Posts
Here was my response:
I have never gotten the impression that Mr. X possessed genuine insight or understanding. Yes, Angelo has realized anatta, but as I mentioned earlier, Ms S certainly has not. Mr E had glimpses in the past but not realisation, though I’m uncertain about his current state.
Be cautious about believing anyone who talks about "no self." Many are just talking about dry non doership, impersonality, nondual experiences, etc. As I've stated before, 99% of those who speak about the experience or insight of "no self" are far from the anatta of AtR or the anatta realization in Buddhadharma.
They haven’t even realized the I AM, let alone attained a genuine realization of anatta. There is a lot of misinformation online, the internet is full of misleading and delusional claims not just on YouTube but also on platforms like Reddit. Even in this group, it happens from time to time that some people openly present themselves as realised when they are essentially just deluding themselves. In the past I just let it slip, but now we have a new rule and any claims will never go unchallenged.
As Krodha/Kyle Dixon once said:
“The streamentry sub is full of people who overvalue their own meditation insights and experiences. Most claiming to be stream entrants who are not.”
“There are probably no srotapannas there. From reading that sub over a decade it is essentially just full of people deluding themselves.
Some nice meditation experiences, sure. But actual stream entrants? Definitely not.”
"It is quite rare to attain stream entry, I’ve been involved with dharma for over a decade and can count those who are tried and true stream entrants on one hand. That said, contemplate the Bahiya and Kalakarama suttas and cultivate the first dhyāna."
----------------------
Mr Z said: "He has quoted Rob Burbea several times "We’re not trying to destroy the sense of self, where trying to understand something about it”. He claims Angelo and others have taken it a step too far."
Soh replied:
Rob Burbea is not correct here. Buddhism does destroy the sense of self, but only at an advanced phase of one's practice.
Destroying the sense of self is part and parcel of overcoming the third and eighth fetters of Buddha’s teachings (I am not speaking here of Kevin Shanilec’s version which I consider to be not exactly the same as Buddha's definitions but that's another story).
However the way the fetters are destroyed is not through forcing it out. That cannot be done.
As John Tan said:
"...it seems that lots of effort need to be put in -- which is really not the case. The entire practice turns out to an undoing process. It is a process of gradually understanding the workings of our nature that is from beginning liberated but clouded by this sense of ‘self’ that is always trying to preserve, protect and ever attached. The entire sense of self is a ‘doing’. Whatever we do, positive or negative, is still doing. Ultimately there is not-even a letting go or let be, as there is already continuous dissolving and arising and this ever dissolving and arising turns out to be self-liberating. Without this ‘self’ or ‘Self’, there is no ‘doing’, there is only spontaneous arising. "
~ Thusness (source: Non-dual and karmic patterns)
"...When one is unable to see the truth of our nature, all letting go is nothing more than another form of holding in disguise. Therefore without the 'insight', there is no releasing.... it is a gradual process of deeper seeing. when it is seen, the letting go is natural. You cannot force yourself into giving up the self... purification to me is always these insights... non-dual and emptiness nature...."
~ Thusness
- https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2009/09/realization-and-experience-and-non-dual.html
So if that is what Rob Burbea meant, then he is correct. However, if he meant that the sense of self will forever be around, then it is clearly wrong, and he is clearly at odds with the Buddhist scriptures from Theravada to Mahayana and Vajrayana. Sense of self will indeed vanish without a trace in true liberation. Also see: https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2022/07/buddhahood-end-of-all-emotionalmental.html
Buddha or arahants will still be able to respond to someone calling his name, but it does not mean he/she has a sense of self.
- https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/jootla/wheel414.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawFNGVgBHTq9uH1IuxwgiDtblDUbra_E7HnGM2DmoHhF_XIBOtuwE2EnrfDEXjkmhQ
And here's another better translation:
SN 1.25
Question: When a mendicant is perfected, proficient, with defilements ended, bearing the final body: would they say, ‘I speak’, or even ‘they speak to me’?”
The Buddha replied: “When a mendicant is perfected, proficient, with defilements ended, bearing the final body: they would say, ‘I speak’, and also ‘they speak to me’. Skillful, understanding the world’s conventions, they’d use these terms as no more than expressions.”
Question: “When a mendicant is perfected, proficient, with defilements ended, bearing the final body: is such a mendicant drawing close to conceit if they’d say, ‘I speak’, or even ‘they speak to me’?”
The Buddha replied: “Someone who has given up conceit has no ties, the ties of conceit are all dissipated. Though that intelligent person has transcended substantial reality, they’d still say, ‘I speak’, and also ‘they speak to me’. Skillful, understanding the world’s conventions, they’d use these terms as no more than expressions.”
Lastly, another sharing of an excerpt of Buddha's discourse in MN 140:
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.”
----
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.”
He said: "[he] has called out you and Angelo several times as preaching an unhealthy, inhumane form of no-self that does not represent the middle way"
Soh replied:
He does not understand the approach and impact of insight nor the anatta insight. Depression and shadows can be released through genuine insight into anatta and emptiness but he does not have these insights at all.
See https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/03/pam-tans-anatta-realisation-and-purging.html
Our admin Tommy said, “These people should speak to me: Former opiate addicted, chain smoking, SSRI-filled, delusional mess. If I'm deluding myself and dissociating then my ability to fabricate experience must be absolutely amazing. 🤣🤣🤣”
Related article: Good book on healing trauma and nondual realization
- Reply
I also wrote, "havent watched both videos yet but Z said “X is stuck in non-doership and believes anatta is some sort of ego-death.”
Thats also been my impression with him
99% of people who speak about no self dont go beyond these
They havent even realised I AM or radiance, let alone nondual, or anatta. But many just think it is anatta
The dunning kruger effect is strong for so many people. This is why i put an end to all the unchecked attainment announcing in atr group rules.. otherwise there will just be endless nonsense one after another and countless people misled"
On the different faces of self/Self and 'no self' experiences and insights, see my article https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/04/different-degress-of-no-self-non.html - Different Degrees of No-Self: Non-Doership, Non-dual, Anatta, Total Exertion and Dealing with Pitfalls
Yet another admin pointed out, "From what Angelo and others have said, I'm guessing he's programmed himself into dissociation and depersonalization, like XYZ did, and now thinks that everyone else has done the same thing."
Also, anyone who mistakes anatta with some sort of ego death state clearly hasn't been reading AtR at all.
See https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/07/anatta-is-dharma-seal-or-truth-that-is.html
Excerpt:
"First I do not see Anatta as merely a freeing from personality sort of experience as you mentioned; I see it as that a self/agent, a doer, a thinker, a watcher, etc, cannot be found apart from the moment to moment flow of manifestation or as its commonly expressed as ‘the observer is the observed’; there is no self apart from arising and passing. A very important point here is that Anatta/No-Self is a Dharma Seal, it is the nature of Reality all the time -- and not merely as a state free from personality, ego or the ‘small self’ or a stage to attain. This means that it does not depend on the level of achievement of a practitioner to experience anatta but Reality has always been Anatta and what is important here is the intuitive insight into it as the nature, characteristic, of phenomenon (dharma seal).
To put further emphasis on the importance of this point, I would like to borrow from the Bahiya Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.10.irel.html) that ‘in the seeing, there is just the seen, no seer’, ‘in the hearing, there is just the heard, no hearer’ as an illustration. When a person says that I have gone beyond the experiences from ‘I hear sound’ to a stage of ‘becoming sound’, he is mistaken. When it is taken to be a stage, it is illusory. For in actual case, there is and always is only sound when hearing; never was there a hearer to begin with. Nothing attained for it is always so. This is the seal of no-self. Therefore to a non dualist, the practice is in understanding the illusionary views of the sense of self and the split. Before the awakening of prajna wisdom, there will always be an unknowing attempt to maintain a purest state of 'presence'. This purest presence is the 'how' of a dualistic mind -- its dualistic attempt to provide a solution due to its lack of clarity of the spontaneous nature of the unconditioned. It is critical to note here that both the doubts/confusions/searches and the solutions that are created for these doubts/confusions/searches actually derive from the same cause -- our karmic propensities of ever seeing things dualistically.
John Tan adds: "This is the seal of no-self and can be realized and experienced in all moments; not just a mere concept.""
Also, see my recent new article that I made into a 'Must Read' article featured on the Must Read list in AtR blog: https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2024/09/genuine-realisation-is-rare.html - "Genuine Realisation is Rare, Most Claimants are Delusional"
