John Ahn said (I'm putting this here so Soh can comment):
I don't really recognize the people in the group anymore. But I've been studying in a way with Wei Yu and John Tan's stuff for the past 11 years. I don't anymore, actually I haven't for sometime. And I'll sort of explain why here.
(Wei Yu has me blocked so if someone can post this to him it'd be good or whatever). For some reason this morning I felt like writing this.
I don't really recognize the people in the group anymore. But I've been studying in a way with Wei Yu and John Tan's stuff for the past 11 years. I don't anymore, actually I haven't for sometime. And I'll sort of explain why here.
(Wei Yu has me blocked so if someone can post this to him it'd be good or whatever). For some reason this morning I felt like writing this.
First
of all the I AM that's often pointed out by the blog is just the ego.
It's certainly not the I AM that's taught by masters in other tradtions.
If you look at the actual teachings of I AM, the sense of background
is rarely mentioned other than the sky and cloud example which just
points to the metaphor of something already present and things that
cloud it.
The ego is the sense of a solid background, separation, and centainty. Or in the words of a teacher I know, the "refusal to participate in phenomena." If you ask your self "who am I" in the conventional sense, it will lead to this sense of center, background, because the ego is our usual sense of self located within and withdrawn within the body. It can be localized or conceptually widened as if a container of phenomena.
The anatta mentioned by the blog is when you see that this pullback "self" is not real but manufactured by the mind. So the realization brings the person into more involvement and activity with the world, thereby creating a sense of immediacy with phenomena. You become more active by default.
Buddhist philosophy of depedent arising is constantly invoked to stabilize the externalization.
And...that's all it is.
In my experience to conflate this as any spiritual realization or experience is so shortcoming. Please don't waste your precious lives believing that having a externalized outlook in day to day living is the extent of spirituality.
One thing you will notice is that the externalization of intention, which is all that anatta is, does not bring bliss or love. I asked thusness some years ago and he confirmed that himself. It does bring clarity and more energy because there is no longer extra effort in rerelgating every experience back to the self (less looping, less clinging). But to say it is some enligthened state, let alone saying things like 98% of masters don't understand what it is, is very limiting and ludicrous.
The ego is the sense of a solid background, separation, and centainty. Or in the words of a teacher I know, the "refusal to participate in phenomena." If you ask your self "who am I" in the conventional sense, it will lead to this sense of center, background, because the ego is our usual sense of self located within and withdrawn within the body. It can be localized or conceptually widened as if a container of phenomena.
The anatta mentioned by the blog is when you see that this pullback "self" is not real but manufactured by the mind. So the realization brings the person into more involvement and activity with the world, thereby creating a sense of immediacy with phenomena. You become more active by default.
Buddhist philosophy of depedent arising is constantly invoked to stabilize the externalization.
And...that's all it is.
In my experience to conflate this as any spiritual realization or experience is so shortcoming. Please don't waste your precious lives believing that having a externalized outlook in day to day living is the extent of spirituality.
One thing you will notice is that the externalization of intention, which is all that anatta is, does not bring bliss or love. I asked thusness some years ago and he confirmed that himself. It does bring clarity and more energy because there is no longer extra effort in rerelgating every experience back to the self (less looping, less clinging). But to say it is some enligthened state, let alone saying things like 98% of masters don't understand what it is, is very limiting and ludicrous.
- John Ahn cool thanks!