A reader’s question (paraphrased)

A reader writes that much non-dual literature explains māyā with the familiar ocean-and-waves image: each individual life is like a wave or bubble that briefly rises from the ocean of consciousness and then subsides. From that perspective, liberation is often pictured as the bursting of the bubble—the dissolution of the illusion of separateness back into the vast sea.

But, the reader continues, if we truly are the sea, then another wave inevitably forms. The ocean’s nature is to move, surge, and dance; the play of waves is not an error to fix but an expression of what the sea is. Likewise, consciousness naturally manifests as forms and experiences—it plays. This spontaneous līlā (divine play) is not opposed to truth; it is truth in motion.

Both Buddhist and Hindu traditions often motivate practice with the wish to be free from the cycle of birth and death—to stop returning, to stop taking up form, since existence is bound up with suffering. Yet, viewed through non-duality, a question arises: if there is no real separation from the “ocean of being,” how could we ever truly avoid “becoming a wave” again?

If it is the very nature of the sea to move and the nature of consciousness to express itself, then what we call reincarnation or manifestation might be the spontaneous rhythm of the infinite rather than a mistake to escape. From this angle, the reader finds it hard to feel motivated for arduous spiritual practice aimed at liberation—because if the ocean-and-wave metaphor holds, we will simply become a wave again (perhaps not here, but in other realms). So: why practice at all? The reader asks for my view when I have time, and ends with thanks for the resources on Awakening to Reality, which they found immensely helpful.

Soh's Reply:

• Compelled cycling continues so long as ignorance and karma persist; ending their causes ends compelled rebirth (dependent origination).
• Compassionate play is the Buddha’s free, effortless manifestation—non-abiding in either saṃsāra or static cessation—appearing as needed for beings via nirmāṇakāya. (Encyclopedia of Buddhism)

• Prajñā (wisdom) that sees through both “self” and “things” as inherently existent, purifying the two obscurations—(i) afflictive and (ii) cognitive (subtle grasping at inherent existence)—the twin veils preventing Buddhahood. (Encyclopedia of Buddhism)
• Bodhicitta and the pāramitās (generosity, ethics, patience, vigor, concentration, wisdom), walking the ten bhūmis toward effortless, compassionate activity (to and beyond the eighth “Immovable”). (lotsawahouse.org)

• “The Tendency to Extrapolate a Universal Consciousness” (Awakening to Reality): https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/12/the-tendency-to-extrapolate-universal.html . (awakeningtoreality.com)
• “No Universal Mind” (Awakening to Reality; with a helpful quote from Khenpo Tsewang Dongyal): https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/08/no-universal-mind.html . (awakeningtoreality.com)
• “No Universal Mind, Part 3” (Awakening to Reality): https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2022/03/no-universal-mind-part-3.html . (awakeningtoreality.com)

• “Though non-duality is experienced, it is not thorough. He sank back to a source and ding dong in between. Is there Witness without conditions? Are there moments of manifestation without conditions where Witness is experienced? If there is, then it is a game. If not, then know the truth of Dependent Origination. There is a stage 6. The nature of Presence is empty.”
• “Buddhism is nothing but replacing the ‘Self’ in Hinduism with Condition Arising. Keep the clarity, the presence, the luminosity and eliminate the ultimate ‘Self’, the controller, the supreme. Still you must taste, sense, eat, hear and see Pure Awareness in every authentication. And every authentication is Bliss.” (2004)
• “The part of stage 5 must be led forward by DO [dependent origination], otherwise one will sink back to a source. Very often, this is the case. So don't underestimate the simple sentence of ‘manifestation is the source’. It is the key to non-duality then lead to DO. It must be DO that lead one out of the source. Then all broken pieces will slowly fall into place. Otherwise, we will have all those funny theories like reality is lila, a game plot of God. That is because causes and conditions is not understood, and how awareness becomes causes and conditions. When luminosity-emptiness is experienced in its total state, then it is dharmakaya. Experiencing the luminosity aspect itself is not enough. It is best not to talk about transcendental body.” (2006)

• Overcoming cyclic existence matters because the Buddha teaches that saṃsāra is only suffering; its beginning is untraceable and its ledger of pain exceeds the waters of the oceans (SN 15.13). Let this stir urgency, not apathy. (SuttaCentral)
• A conscious emanation of an eighth-bhūmi bodhisattva or a Buddha does not suffer as we do; they freely manifest to guide and liberate—this is non-abiding nirvāṇa and trikāya in action. (Encyclopedia of Buddhism)
• Our human birth is precious and rare (the blind turtle simile). We must practice as if our hair were on fire, mindful of death and impermanence, because conditions change swiftly and opportunities vanish. (SuttaCentral)

• SN 15.13 (oceans of blood), blind turtle (SN 56.48), Bāhiya (Ud 1.10), and Fire Sermon (SN 35.28) are all explicitly referenced with canonical sources. (SuttaCentral)
• Non-abiding nirvāṇa and trikāya are grounded with accessible references; the eighth-bhūmi point is anchored in a traditional stages-and-paths resource. (Encyclopedia of Buddhism)
• The refutations of “universal consciousness” are included with three specific links (ATR 2018/2021/2022). (awakeningtoreality.com) 

One of the most top-voted threads on Reddit's streamentry subreddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/streamentry/comments/igored/insight_buddhism_a_reconsideration_of_the_meaning/

[9:07 PM, 8/27/2020] John Tan: Yes pretty much agree with what he said.
[9:40 PM, 8/27/2020] John Tan: But the same insight of anatta must be applied to object, characteristics, cause and effect, production and cessation...which is a more slippery issue. Nevertheless, experientially seeing through self/Self is still most crucial.

John Tan
Friday, January 23, 2015 at 6:13pm UTC+08

You cannot choose and pick what you like about liberation and enlightenment. Saying one has actualized anatta and uprooted self and attained arahatship is not what you see people declaring here and there. I have told you many times what [these people] realized is only at most stream entry. You are talking about liberation and freedom from cyclical existence (Note by Soh: Do read this article  for clarifications, Why Overcome Cyclic Rebirths?) and therefore you are referring to arahatship.

......

John Tan: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/08/insight-buddhism-reconsideration-of.html
(Note: Based on previous context, I've assumed this is the link for "insight-buddhism...")

[6:11 am, 19/04/2022] John Tan: This article is written myriad object?
[6:14 am, 19/04/2022] John Tan: Should put geoff and myriad objects article in main link, I think it clears a lot of misconceptions.
Soh: Yeah.. ok
Main link as in the stickied posts in atr blog?
John Tan: Yes
Soh: Ok
[9:58 am, 19/04/2022] John Tan: Any links to insightful articles?
[9:58 am, 19/04/2022] John Tan: I think a section on that is good
Soh: Ok.. later i think how to create
John Tan: Otherwise many ppl might missed all these good articles
[9:59 am, 19/04/2022] John Tan: Otherwise many ppl might miss all these good articles
[9:59 am, 19/04/2022] John Tan: And its really difficult to search through the whole blog other than u
[10:00 am, 19/04/2022] John Tan: Nafis is another one that probably went through the whole blog... Lol
Soh: yeah im surprise he is becoming like me.. many of the posts he pasted was what i wanted to pasted but lazy lol

….

Update, 2024:

I recently wrote on reddit:

What Krodha said in this thread is right:

 “The streamentry subreddit is full of people who overvalue their own meditation experiences. Most who claim stream-entry aren’t stream-entrants.”

“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."

I would add that many people have misunderstood what stream entry is. Maybe 99% on reddit. The only thread on the streamentry subreddit that correctly presents stream entry can be found in https://www.reddit.com/r/streamentry/comments/igored/insight_buddhism_a_reconsideration_of_the_meaning/ , it is a good read and highly recommended reading.

——

Glad you liked it. If that interests you, I think this should interest you too. On nondual awareness and its nature and the subtleties of insight:

• https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html
• https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2009/03/on-anatta-emptiness-and-spontaneous.html
• https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2007/03/mistaken-reality-of-amness.html

🙏 :) p.s. I'm Soh, and Thusness (John Tan) is my mentor... I've been through similar stages in my journey

——

Self-view is well defined, for example, as I quoted in my article:

“The contemplation of neti neti, or dissociation, the separation of the witness from the witnessed, Self from not-self and so on, is done to 'support' a position of a true Self. So with regards to the phenomenal world of everchanging things, I reject as not me and mine, for I am the ultimate Witness that is perceiving all these.

This is the false View no. 4 described in Sabbasava Sutta: "...As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self... or the view It is precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self of mine — the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions — is the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will stay just as it is for eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress." - the commentary of 'Middle Length Discourses' book explains, "of these six views, the first two represent the simple antinomy of eternalism and annihilationism; the view that ‘no self exists for me’ is not the non-self doctrine of the Buddha, but the materialist view that identifies the individual with the body and thus holds that there is no personal continuity beyond death. The next three views may be understood to arise out of the philosophically more sophisticated observation that experience has a built-in reflexive structure that allows for self-consciousness, the capacity of the mind to become cognizant of itself, its contents, and the body with which it is inter-connected. Engaged in a search for his 'true nature,' the untaught ordinary person will identify self either with both aspects of the experience (view 3), or with the observer alone (view 4), or with the observed alone (view 5). The last view is a full-blown version of eternalism in which all reservations have been discarded.”

• https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2011/10/anatta-not-self-or-no-self_1.html

The insight and realisation of anatman puts an end to all views of self.

——

Since self view is well defined by Buddha in several suttas, that is a very clear indication of when stream entry occurs. Most people however misunderstand that point and have a watered down version of “ending self view”.

So yes what you said is right it is not arbitrary

On a related note, i wrote an article about the different degrees of no self. Only the true anatman insight can end self view, not mere non doership, impersonality or even nondual: https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/04/different-degress-of-no-self-non.html

….

A crucial criteria in Buddha's teachings on stream entry is the ending of self-view. This ending of self-view marks the attainment of stream entry.
Krodha/Kyle Dixon explained well what that entails: https://www.reddit.com/r/Buddhism/comments/15m6m36/explain_like_im_five_what_is_selfview_how_to/

krodha · 6 mo. ago

What's an easy way to identify self view in daily life?

Self-view is the nonconceptual feeling of being an inner subjective knower of external phenomena that feel separate from you. If you feel that you are the seer of sights, hearer of sounds, feeler of feelings, knower of the known, that is self-view.

Overcoming self-view looks like this:

With the recognition of selflessness there is an emptying out of both the “subject” and “object” aspects of experience. We come to understand that “I-making” and “mine-making” with regard to the mind and body as well as all external representations is deluded. When the recognition of selflessness is fully developed there is no longer any reification of substantial referents to be experienced in relation to subjective grasping. Whatever is seen is merely the seen (diṭṭhamatta). Whatever is heard or sensed is merely the heard (sutamatta) and merely the sensed (mutamatta). Whatever is known is merely the known (viññātamatta). This is explained in Ud 1.10 Bāhiya Sutta:

"Then, Bāhiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bāhiya, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress."

When there is no self to be found one’s experience becomes very simple, direct, and uncluttered. When seeing, there is the coming together of visible form, the eye, and visual consciousness, that’s all. There is no separate “seer.” The seer is entirely dependent upon the seen. There can be no seer independent of the seen. There is no separate, independent subject or self.

This is also the case for the sensory object. The “seen” is entirely dependent upon the eye faculty and visual consciousness. There can be no object seen independent of the eye faculty and cognition. This is the case for all possible sensory objects. There is no separate, independent sensory object.

The same holds true for sensory consciousness as well. “Seeing” is entirely dependent upon the eye and visible form. There can be no seeing independent of the eye and cognition. This is the case for all possible sensory cognitions. There is no separate, independent sensory consciousness.

It’s important to understand this experientially. Let’s take the straightforward empirical experience of you looking at this screen right now as an example. Conventionally speaking, you could describe the experience as “I see the computer screen.” Another way of describing this is that there’s a “seer” who “sees” the “seen.” But look at the screen: are there really three independent and separate parts to your experience? Or are “seer,” “sees,” and “seen,” just three conceptual labels applied to this experience in which the three parts are entirely interdependent?

The “seer,” “seen,” and “seeing” are all empty and insubstantial. The eye faculty, visible form, and visual consciousness are all interdependent aspects of the same experience. You can’t peel one away and still have a sensory experience — there is no separation. AN 4.24 Kāḷakārāma Sutta:

Thus, monks, the Tathāgata does not conceive an [object] seen when seeing what is to be seen. He does not conceive an unseen. He does not conceive a to-be-seen. He does not conceive a seer.

He does not conceive an [object] heard when hearing what is to be heard. He does not conceive an unheard. He does not conceive a to-be-heard. He does not conceive a hearer.

He does not conceive an [object] sensed when sensing what is to be sensed. He does not conceive an unsensed. He does not conceive a to-be-sensed. He does not conceive a senser.

He does not conceive an [object] known when knowing what is to be known. He does not conceive an unknown. He does not conceive a to-be-known. He does not conceive a knower.

Sensory consciousness can’t be isolated as separate and independent. Nor can any of these other interdependent phenomena. Even the designations that we apply to these various phenomena are entirely conventional, dependent designations. But this doesn’t mean that we should now interpret our experience as being some sort of cosmic oneness or unity consciousness or whatever one may want to call it. That's just another empty, dependent label isn’t it? The whole point of this analysis is to see the emptiness of all referents, and thereby stop constructing and defining a “self.”

— Geoff/Jnana

(Note: The "15 Share" part from Reddit is omitted as it's interaction metadata)

Note by Soh: For the full chapter and article by Geoff/Jnana which is very highly recommended, "required reading", please read in full: Great Resource of Buddha's Teachings

Update, 2022:

Someone wrote:

>the first five looks fairly easy, even somebody trained in Adaita Vendanta could do most of them

Soh:

Actually what triggers stream entry would be a direct experiential realization of anatman and conditionality. This is different from the realization of atman-brahman in Hinduism or Advaita Vedanta.

Anatman could be summarised as the realization that in truth, always already, in seeing, there is just the seen, no seer, in hearing, there is just sound, no hearer, and so on. Read Bahiya Sutta and Kalaka Sutta for example. Also check out the chapters on selflessness and cessation in this well compiled PDF: https://app.box.com/s/nxby5606lbaei9oudiz6xsyrdasacqph

Also, you should read this well written article explaining what stream entry is, what the realization entails, for example: https://www.reddit.com/r/streamentry/comments/igored/insight_buddhism_a_reconsideration_of_the_meaning/

When the direct realization of anatman manifests and you attain stream entry, you instantly cut off the first three fetters all at once. You will no longer have skeptical doubt about the Buddhadharma because now you have direct experiential realization of it and have ascertained the Buddha's words to be true.

Edit and update on my first point: When you experience impersonality and even nondual even in Advaita Vedanta, it is certainly not the overcoming of self view of the first fetter. There can still be the view of an unchanging self or awareness like vedanta. It is very clear by reading all the suttas that overcoming of self view covers even eternal witness and substantialist nondual views, so impersonality and nondual does not reach the elimination of self view that a stream enterer has attained.

I wrote an article before with citations from Buddha on how all these self views are refuted, including an eternal witness or an unchanging infinite consciousness as self and so on http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2011/10/anatta-not-self-or-no-self_1.html — stream entry realization covers the dissolution of all these subtle views of self and inherent existence.

Further Reading & Resources