoever told you rig pa is not part of the five aggregates? Rig pa is knowledge of your own state. In its impure form one's own state manifests as the five aggregates; in its pure form, it manifests as the five buddha families.
Nagārjuna resolves this issue through using the eight examples. There is no substantial transmission, but there is serial continuity, like lighting a fire from another fire, impressing a seal on a document and so on. See his verses on dependent origination:
All migrating beings are causes and results.
but here there are no sentient beings at all;
just empty phenomena entirely produced
from phenomena that are only empty,
phenomena without a self and what belongs to a self,
[like] utterances, lamps, mirrors, seals,
lenses, seeds, sourness and echoes.
Although the aggregates are serially connected,
the wise are understand that nothing transfers.
Also, the one who imputes annihilation
upon extremely subtle existents,
is not wise,
and will not see the meaning of ‘arising from conditions’.”
I was totally ok with concept of rebirth until anatta lol.
the whole concept falls through. Coz in direct experience it’s just seamless moment to moment experience self arising.
Technically if we want to say rebirth and split the moment, rebirth will be happening all the time like even now.
If we don’t want to split the moment , as this direct xp is so seamless, can’t really find what is going to rebirth?
When aggregates is just this one whole seamless arising isn’t it.
Soh Wei Yu
When there is activity of grasping and seeking then there is rebirth, therefore the second noble truth
Was reminded of a journal entry
3rd October 2012
Thusness told me that the stream of wisdom will penetrate into the three states eventually, many years ago. For example if you keep chanting something, or if you keep playing computer games, then in the dream these things will appear. Likewise when you get acquinted with wisdom, this appears into dream and deep sleep as well. This is the flow of dependent origination – ignorance flows, wisdom also flows.
This is another dream that Thusness told me to wrote down. It happened last night.
In my dream, I was contemplating something that the Buddha said:
"Bhikkhus, when ignorance is abandoned and true knowledge has arisen in a bhikkhu, then with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of true knowledge he no longer clings to sensual pleasures, no longer clings to views, no longer clings to rules and observances, no longer clings to a doctrine of self.When he does not cling, he is not agitated. When he is not agitated, he personally attains Nibbana. He understands: 'Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming to any state of being." (MN11: Cula-sihanada Sutta)
As I contemplated this in my dream, I saw how when there is craving, when there is agitation, when there is clinging, I could project consciousness out of my body into another place, into the sky, into another realm, into another lifetime. I saw that this is how rebirth works - craving drives the entire process of becoming!
And then I stopped this craving-conceiving-projecting, and I was back where I was - on my bed. But I am still sleeping. And I instantly entered into this incredible bliss again (this happened a few times so far) - it was sooo blissful like the last time. But this time, it lasted much longer.
I can feel my entire being, even my face, is of this intense blissful vibration. After some time which felt longer than the last time (it was quite long and I began to wonder how long it will last), then as thoughts arise, the bliss begin to lessen until I woke up from the blissful sleep samadhi.
May all beings put an end to becoming and attain the highest bliss of Nirvana. p.s. THIS is well said --->
29. “So it was with reference to this that it was said: ‘One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, should cultivate relinquishment, and should train for peace.’
30. “‘The tides of conceiving do not sweep over one who stands upon these [foundations], and when the tides of conceiving no longer sweep over him he is called a sage at peace.’ So it was said. And with reference to what was this said?
31. “Bhikkhu, ‘I am’ is a conceiving; ‘I am this’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall not be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be possessed of form’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be formless’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be non-percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient’ is a conceiving. Conceiving is a disease, conceiving is a tumour, conceiving is a dart. By overcoming all conceivings, bhikkhu, one is called a sage at peace. And the sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die; he is not shaken and is not agitated. For there is nothing present in him by which he might be born. Not being born, how could he age? Not ageing, how could he die? Not dying, how could he be shaken? Not being shaken, why should he be agitated?
32. “So it was with reference to this that it was said: ‘The tides of conceiving do not sweep over one who stands upon these [foundations], and when the tides of conceiving no longer sweep over him he is called a sage at peace.’ Bhikkhu, bear in mind this brief exposition of the six elements.”
(Buddha, MN 140 Dhātuvibhanga Sutta)
Soh Wei Yu
Yin Ling got a few but too many articles in atr until i forgot where lol
Soh Wei Yu
(2:52 PM) Thusness: r u denying the "I AMness" experience?
(2:54 PM) AEN: u mean in the post?
(2:54 PM) AEN: no
(2:54 PM) AEN: its more like the nature of 'i am' rite
(2:54 PM) Thusness: what is being denied?
(2:54 PM) AEN: the dualistic understanding?
(2:55 PM) Thusness: yes it is the wrong understanding of that experience. Just like 'redness' of a flower.
(2:55 PM) AEN: oic..
(2:55 PM) Thusness: Vivid and seems real and belongs to the flower. It only appears so, it is not so.
(2:57 PM) Thusness: When we see in terms of subject/object dichotomy, it appears puzzling that there is thoughts, no thinker. There is sound, no hearer and there is rebirth, but no permanent soul being reborn.
(2:58 PM) Thusness: It is puzzling because of our deeply held view of seeing things inherently where dualism is a subset of this 'inherent' seeing.
(2:59 PM) Thusness: So what is the problem?
(2:59 PM) AEN: icic..
(2:59 PM) AEN: the deeply held views?
(2:59 PM) Thusness: yeah
(2:59 PM) Thusness: what is the problem?
(3:01 PM) AEN: back
(3:02 PM) Thusness: The problem is the root cause of suffering lies in this deeply held view. We search and are attached because these views. This is the relationship between 'view' and 'consciousness'. There is no escape. With inherent view, there is always 'I' and 'Mine'. There is always 'belongs' like the 'redness' belongs to the flower.
(3:02 PM) Thusness: Therefore despite all transcendental experiences, there is no liberation without right understanding.
Soh Wei Yu
Therefore even when there is sense of self, rebirth, it is vis dependent origination without agent.
This truth of anatta and no agent and d.o. Is a seal, not merely a state.
But indeed arahants have no (sense of) self and therefore no more rebirth
Therefore like john tan said years ago
“The logic that since there is no agency, hence no choice to be made is no different from "no sufferer, therefore no suffering".
This is not anatta insight.
What is seen through in anatta is the mistaken view that the conventional structure of "subject action object" represents reality when it is not. Action does not require an agent to initiate it. It is language that creates the confusion that nouns are required to set verbs into motion.
Therefore the action of choosing continues albeit no chooser.
"Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found;
The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there;
Nibbāna is, but not the man that enters it;
The path is, but no traveler on it is seen."
The activity of rebirth happens for the ignorant but was never initiated by an agent or soul but purely by d.o., no soul is being transferred and no such unchanging medium can be found
An instant of vivid empty mind moment (appearance) does not move, not from here to there. Only from a conventional standpoint, there seem to b movement. That is just my 2 cents.
The problem I see with anatta, or seeing through the notion of a self, is that although we get the gist of it, somehow we still have a more or less subtle 'image' or 'images' of what we are. This is really hard to perceive - in my case, of course. Its hard to even try to describe these images, but they are there, and they give raise to certain types of action, certain types of reactions.
Soh Wei Yu
Soh Wei Yu
The Buddha said: Blissful is passionlessness in the world, The overcoming of sensual desires (i.e. anagami); But the abolition of the conceit "I am" (i.e. arahantship) — That is truly the supreme bliss.
Also, the Buddha said:
“The noble ones have seen as happiness
The ceasing of identity.
This [view] of those who clearly see
Runs counter to the entire world.
“What others speak of as happiness,
That the noble ones say is suffering;
What others speak of as suffering,
That the noble one know as bliss.”
So what is the difference between the 'view of self' and the 'trace of self'?
As Thusness wrote to me in 2011:
Session Start: 29 March 2011
Thusness: yeah of course
Thusness: if u do not feel the 'body construct' and 'mind construct', just the play of dharma, how does the sense of self arise?
AEN: It doesnt
Thusness: for me, it is just this dependent originated activity...
Thusness: primordially pure and luminous
Thusness: sense of self does not arise
Thusness: i do not see 'body' or 'mind'
Thusness: for there is no agent
Thusness: for u by now u should be clear on this
Thusness: otherwise, u will not feel the 'process'
Thusness: u told me about the mini maha experience
Thusness: so u should not feel the sense of self
Thusness: logically when the agent is gone, the primary cause for these sense of self should also be gone
Thusness: however due to the deeper dispositions, it continues to linger
Thusness: when u engage in this modern world, it re-enfore the identity
Thusness: so by seeing there is no-self in anatta, the sense of self should also dwindle
Thusness: when u practice and there is mind body drop
Thusness: due to de-construction of body and mind
Thusness: there is only purity of sensations
Thusness: it is just a lingering trace
Thusness: how does the sense of self arise?
Thusness: and that means it is simply a dispositions
Thusness: and during daily activity, there is re-enforcing of this trace
Thusness: when there is no agent, this trace will be seen as it is
Thusness: in non-dual and one mind, this is not just a trace
Thusness: u may have trace of identity
Thusness: but 'Self' (comments: self-view; that a truly existing self/Self exists) is not a trace
Thusness: it is as if it is truly 'there' and all there is
Thusness: but anatta is different
Thusness: for everything is like a trace
Thusness: and self is not any more special that an arising sound
Thusness: no diff
Thusness: can u understand the difference?