Showing posts with label Non Doership. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Non Doership. Show all posts
Perfect Brilliant Stillness by David Carse


 

 This is a nice book I read more than ten years ago. Not so much into anatta or emptiness, but about I AM and luminosity, impersonality and nondoership, and nonduality. Of the neo advaita type, with Tony Parson’s personal endorsement in it.

 
David carse is stage 4 sort of nondual, not anatta
 
(He had a permanent nondual awakening on ayahuasca, which is rare as I commented that most people only have passing peak experiences and glimpses through psychedelics)
 
 

https://www.perfectbrilliantstillness.org/



Session Start: Tuesday, 12 June, 2007

(9:02 PM) AEN:    Tony parsons say the following book is good, “It is so rare to see any work that holds that essential and fundamental perception without compromise.  Your book is a beacon which can shine through all of the fog and nonsense that is broadcast under the name of ‘advaita’ or ‘non-duality’. Especially as that expression comes out of no-one!”

Tony Parsons author of The Open Secret, As It Is and All There Is.
(9:03 PM) AEN:    -----
(9:03 PM) AEN:    

There is one tradition within Advaita which says that maya, the manifestation of the physical universe, is over-laid or superimposed on Sat Chit Ananda. I'm no scholar of these things, and can only attempt to describe what is seen here; and the Understanding here is that there is no question of one thing superimposed on another. Maya, the manifestation, the physical universe, is precisely Sat Chit Ananda, is not other than it, does not exist on its own as something separate to be overlaid on top of something else. This is the whole point! There is no maya! The only reason it appears to have its own reality and is commonly taken to be real in itself is because of a misperceiving, a mistaken perception which
(9:03 PM) AEN:    sees the appearance and not What Is. This is the meaning of Huang Po's comment that "no distinction should be made between the Absolute and the sentient world." No distinction! There is only One. There is not ever in any sense two. All perception of distinction and separation, all perception of duality, and all perception of what is known as physical reality, is mind-created illu-sion. When a teacher points at the physical world and says, "All this is maya," what is being said is that what you are seeing is illusion; what all this is is All That Is, pure Being Consciousness Bliss Outpouring; it is your perception of it as a physical world that is maya, illusion.
(9:06 PM) AEN:    -----
(9:06 PM) AEN:    Then there is no one to know but only the knowing, and all this world is as in a dream or a vision; only Brilliance beyond light, Love beyond love, clear knowing pure beauty streaming through these transparent forms and no one here at all.

After the jungle, there is an intensely odd and very beau-tiful quality to the experience of life. In one sense I can only describe everything, all experience, as having a certain emptiness. This is the sense in which everything used to matter, to be vital and important, and is now seen as unreal, empty, not important, an illusion. Once it is seen that the beyond-brilliance of Sat Chit Ananda is all that is, the dream continues as a kind of shadow. Yet, at the same moment that all of what appears in the dream is experi-enced as empty, it is also seen as more deeply beautiful and perfect than ever imagined, precisely because it is not other than Sat Chit Ananda, than all that is. Everything that does not matter, that is empty illusion, is at the same time itself the beyond-brilliance, the perfect beauty. Somehow there is a balance; these two appa
(9:07 PM) AEN:    these two apparently opposite aspects do not cancel each other out but complement each other. This makes no 'sense,' yet it is how it is.
(9:09 PM) Thusness:    very good!
(9:09 PM) AEN:    eh u're online! hahahaha
(9:09 PM) Thusness:    yeah
(9:09 PM) AEN:    There is in no way an individual sitting here talking to you. This body is nothing, an appearance in the dream. All there is is Consciousness, and it is Consciousness which is streaming through this appearance.

There is nothing here that exists in and of itself. What we call the human being is not an independent being, not an originating mechanism, not a transmitter. It is a relay station, a pass-through mechanism for Consciousness, the One Consciousness, All That Is. That is what I am, talking to you. And it is the same One Consciousness listening to this, looking back at me out of those eyes you call your own. What I am when I say 'I Am' is exactly the same as what you are when you say 'I Am.'
(9:09 PM) AEN:    http://www.non-dualitybooks.com/Perfect%20Brilliant%20Stillness.htm
(9:09 PM)    Thusness is now Online
(9:12 PM) AEN:    strange i thought i saw u offline
(9:12 PM) AEN:    u were offline just now rite?
(9:12 PM) Thusness:    i am online now.
(9:12 PM) AEN:    yea just now leh
(9:12 PM) AEN:    when i first pasted :P
(9:12 PM) Thusness:    online...
(9:12 PM) AEN:    ohh i must have seen wrongly haha
(9:13 PM) Thusness:    Tony parsons is really good and clear.
(9:13 PM) Thusness:    just like what i described....heehehe
(9:13 PM) Thusness:    but i don't tink ppl will know what he is saying.
(9:13 PM) AEN:    no leh
(9:13 PM) AEN:    thats not tony parsons
(9:13 PM) AEN:    but tony parsons thinks this author is good
(9:14 PM) Thusness:    huh?
(9:14 PM) Thusness:    no...
(9:14 PM) AEN:    he is david carse
(9:14 PM) AEN:    i said Tony parsons say the following book is good, “It is so rare to see any work that holds that essential and fundamental perception without compromise.  Your book is a beacon which can shine through all of the fog and nonsense that is broadcast under the name of ‘advaita’ or ‘non-duality’. Especially as that expression comes out of no-one!”

Tony Parsons author of The Open Secret, As It Is and All There Is.
(9:14 PM) Thusness:    ic.
(9:14 PM) Thusness:    yeah...
(9:14 PM) Thusness:    get his book...
(9:14 PM) AEN:    david carse or tony parsons lol
(9:15 PM) Thusness:    the one written the para on top
(9:15 PM) AEN:    david carse
(9:15 PM) AEN:    icic
(9:15 PM) Thusness:    i wonder he has had that experience for how long?
(9:15 PM) Thusness:    and is closer to buddhism....
(9:15 PM) AEN:    must have been many many years
(9:15 PM) AEN:    he said
(9:15 PM) AEN:    

Almost everyone I've heard of for whom this nameless thing appears to have been genuine seems to have gone into a long gestation period. Robert Adams, Tony Parsons, Suzanne Segal, Douglas Harding, and others; even Ramana Maharshi: ten, twelve, twenty years before any 'coming out.' In the Zen tradition, when a student monk comes to awakening he stays on in the role of student for another ten years of 'stabilizing.' Even Hui-Neng, the Sixth Zen Patriarch went and hid in the mountains for fifteen years after it happened.
(9:16 PM) AEN:    wait
(9:16 PM) AEN:    

Clearly in my case it was different, almost the complete opposite. After a lifetime of experiencing life as almost unbearably confusing and painful, of fighting against life and everything it brought, very different patterns and habits and ways of thinking were laid down in the condi-tioning. There was no background of the Teaching to fall back on or refer to. And, there was no community or other resources for support immediately after the happening.
(9:16 PM) AEN:    strange
(9:16 PM) AEN:    he never mention
(9:16 PM) AEN:    haha
(9:16 PM) AEN:    he said

Makes sense here. Jed McKenna calls it a "damn peculiar ten years" and I'd have to agree. It simply takes a while for the body/mind organism to adjust. Everything that people think is important and makes sense, is seen to be completely absurd, meaningless. And what people don't even see, is Perfect, beautiful, complete, needs no words. There is an inclination, even greater than previously, toward silence and solitude even though there is obviously no such thing.
(9:17 PM) Thusness:    david carse...
(9:17 PM) AEN:    yea
(9:17 PM) Thusness:    i am not sure whether he practices meditation...lol
(9:17 PM) AEN:    haha how come
(9:18 PM) Thusness:    vipassana meditation in particular.
(9:18 PM) AEN:    u think he does?
(9:18 PM) Thusness:    nope
(9:18 PM) AEN:    i think he's more to advaita
(9:18 PM) Thusness:    i am asking.
(9:18 PM) AEN:    oic
(9:18 PM) Thusness:    from what u have posted, his experience is thorough and clear.
(9:19 PM) AEN:    icic..
(9:19 PM) AEN:    yea otherwise tony parsons wldnt say such gd things hehe
(9:19 PM) Thusness:    yes.
(9:20 PM) Thusness:    but to deconstruct all and relook not from conventional standpoint.
(9:20 PM) Thusness:    a total start with a new and right view
(9:21 PM) Thusness:    it should be there is no I and mine from start.
(9:21 PM) Thusness:    therefore it is exactly what Buddha described in DO.
(9:21 PM) AEN:    icic..
(9:21 PM) AEN:    so u mean wat david carse should understand DO?
(9:22 PM) Thusness:    i wonder how many years he has had that clarity of experience and does he go through insight meditation.
(9:22 PM) AEN:    oic.. have to check
(9:22 PM) Thusness:    it will be good if it is more than 5 yrs. :)
(9:23 PM) AEN:    icic..
(9:23 PM) AEN:    i think so bah, he said others need to go through 10+ years etc b4 body/mind is adapted or something
(9:24 PM) AEN:    so he probably had v long experience
(9:27 PM) AEN:    btw i dont think meditation led to his enlightenment
(9:28 PM) AEN:     Hui-Neng says that while the Understanding is sudden, what he calls 'deliverance' is gradual indeed. Near as I can figure, the mind/body thing is impacted by the happening of the Understanding, and that can take some adjustment. How can it be otherwise? In some cases perhaps the transition can be smooth: if for example you live in a culture and a time in which you are saturated in the the basic elements of the Teaching all your life, the period of adjustment in the body/mind organism may be very mild.

Clearly in my case it was different, almost the complete opposite. After a lifetime of experiencing life as almost unbearably confusing and painful, of fighting against life and everything it brought, very different patterns and habits and ways of thinking were laid down in the condi-tioning. There was no background of the Teaching to fall back on or refer to. And, there was no community or other resources for support immediately after the happening.

There is a tradition in Buddhism of something called Pratyeka-bodhi, 'solitary realization.' It refers to Awakening when it occurs ou
(9:28 PM) AEN:     There is a tradition in Buddhism of something called Pratyeka-bodhi, 'solitary realization.' It refers to Awakening when it occurs outside of the usual transmission of teaching from master to disciple, and without the usual background or preparation or support. In such a case, the road to deliv-erance might well be even more "damn peculiar" than otherwise. Perhaps Ramesh was thinking of something like this when he said to me,
(9:28 PM) AEN:    his awakening was sudden and he didnt knew any teachings
(9:30 PM) Thusness:    not meditation lead to his experience.
(9:30 PM) Thusness:    it is I want to know whether he meditates.
(9:30 PM) AEN:    orh ok icic
(9:31 PM) AEN:    btw u tink tony parsons better or david carse's bk better? lol
(9:32 PM) Thusness:    both are good.
(9:32 PM) Thusness:    what is david carse url?
(9:32 PM) AEN:    icic
(9:32 PM) AEN:    i dun tink he has website..
(9:32 PM) Thusness:    ic
(9:33 PM) AEN:    http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0976578301/ref=sib_dp_pt/105-5634522-7843629#reader-link
(9:34 PM) AEN:    "What you think you are, a separate individual entity, is part of this illusion. You are not the doer of any action or the thinker of any thought. Events happen, but there is no doer. All there is, is Consciousness. That is what You truly are."
(9:34 PM) AEN:    not much more info about his story
(9:34 PM) AEN:    lol
(9:34 PM) AEN:    its probably somewhere in the book but u have to get it :P
(9:35 PM) AEN:    chapter 3.. not included lol
(9:40 PM) Thusness:    cool...
(9:40 PM) Thusness:    the first page about copyright...
(9:40 PM) Thusness:    lol
(9:40 PM) AEN:    hahaha
(9:40 PM) AEN:    theres chapter 2 also
(9:41 PM) AEN:    chapt 1 and 2
(9:41 PM) Thusness:    straight away there is no 'mine'
(9:41 PM) AEN:    yeha
(9:41 PM) AEN:    yeah
(9:41 PM) AEN:    in fact
(9:41 PM) AEN:    the book name is this
(9:41 PM) AEN:    Perfect Brilliant Stillness: beyond the individual self
(9:42 PM) AEN:    "An intimate account of spontaneous spiritual enlightenment and its implication in a life lived beyond the individual self." - http://www.nonduality.com/perfect_brilliant_stillness.htm
(9:44 PM) AEN:    lol he awakened when he was working on strange shamanic practices
(9:46 PM) AEN:    hmm apparently ramesh balsekar was one of david carse's teachers?
(9:46 PM) AEN:    http://www.amazon.com/Perfect-Brilliant-Stillness-David-Carse/dp/0976578301
(9:51 PM) Thusness:    yeah
(9:53 PM) Thusness:    but the way he express in the chapter is not good enough.
(9:53 PM) Thusness:    ehehehhe
(9:53 PM) AEN:    which chapter
(9:54 PM) AEN:    hmm what things he express?
(9:54 PM) Thusness:    both chapter.
(9:54 PM) Thusness:    chapters.
(9:54 PM) AEN:    oo icic
(9:54 PM) AEN:    what u tink is not good enough
(9:54 PM) Thusness:    but good to get his book.
(9:54 PM) AEN:    oic
(9:54 PM) Thusness:    probably it is because not buddhist trained. :P
(9:54 PM) Thusness:    lol
(9:54 PM) Thusness:    joking.
(9:55 PM) AEN:    wahahahaha
(9:55 PM) AEN:    hmm
(9:55 PM) AEN:    but wat do u tink is not expressed good enough
(9:55 PM) AEN:    like in wat aspect
(9:55 PM) Thusness:    i prefer buddhism and DO.
(9:55 PM) Thusness:    and vipassana meditation.
(9:55 PM) Thusness:    it is very important.
(9:56 PM) Thusness:    if can go along with non-dual realisation.  It produces fantastic results. :P
(9:56 PM) AEN:    oo icic..
(9:56 PM) Thusness:    practice insight meditation.
(9:57 PM) AEN:    ok
(9:57 PM) Thusness:    if u can have non-dual insight and u practice insight meditation.
(9:57 PM) Thusness:    u will know what i meant.
(9:57 PM) AEN:    icic..
(9:58 PM) Thusness:    the best is 3-5 yrs of solid practice in meditation after non-dual experience.
(9:58 PM) AEN:    oic..
(10:01 PM) Thusness:    it is very difficult to tell u the experience but normally 3-5 yrs after the non-dual realisation with the support of insight meditation will be great.
(10:01 PM) AEN:    icic..
(10:01 PM) AEN:    will realise 'emptiness as form'?
(10:03 PM) Thusness:    should. :)
(10:03 PM) AEN:    icic..
(10:03 PM) Thusness:    that is very very important like mind/body drop
(10:03 PM) AEN:    oic
(10:03 PM) Thusness:    if not the experience will not be complete even at the non-dual stage.
(10:03 PM) Thusness:    the intensity and clarity of manifestation alone.
(10:03 PM) Thusness:    and nothing else.
(10:03 PM) AEN:    oic..
(10:07 PM) Thusness:    but my advise is to find someone with that sort of experience and is a buddhist.
(10:07 PM) AEN:    icic
(10:07 PM) Thusness:    however mostly is in those zen monks.
(10:07 PM) Thusness:    lol
(10:07 PM) Thusness:    and i don't quite like zen.
(10:07 PM) AEN:    hahaha why
(10:07 PM) AEN:    zen monks like who
(10:08 PM) Thusness:    dogen is good.
(10:08 PM) AEN:    oic
(10:08 PM) AEN:    why u dont like zen ah
(10:08 PM) Thusness:    huang po also
(10:08 PM) AEN:    icic
(10:08 PM) Thusness:    i don't like zen books.
(10:08 PM) Thusness:    like what longchen said.
(10:08 PM) Thusness:    in dzogchen.
(10:09 PM) AEN:    i cant really remember what exactly longchen said liao.. he said wat.. dun wanna reinforce more concepts?
(10:09 PM) AEN:    cant remember
(10:09 PM) AEN:    whats ur reason
(10:09 PM) Thusness:    first many haven't really scratch the surface yet.
(10:09 PM) Thusness:    and nowadays many zen masters are half past six also
(10:09 PM) Thusness:    unlike the past.
(10:09 PM) AEN:    as in what
(10:10 PM) Thusness:    in their realisation.
(10:10 PM) AEN:    oic
(10:10 PM) Thusness:    it is very dangerous.
(10:10 PM) AEN:    icic
(10:10 PM) AEN:    how come
(10:10 PM) Thusness:    anyone that gone through the process of training will know how subtle 'bonds' are.
(10:11 PM) Thusness:    it is not just a sudden realisation then that's it sort of stuff.
(10:11 PM) AEN:    oic..
(10:11 PM) Thusness:    and even the realisation is mostly advaita like.
(10:12 PM) AEN:    icic.. as in what, 'i amness'?
(10:12 PM) Thusness:    yeah...no matter how intense the experience is, still under the bond.
(10:12 PM) AEN:    oic
(10:13 PM) AEN:    btw so
(10:13 PM) AEN:    whats ur reason for not liking zen or dzogchen books or stuff like that
(10:13 PM) AEN:    even if its good
(10:13 PM) AEN:    as in deep in insight
(10:14 PM) Thusness:    nope...i like dzogchen books.
(10:14 PM) Thusness:    i think they are written more proper.
(10:14 PM) Thusness:    with clear and detailed explanations.
(10:14 PM) Thusness:    precise too.
(10:14 PM) AEN:    oic..
(10:14 PM) Thusness:    however it must not prone towards advaita.
(10:15 PM) AEN:    icic
(10:15 PM) AEN:    then zen books leh :P
(10:15 PM) AEN:    explanation no good?
(10:15 PM) Thusness:    zen stressed on directness
(10:15 PM) AEN:    namkhai norbu is good rite?
(10:15 PM) AEN:    icic.. wot about it
(10:15 PM) Thusness:    the one u posted me yesterday?
(10:15 PM) Thusness:    yeah...
(10:15 PM) AEN:    ya
(10:15 PM) Thusness:    that one is very good.
(10:16 PM) AEN:    icic
(10:16 PM) Thusness:    u have to practice meditation.
(10:16 PM) AEN:    ok
(10:16 PM) Thusness:    insight meditation once non-duality insight is gained, practice harder.
(10:16 PM) AEN:    icic.. ok
(10:16 PM) Thusness:    the first 2 years of deconstruction will still be tough.
(10:17 PM) Thusness:    later when u can feel the crystal clarity in manifestation and realised the texture and fabric of awareness, u will not see it as formless, u will see emptiness as forms.
(10:17 PM) Thusness:    formless and forms are one.
(10:17 PM) AEN:    icic..
(10:21 PM) AEN:    I only am all beings
I only exist as all appearances
I am only experienced as all sentience
I am only cognised as all knowing.
Only visible is all that is seen,
Every concept is a concept of what I am.
All that sseems to be is my being,
For what I am is not any thing.

Being whatever is phenomenal,
Whatever can be conceived as appearing,
I who am conceiving cannot be conceived,
Since only I conceive,
How could I conceive what is conceiving?
What I am is what I conceive;
Is that not enough for me to be?
(10:21 PM) AEN:    ~ Wei Wu Wei
(10:21 PM) AEN:    what u tink
(10:21 PM) Thusness:    heard a lot about him but din read much
(10:21 PM) AEN:    oic
(10:21 PM) Thusness:    hehehe
(10:21 PM) Thusness:    i am almost done with forgetting everything
(10:21 PM) AEN:    lol
(10:21 PM) Thusness:    lol
(10:46 PM) AEN:    u there?
(10:46 PM) AEN:    now mike has a sudden interest in dzogchen liao
(10:46 PM) AEN:    after reading our posts
(10:46 PM) AEN:    LOL
(10:46 PM) AEN:    he wanna attend namkhai norbu's teachings now :P
(10:48 PM)    Thusness has changed his/her status to Idle
(10:51 PM)    You have just sent a nudge.
(10:51 PM) AEN:    lol
(10:51 PM) AEN:    i tink its gd for him
(10:56 PM)    AEN is now Offline

Labels: , , , , , , 0 comments | | edit post
Anatta is Not Just Non-Doership

 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 realization.

 

Although 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 as base."

 

Session Start: Saturday, March 07, 2009

 

(1:47 AM) AEN:            i just read kiloby's article on no doer... his anatta insight is mostly on the Stanza 1 rite?

 

(1:49 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

(1:50 AM) AEN:            actually he did mention conditioning a bit also

(1:52 AM) Thusness:    yes more on that but only the no doership. not seeing that there is no agent as a phenomena. and not seeing DO

(1:53 AM) AEN:            oic..

what do you mean 'no agent as a phenomena.'

(1:54 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?

(1:57 AM) AEN:            oic..

ya i tink longchen realised no doer first rite b4 seeing non dual the no agent is the non dual?

(1:58 AM) Thusness:    no agent as no doership...means in terms of controlling, coordinating

(1:59 AM) Thusness:    means there can be an agent, but that agent has no control

this means no doership. the other is the absence of an agent in phenomena. usually there are 2, the subject and the object

(1:59 AM) Thusness:    get it?

(2:00 AM) AEN:            oic..

yea i remember

galen sharp talked about

u are the watcher, but there is no doer

so thats only seeing the no doer aspect rite

(2:00 AM) Thusness:    not no doer. no doership

(2:01 AM) AEN:            ya

(2:01 AM) Thusness:    one is referring to the phenomena as an entity. one is referring to whether we have control over anything that is different

(2:01 AM) AEN:            oic..

(2:02 AM) Thusness:    means i do not see 2, i only see 1, in no doer

(2:02 AM) Thusness:    while no doership is seeing spontaneity without control. get it?

(2:03 AM) AEN:            yeah

so no doer = no agent + no doership

(2:03 AM) AEN:            ?

(2:03 AM) Thusness:    yeah

(2:03 AM) AEN:            icic

(2:03 AM) AEN:            kiloby talks about an agent?

(2:04 AM) Thusness:    actually both but not clear.

[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

Comments by John Tan in 2009 on these paragraphs from “The Sun My Heart” (see excerpts in Sun of Awareness and River of Perceptions),

 

"...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."

Labels: , 0 comments | | edit post
Non-Doership is Not Yet Anatta Realization
Just spoke to someone who mentioned he realized anatta and has stabilised it. Previously he has gone through the I AM.

But on further discussion it turns out what he refers to 'anatta' is what I call 'non-doership'. I told him,

"what's important is that in the midst of vivid manifestation, like hearing a sound, seeing a scenery, it can be realized that 'Awareness' and 'Witnessing' is none other than the sound, the colors, and so on, and there is no background agent, knower, seer, hearer,. this will lead to the collapsing of an agent and Witness into vivid luminous manifestation without needing to enter a state of nothingness


in the midst of vivid manifestation nirvana is seen, like in bahiya sutta. in the seen only the seen without you in terms of that and that is the end of suffering
there is a realization involving the complete seamlessness of subject-action-object, realizing that there is no seer besides seeing besides seen, the dualistic structure gets seen through and collapses
the actualization of anatta will dissolve any centerpoint or Witness
is your no-mind experience like 'there is no cold or heat' stable or only passing glimpses in meditation? is the sense of dualistic subject/object witnessing persistent in daily experience?"

 
He mentioned that his experience of no-mind of "there's just experience no one experiencing anything just experience" is only fleeting glimipses throughout the day, whereas his sense of Subject/Object Witnessing is persistent throughout his daily experience. Also in his glimpses of no-mind, "What I experienced was when I let go of all Concepts ideas everything what remained was experience alone. And suffering truly ended there"


I told him the experience no-mind is not the same as the realization of anatta.

All phenomena happening by itself spontaneously and causally (via dependent origination) on its own, without the sense of doership or control, is not what I call anatta realization.

 I told him, "i see, in that case i would consider that you are experiencing as non-doership, but the realization of anatta has not arisen.. once the realization of anatta in the sense of complete seeing through of the construct and sense of a seer-seeing-seen, the no-mind will become effortless and the tendency to fall back to subject-object witnessing will dissolve


the realization is as i described in http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2010/10/my-commentary-on-bahiya-sutta.html

and https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-wind-is-blowing.html"



He asked, "Ok. So this is your recommendation of where to start correct?"


I told him, 

"contemplate on bahiya sutta and challenge any sense of a seer, witnessing, seeing, hearing, as existing by its own side as anything other than the sound, color, sensation, etc. until a sudden realization arises that what you call 'witnessing' and 'awareness'... or 'seeing' is only colors, 'hearing' is only sound, never a seer or hearer beside



i think these links will clarify things for you, https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2018/11/no-mind-and-anatta-focusing-on-insight.html and also the article and comments by thusness at the comments section can be helpful - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2008/01/ajahn-amaro-on-non-duality-and.html
"

 


I do not have the slightest trace of subject/object duality for about the past 8 years after the realization of anatta. Before realization of anatta I was switching between Witness and glimpses of No Mind for some time.
Labels: , 7 comments | | edit post
The Pathologies of Insights (Determinism, Solipsism, Disease of Non-Conceptuality)
Writing this article has been on my to-do list for a few months but I couldn't do it due to exams and workload. Now I'm having a short holiday so I think I should quickly get this typed out.

There is a kind of pathology or danger in various kinds of insights because they are partial and one may not have yet seen the complete picture. As you may have seen in my recent discussions, the pathology or danger in non-doership is that one will fall into a kind of extreme deterministic thinking - that somehow because there is no doer, nothing can/should be done about things. This leads to a very passive attitude to things, or rather, one is restricted to experiencing no-self in a passive way (of merely letting experience happen in non-doership), one which prevents the experience of non-dual in action/activities via complete non-dual engagement, involvement, incorporating intentions, and later going into total exertion. (Also non-doership does not imply one has arisen non-dual insight)

Furthermore, someone who had some insight into the non-division of subject and object can fall into the extremes of subsuming (either object into subject like certain forms of traditional and neo Vedanta, or subsuming subject into object like Actualism), and via subsuming all phenomena into pure subjectivity, end up with an extreme notion of solipsism (the view that there is no others, only me).

Then there is the often mentioned-by-me (and Thusness) "disease of non-conceptuality". And finally -- blindness to karmic propensities, the afflictive actions and conditioning arising out of delusional framework of inherency and subject/object.

As I pasted some days back an excerpt from Thusness from one year ago on the disease of non-doership:

"John Tan: Nihilistic tendencies arise when the insight of anatta is skewed towards the no-doership aspect. The happening by itself must be correctly understood. It appears that things are accomplished by doing nothing but in actual case it is things get done due to ripening of action and conditions.

So the lack of self-nature does not imply nothing needs be done or nothing can be done. That is one extreme. At the other end of extreme is the self-nature of perfect control of what one wills, one gets. Both are seen to be false. Action + conditions leads to effect.

June 1 at 11:32am · Unlike · 8"

And I just wrote:

"What you said is not completely wrong but can be misleading unless you understand 'nature' as 'dependent origination' (replying to a post about anger, killing, suffering being the expression of nature instead of a self). Which is to say, it is not fate, or some sort of outside determinism, nor is it spontaneous arising without causes, but simply dependencies playing out here.

For example, torturing people is the result of ignorance, aggression, etc etc. There are various causes and conditions as listed in the twelve links of dependent arising. And it is not something that is fixed. By engaging in dharma practice we deal with the afflictions and liberate them. Four noble truths are like what doctor does - diagnosis, cause, relief, cure. Four noble truths are completely in alignment with "no self, dependent origination". It would be erroneous if a doctor realizes there is no self, therefore, thinks that all diseases are 'just as it is' and should not or cannot be dealt with. They should be dealt with. But they are dealt with not via the attempting to exert control or hard will via by the false notion of agency (sickness can't be cured merely by trying to will or control it out of existence - there are so many dependencies involved). They are dealt with via seeing its dependent origination and treating its dependent origination in a non-inherent way.

Now in the case of 'torturing', if someone practices metta, it can help (or if you prefer, leave out the 'someone' -- 'practicing metta can help'). Then when fundamental delusion is cleared, aggression can no longer arise. There is nobody controlling anger, anger arise whether one wants to or not -- yet it can be treated by applying the right antidote (e.g. metta) or actualizing wisdom so that it releases (e.g. anatta, twofold emptiness), just like diseases happen whether one wants to or not -- yet there is medicine, cure. There is suffering, the cause of suffering, the end of suffering, and the path that ends suffering."

Thusness then added on:

"“There is nobody controlling anger, anger arise whether one wants to or not”

Maybe sees it this way:

There is no one controlling anger, anger arises due to dependent origination.

With ignorance comes attachment. When attachment meets its secondary conditions, anger arises. Without secondary conditions, anger does not arise. Although it does not arise, it will not cease to arise unless the primary cause is severed. Here the appearance of “spontaneous arising” is seen from the perspective of DO.

Seeing this way, there is anatta; there is dependent origination; there is mindfulness of the cause of anger, the conditions, the cure and the ending of it. There is no bypassing as in “nothing needs be done”, albeit no-self."

...

Now.. there is another pathology which actually is the main one I wanted to address in this post.

On solipsism, as pointed out by Thusness before based on his own experience (that is, he too faced this tendency of solipsism after an initial breakthrough to nondual over a decade ago), the danger of someone going into nondual or even emptiness without the taste of total interpenetration is that one can easily fall into the extremes of solipsism. If we are directly experiencing our reality like in Vipassana, what we see are endless dependencies - seamless and intricate, in such a case there is no danger of falling into the view of solipsism.

As I wrote in my article Dharma Body last year: "...(Note: Dharma as simply a unit of experience dependently originating - not implying any inherently existing material universe [as the universe/dharma body here is seen as marvelous activities/phenomena dependently originating seamlessly without center or boundaries], nor is this dharma body in any sense a subjective body at all [if it is subjectively self-existent then causes and conditions will not be incorporated nor necessary for any given manifestation])..." - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2013/09/dharma-body.html

Also, as Piotr shared last month, "...what Soh told me in the past, if we apply Buddha's deconstruction from sound example from sutra, then clarity I call visual form right now of this laptop, letters is no more "mine" than any of secondary conditions right now, and Buddha's teaching about not-mine and other teachings sealed possibility of solipsism permanently for me. Somehow [solipsism] for me its non-issue lol "

He's referring to what I told him many months ago:

"Thusness wrote "you see, when we say there is no self or other, we can still not see in terms of DO."

I commented: this is very important.. and lately I'm seeing it more as well. To overcome all sense of I, me, and even mine, D.O. has to step in. Many people talk about no I, no background, but still there is sense of mine... and there are also those that say everything is 'the manifestation of my mind or my nature'.. that is subtly subsuming everything to mind. Even if there is no duality.

In dependent origination you totally see the entire formation of interdependencies... not in words but directly taste the totality of its workings forming every moment of experience. When the drum beat sounds you don't see it as just 'the manifestation of my mind' but you see it as the person hitting, the drum, the vibration, the ears etc... all in total exertion... how can that have anything to do with I or mine? It is not 'mine' anymore than it is the person hitting, the drum's, the vibration's... etc. It is not only that there is no hearer behind sound... not only no I but no mine at all.. the sound itself does not belong to anyone... it is the entire universe in total exertion so to speak.. but it is not understood in logic. You have to see the whole process and interdependencies directly. Breathing is like this... walking is like this... every action every experience is like this. This is the path to dissolve I, me, mine... only through D.O. is the release thorough.

Not 'everything is just consciousness' or 'everything is my consciousness'... consciousness isn't that special or important. It does not have a special, independent, ontological status. Rather it is the interdependencies the workings of D.O. through which that moment of consciousness/experience is in total exertion. The true turning point is when mind is completely separated from mine.. I, me, mine.. the dualistic and inherent tendency must be dissolved and replaced with the wisdom of D.O."

Some conversations with Thusness back in 2012 are quite illuminating on this subject:

10/22/2012 9:09 AM: John: To me is just is "AEN" an eternal being...that's all. No denial of AEN as a conventional self

10/27/2012 2:48 PM: John: All is just him is an inference too. There is no other is also an assumption
10/27/2012 2:48 PM: AEN: That's what I said lol
10/27/2012 2:48 PM: AEN: He didn't see it
10/27/2012 2:49 PM: John: But other mindstreams is a more valid assumption. Don't u think so?
10/27/2012 2:50 PM: John: And verifiable
10/27/2012 2:50 PM: AEN: Yeah

10/27/2012 6:21 PM: John: Whatever in conventional reality still remain, only that reification is seen through. Get it?
10/27/2012 6:23 PM: John: The centre is seen through be it "subject" or "object", they r imputed mental constructs.
10/27/2012 6:24 PM: John: Only the additional "ghostly something" is seen through
10/27/2012 6:26 PM: AEN: Ic..
10/27/2012 6:26 PM: John: Not construing and reifying. Nothing that "subject" does not exist.
10/27/2012 6:26 PM: John: Get it?
10/27/2012 6:28 PM: John: This seeing through itself led to implicit non-dual experience
10/27/2012 6:28 PM: AEN: "Nothing that "subject" does not exist." - what u mean?
10/27/2012 6:29 PM: John: Not "subject" or "object" does not exist.
10/27/2012 6:30 PM: John: Or dissolving object into subject or subject into object...etc
10/27/2012 6:30 PM: AEN: Ic..
10/27/2012 6:30 PM: John: That "extra" imputation is seen through.
10/27/2012 6:30 PM: AEN: Oic
10/27/2012 6:31 PM: John: R u clear? Conventional reality still remain as it is.
10/27/2012 6:34 PM: John: Btw focus more on practice in releasing any holdings....do not keep engaging on all these.
10/27/2012 6:35 PM: AEN: Ic.. Conventional reality are just names imposed on non-inherent aggregates right
10/27/2012 6:35 PM: John: Yes
10/27/2012 6:37 PM: John: That led to releasing of the mind from holding...no subsuming of anything
10/27/2012 6:39 PM: John: What u wrote is unclear
10/27/2012 6:40 PM: John: Do u get what I mean?
10/27/2012 6:42 PM: AEN: Yeah
10/27/2012 6:43 PM: John: Doesn't mean AEN does not exist...lol
10/27/2012 6:43 PM: John: Or I m u or u r me
10/27/2012 6:44 PM: John: Just not construing and reifying
10/27/2012 6:44 PM: AEN: Ic..
10/27/2012 6:45 PM: AEN: Nondual is collapsing objects to self, thus I am you
10/27/2012 6:45 PM: AEN: Anatta simply sees through reification, but conventionally I am I, you are you
10/27/2012 6:45 PM: John: Or collapsing subject into object
10/27/2012 6:45 PM: AEN: Ic..
10/27/2012 6:45 PM: John: Yes
10/27/2012 6:46 PM: John: U r still unclear abt this and mixed up
10/27/2012 6:47 PM: John: Seeing through the reification of "subject", "object", "self", "now", "here"
10/27/2012 6:48 PM: John: Get it?
10/27/2012 6:48 PM: AEN: Oic..
10/27/2012 6:48 PM: John: Seeing through "self" led to implicit non-dual experience
10/27/2012 6:49 PM: John: Coz experience turns direct without reification
10/27/2012 6:49 PM: John: In seeing, just scenery
10/27/2012 6:50 PM: John: Like u see through the word "weather"
10/27/2012 6:51 PM: John: That weather-ness
10/27/2012 6:51 PM: John: Be it subject/object/weather/...etc
10/27/2012 6:52 PM: AEN: ic..
10/27/2012 6:53 PM: John: That is mind free of seeing "things" existing inherently
10/27/2012 6:53 PM: John: Experience turns vivid direct and releasing
10/27/2012 6:55 PM: John: But I don't want u to keep participating idle talk and neglect practice...always over emphasizing unnecessarily
10/27/2012 6:57 PM: AEN: Oic..
10/27/2012 7:06 PM: John: What happens to experience?
10/27/2012 7:10 PM: John: I hv very important deal that should take place within this month hopefully they go through smoothly...we meet after that
10/27/2012 7:13 PM: AEN: Oic.. Ok..
10/27/2012 7:13 PM: AEN: U mean after anatta? Direct, luminous, but no ground of abiding (like some inherent awareness)
10/27/2012 7:15 PM: John: And what do u mean by that?
10/27/2012 7:20 PM: AEN: Means there are only transient six sense streams experience, in seen just seen, etc
10/27/2012 7:20 PM: AEN: Nothing extra
10/27/2012 7:21 PM: John: Six stream experiences is just a convenient raft
10/27/2012 7:21 PM: John: Nothing ultimate
10/27/2012 7:23 PM: John: Not only must u see that there is no Seer + seeing + seen...u must see the immerse connectedness
10/27/2012 7:26 PM: John: Implicit Non-dual in experience in anatta to u means what?

...

Then, there is another disease after one has some non-conceptual direct realization -- be it I AMness or some sort of non-dual insight, one has a direct taste of pristine, unsullied Awareness or Presence. One's practice then becomes based on that direct taste, that taste is only present when one is bare, naked and non-conceptual.

Furthermore, one may find that 'thoughts' is a source of much misery and confusion, and think that the goal of practice is therefore to completely strip off all thoughts. These practitioners could not find a resolution to these confusion and so they resorted to practice of non-conceptuality and naked awareness (however if they did realize anatta and emptiness, these confusions will dissolve but not via grasping to a state of non-conceptuality). Actually, suffering and confused thoughts are the result of a more fundamental underlying cause -- delusion, view of inherency, and so it is more important to resolve those fundamental underlying causes that causes grasping.

As I often quoted from Thusness in this article on the disease of non-conceptuality:
http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2011/08/disease-of-non-conceptuality.html

Excerpt: "In case 1 practitioners see ‘The seen is neither subjective nor objective.... it just IS....’
In terms of experience, practitioners will feel Universe, Life. However this is not anatta but rather the result of stripping off (deconstructing) identity and personality.

When this mode of non-conceptual perception is taken to be ultimate, the terms “What is”, “Isness”, “Thusness” are often taken to mean simply resting in non-conceptuality and not adding to or subtracting anything from the ‘raw manifestation’. There is a side effect to such an experience. Although in non-conceptuality, non-dual is most vivid and clear, practitioners may wrongly conclude that ‘concepts’ are the problem because the presence of ‘concepts’ divides and prevent the non-dual experience. This seems logical and reasonable only to a mind that is deeply root in a subject/object dichotomy. Very quickly ‘non-conceptuality’ becomes an object of practice. The process of objectification is the result of the tendency in action perpetually repeating itself taking different forms like an endless loop. This can continue to the extent that a practitioner can even ‘fear’ to establish concepts without knowing it. They are immobilized by trying to prevent the formation of views and concepts. When we see ‘suffering just IS’, we must be very careful not to fall into the ‘disease’ of non-conceptuality."

What these practitioners fail to understand that the key to release does not lie in trying to sustain a state of non-conceptuality or naked awareness, but in releasing the various bonds of consciousness that reifies self and phenomena. Very soon, non-conceptuality itself becomes one's new bondage and attachment. Non-conceptual experience isn't itself a problem, but attachment to it or treating as a be-all end-all of practice is problematic.

In fact, non-conceptual experience should be complemented with right view, and at the beginning even a conceptual understanding of right view can be very helpful, as it serves as a condition for direct realization of emptiness. As Thusness also wrote, "...The journey of emptying also convinces me the importance of having the right view of Emptiness even though it is only an intellectual grasped initially. Non-conceptuality has its associated diseases…lol…therefore I always advocate not falling to conceptuality and yet not ignoring conceptuality. That is, strict non-conceptuality is not necessary, only that habitual pattern of reification needs be severed..." - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2014/07/a-and-emptiness.html

Only after deepening of insights do we realize, it is the realization and actualization of twofold emptiness that is the definitive path of self-release/liberation. This is discussed more indepth in my previous article, "Self-Release".

Then comes the fourth pathology -- blindness to karmic propensities.

What is karmic propensities? Kyle Dixon wrote: "...the very act of 'holding' or grasping is another factor which reifies a subject relating to objects. For the very act of 'holding' presupposes something to be held and a subject to hold it, and that activity in and of itself implies these two. The action or activity literally creates the illusion of a subject-object dichotomy, and if that illusion is not seen for what it is, then the entire process runs away with itself, becoming an intricate and delusional structure of habitual tendencies which are conventionally referred to as a 'self'. Again, there is no self contained therein, within, or apart from that activity, but the delusion surrounding that activity cannot see that in the absence of insight which reveals it to be so.

For example, if we were to say there is only unpleasant emotions and no entity which is feeling those emotions; emptiness would argue that those emotions are still arising due to either accepting or rejecting. The very act of accepting and/or rejecting presupposes something to be accepted or rejected, and the very act itself (along with the presupposition the action is based upon) is precisely what the entity is. The entity cannot be found apart from that action, and ultimately the so-called entity cannot be found within that action either, but under the sway of delusion this is not apparent. That is what the notion of karma truly is: 'action', but it is delusional action which is predicated upon the misunderstanding that the apparent dependencies and relationships between subjects and objects, or objects and objects etc., is valid. So emptiness seeks to penetrate these subtle assumptions, presuppositions, conditioning behaviors and so on by revealing the unreality of the factors they are based upon. It is a very thorough and comprehensive process, which is also very liberating. If done skillfully it utterly exhausts these subtle tendencies and neuroses, and with the pacification of those tendencies, the illusion of the entity which can exist or not exist is also pacified..." - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com.au/2014/06/self-as-karmic-tendencies.html

Overwhelmed by a partial insight -- be it non-doership, or I AMness, or usually One Mind, one clings to the 'Absolute' and neglects the 'relative'. This can happen when one fails to see the total exertion of karmic propensities from moment to moment - manifest completely as traces of clinging and identification in various forms.

Zen priest/teacher Alex Weith also talks about the stagnating waters (emphasis added): "...The problem is that we still maintain a subtle duality between what we know ourself to be, a pure non-dual awareness that is not a thing, and our daily existence often marked by self-contractions. Hoping to get more and more identified with pure non-dual awareness, we may train concentration, try to hold on to the event of awakening reifying an experience, ***or rationalize the whole thing to conclude that self-contraction is not a problem and that suffering is not suffering because our true nature is ultimately beyond suffering. This explains why I got stuck in what Zen calls "stagnating waters" for about a year.***

This is however not seen as a problem in other traditions such as Advaita Vedanta where the One Mind is identified with the Brahman that contains and manifests the three states of waking, dreaming and deep sleep within itself, yet remains untouched by its dreamlike manifestation..."

Also, others may also say things like "suffering is awareness, contraction is awareness" etc etc -- skewing towards the aspect of non-dual luminous clarity that is never lost. Sure -- luminous clarity is never lost, and is manifest in every single manifestation, but no matter how clear that clarity is, it will never release suffering. Your mindstream has always been luminously clear but still you have been lost in samsara for beginningless lifetimes undergoing tremendous and countless sufferings. What good is that? Realizing non-dual luminosity is not enough. As discussed earlier, it is not the definitive path of release. And although even suffering and emotions are by nature luminous and empty, if we do not realize and actualize this luminous yet empty nature (note: not just 'luminous clarity' but more importantly the 'empty' nature) which releases those afflictions, then we are simply mouthing high views and deluded concepts.

Often coming together with this pathology of blindness to karmic propensities is the "I got it syndrome", which is to say, they think whatever they realize is complete or is perfect. Every insight can have that effect -- the realization of I AMness may result in a deceptive thought "this is it, this is liberation, enlightenment" etc. The realization of One Mind, pure transparency, etc, can also result in that effect. In truth, one is still far from total release and realization. Even if one has realized twofold emptiness, one is far from full actualization, which explains for the relative difference between the 1st bhumi Bodhisattva (who realized emptiness) and the 11th/13th/16th bhumi corresponding to Buddhahood. I must say, I am far from full Buddhahood, and I doubt anyone I know is anywhere close to full Buddhahood yet (although a number of people I personally know have begun the definitive path of release). It is always good to keep this in mind and be humble about one's practice and achievements.

However, it is unfortunate that very often, people who have not even realized emptiness (but may have realized the aspect of unconditioned Clarity/Awareness) can often be tricked into thinking of himself as "I got it". Even the neo-Advaitin/Zen teacher Adyashanti have made a related remark, "Whenever you touch upon a deep truth, suchness of reality, your true nature, each aspect feels like it's total and complete and all-inclusive at that moment. So that's why teachers have a very hard time getting through to people when they have an initial experience of anything because if it's an initial experience of reality it feels totally complete and there is a certain innate confidence that arises within you. Not an egoic confidence but a confidence that comes from reality." I will also add, very often that experiential confidence does in fact translate into an egoic kind of confidence. The "I got it syndrome" translates into "I know it all syndrome", so one has effectively shut down from further learning and practice.

Yet another neo-Advaitin teacher Vishrant said in a talk where he described 'awareness of awareness' as merely a kindergarten stage of awakening, "the teachers that are flying in and out and telling people they are awake are actually misleading people. The terrible side of that is when somebody is told they are awake, the ego grasps it and says, 'I am awake', and then stop seeking, and then these people stop looking because they think they've already found. So it cuts off their chances for ongoing awakening. It's very sad."

If even these neo-Advaitin teachers are clear about this pitfall, so much more must Buddhists (and other traditions like traditional Advaita) take heed and be aware of our kleshas!

If we are clear about our many faces of karmic propensities, we will know the path ahead. If we are ignorant of them, or in denial of them, or cling to the Absolute, then there is no way we will ever experience its release. There is no way, no chance at all, for someone ignorant of their karmic propensities or the four noble truths to experience Nirvana. They are not even on the path towards its release because they do not even see the afflictions/propensities, nor the cause of the afflictions, nor the end or path that ends afflictions.

Very often if one is blind to karmic propensities, one can also fall into a nihilistic attitude -- a denial or rejection of a path, or a denial or rejection of suffering, afflictions, etc.

First we need to know the faces of self/Self, I, me, mine, inherency. Then we need to scan our entire body mind for any clinging and contraction and grasping... fully touch the dharma of clinging and afflictions. This is a moment to moment practice.. very often various afflictions only manifest in the presence of secondary conditions (the primary condition is ignorance). Get intimate with afflictions, with karmic propensities, with delusion. It's ok.. you won't be harmed as there never was a you separate from these afflictions anyway, so any sort of avoidance or dissociation is simply another form of delusion and affliction. But through wisdom into its true (luminous and empty) nature they are allowed to release.
Labels: , , 3 comments | | edit post
Intention, Nihilism, Total Control, Anatta
I think we have to be careful not to fall into extremes about this. As Thusness wrote last year:

"Nihilistic tendencies arise when the insight of anatta is skewed towards the no-doership aspect. The happening by itself must be correctly understood. It appears that things are accomplished by doing nothing but in actual case it is things get done due to ripening of action and conditions.

So the lack of self-nature does not imply nothing needs be done or nothing can be done. That is one extreme. At the other end of extreme is the self-nature of perfect control of what one wills, one gets. Both are seen to be false. Action + conditions leads to effect.
June 1 at 11:32am · Unlike · 8"

Also in 2008:

(7:23 PM) Thusness: We will not know perfect conditionality is unconditioned
(7:23 PM) Thusness: because the inherent and dualistic mind priced 'controller', 'self'
(7:24 PM) Thusness: The 'perfect conditionality' is never freedom to an inherent and dualistic mind.
(7:24 PM) Thusness: What is the method of practice in Christianity?
(7:25 PM) AEN: surrendering?
(7:25 PM) Thusness: yes
(7:25 PM) Thusness: surrendering is a total giving up, losing self control
(7:25 PM) Thusness: isn't that perfect loss of control and freedom?
(7:27 PM) AEN: no
(7:27 PM) AEN: cos everything continues to be done without a doer, its only the illusion of a doer that is dissolved?
(7:27 PM) AEN: its more like a happening
(7:27 PM) Thusness: yes but isn't that a lost of control?
(7:28 PM) AEN: dunnu leh, but intention can still arise even though there is no doer... so it's not that there is no control
(7:29 PM) Thusness: there is no control
(7:29 PM) AEN: oic
(7:29 PM) AEN: no control but intention arises
(7:29 PM) AEN: resulting in deeds
(7:29 PM) Thusness: there is intention
(7:30 PM) Thusness: we are confused because we 'tend' to analyse and not 'see' the actual happening.
(7:30 PM) Thusness: just like a hand, each fingers does not control
(7:30 PM) Thusness: when u close ur hand, it becomes a fist.
(7:30 PM) Thusness: each finger does not control
(7:31 PM) Thusness: like working in a group
(7:31 PM) Thusness: each individual does not control
(7:31 PM) Thusness: but each individual can contribute
(7:31 PM) Thusness: 'control' is really an illusion...though there is intention
(7:32 PM) AEN: oic.. wat u mean is that ur intention is only part of the conditioning?
(7:32 PM) Thusness: no lah
(7:33 PM) Thusness: contributes as a form of conditions u mean?
(7:33 PM) AEN: ya
(7:33 PM) AEN: wat u mean
(7:33 PM) Thusness: for an arising outcome
(7:33 PM) Thusness: means intention serves condition for an arising outcome
(7:33 PM) AEN: icic..

In 2009:

(12:59 PM) Thusness: there is intention, there is doing but there is no agent
so there is intention but there is no control
(12:59 PM) Thusness: intention only as cause and conditions
(12:59 PM) AEN: oic..
(12:59 PM) Thusness: so karma, intentions, tendencies and then manifestation
when u chant, why it works
when u summarize, why it works
(1:00 PM) Thusness: but it works not through an agent controlling an outcome
(1:00 PM) AEN: but it can be misunderstood as determinism? like every action and intention is conditioned
(1:00 PM) Thusness: yes
there is intention
(1:01 PM) Thusness: intention affects outcome
but not like an agent in control of something
(1:01 PM) AEN: icic..
(1:01 PM) Thusness: effects comes powerfully strong when there is complete oneness
that the imprints is strong and stable
(1:01 PM) AEN: wat effects
wat u mean
(1:02 PM) Thusness: means like practice makes perfect lah
(1:02 PM) Thusness: u practice and don't have to ask for result
let it sink into ur deepest most consciousness
it is always like that


Also, in 2009:
 
 Session Start: Monday, April 06, 2009

(1:40 PM) AEN:    i forwarded u a second mail about free will
(1:47 PM) Thusness:    There is influence, there is no control.
(1:47 PM) Thusness:    And influence is by intention and imprints.
(1:52 PM) Thusness:    Next there is also nothing to fear about 'no-control'.  We must clearly know what is meant by no-control in actual experience.  It sounds uncomfortable when our mind is inherent but in actual experience it is liberating because 'inherent view' blinds us from right experience and understanding.
(1:54 PM) Thusness:    However this is not to say that everything is determined.  The advaita practitioners is not aware of imprints and karma and mistaken spontaneity due to dependent origination with determinism.

Session Start: Friday, April 10, 2009

(2:34 PM) AEN:    konomonte asked a qn on free will to dharma dan and he replied... i forwarded to

(10:22 PM) Thusness:    read. Quite good. :)
(10:23 PM) AEN:    icic..
(10:24 PM) Thusness:    komomonte cannot understand the question of free will this way.
(10:26 PM) Thusness:    he must first experience no-self and understand how subject/object view affect us then when he look at the question of free will, he will be able to understand better.
(10:29 PM) Thusness:    because when our mind and experienced are shaped by inherent thoughts, we see 'free will' as a form of freedom.  Once we are able to go beyond dualistic and inherent views, we see otherwise.  But we must also not lead to the wrong understanding of determinism for both free will and determinism are extremes.
(10:29 PM) AEN:    oic..
(10:31 PM) Thusness:    what did u write to him?
(10:31 PM) AEN:    u mean previously
(10:31 PM) Thusness:    yeah
(10:33 PM) AEN:    basically i said what u said, that things do not happen by chance or ramdomly or determined, but due to conditions. so there is no control, but there is influence by intentions and imprints.
(10:33 PM) Thusness:    yes
(10:34 PM) Thusness:    Dharma Dan's answer i also along that line.
(10:34 PM) Thusness:    It is causal.
 

Also I wrote this in my e-book:

6th April 2012
No-self does not imply determinism.
As I wrote to someone:
............
Yes but not to be mistaken that will has no part in all these. The teaching of anatta or no self does not deny will or the aggregates... The buddha teaches that a sentient being is simply a convention for five aggregates: matter/body, feelings, perception, volition, consciousness. Notice that volition is part of it. This will/volition can be directed towards a wholesome or unwholesome path. However, also remember that the five aggregates are empty of self - and are without agent. Does that mean there is no free will? In a sense yes, but neither does it imply determinism: another dualistic extreme. Free will means subjective controller determines action, determinism means objective world determines subjective experience. In reality there is no subject and object - in thinking just thought, in hearing just sound. But there are requisite conditions for every manifestation. Those conditions can be changed if there is a correct path.

A concrete example: if you ask a beginner to run 2.4km in 9 minutes with an unfit body, that is asking for the impossible. No matter how hard willed is he, he is never going to make it. Why? The current requisite conditions of his body is such that the result of running 9 minutes is impossible. Control, agency, doesn't apply when manifestation always arise due to conditions.

It however also means that if you exercise regularly for months or years, there is no reason the body (conditions) cannot be improved to the degree that running 9 mins is definitely possible. This is what I mean by working with conditions.

So those teachers who say meditation are useless are not understanding latent tendencies and conditions. They mistook no doership with some kind of fatalism. Every proper practice has its place in working with one's conditions.

Just because there is no self, no doer, doesn't mean my body is fated to be unfit and I can't reach the 9 min. Just because I exercise regularly doesn't mean I am reinforcing the notion of self or doership. In any case, action is always without self.

It also does not mean that "will" has no place at all. "Will" is often misunderstood to be linked to a self or agent that has full control over things, whereas it is simply more manifestation and conditions. Yes, sheer will going against conditions isn't going to work – this is not understanding no-self and dependent origination. But if will is directed properly with correct understanding of no-self and conditionality, at a proper path and practice, it can lead to benefits.

That is why the first teaching of Buddha is the four noble truths: the truth of suffering, the cause of suffering, the end of suffering, the way to end suffering. This path arises as a result of his direct insight into no-self and dependent origination.

Like a doctor, you don't tell your patients "you are fated to be ill and sick and in pain, because there is no individual controller, everything is the will of God". That is nonsense. Instead, you diagnose the illness, you seek the cause of illness, you give a treatment that eliminates the cause of illness. There is no self, there is no controller, but there is conditions and manifestation and a way to treat bad conditions. This is the way of the four noble truths.

-------

In my experience after initial anatta insight, one should look into the active mode of nondual anatta that later leads to total exertion. Otherwise one will be stuck with a passive nondual experience and skew towards non-doership. This will also prevent falling into the extremity of 'determinism' and mistaking non-action as passive non-doership.

Partial excerpt from http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/.../total-exertion...

10/20/2012 9:51 AM: Thusness: What is non-meditation to you? And what is non-action?
10/20/2012 10:46 AM: AEN: Non meditation is simply experiencing experience as it appears without dualistic/inherent view which is rather similar to what jax is saying I think
10/20/2012 10:58 AM: Thusness: What do u mean by experiencing experience as it appears without dualistic/inherent view? If I ask u to take a deep breath now and then breath normal, are they non-action and non-meditation?
10/20/2012 11:01 AM: AEN: Yes
10/20/2012 11:01 AM: Thusness: Why so?
10/20/2012 11:02 AM: AEN: It is just experience in its natural state, without the sense of self or dualistic action arising
10/20/2012 11:02 AM: Thusness: Natural state refers to?
10/20/2012 11:03 AM: AEN: Appearance appearing according to conditions, unmodified and unaltered by dualistic action/sense of self
10/20/2012 11:04 AM: Thusness: That which you are talking about is no-doership. What if there is intention, as in chanting?
10/20/2012 11:05 AM: AEN: There is no problem with intention, bcos that too is an arising without self... Its like total exertion in every moment, total action without self, whether chanting, walking, sitting
10/20/2012 11:06 AM: Thusness: An arising without self meaning? As in no-doership...u hv to b clear...
10/20/2012 11:07 AM: AEN: There is total involvement of all conditions, just without agency. Conditions include intention
10/20/2012 11:08 AM: Thusness: Total is always void of self. When there is no gap between actor and action, that is non-action. Lot of movement in appearance but nothing truly moves. When the one who will is gone (no-will), the entire movement appears to be "your willing". It is not about no-doership and arising spontaneously but doer and deeds are refine till none in total action.
10/20/2012 11:18 AM: AEN: Yes there is no standing back watching action unfold but instead whole being is just action, no self
10/20/2012 11:18 AM: Thusness: When insight of anatta arises, the heat and cold "kill you" is the actualization non-action.
10/20/2012 11:18 AM: Thusness: Yes
10/20/2012 11:20 AM: AEN: Ic.. I think only zen emphasizes this very much. Like Zen Master Seung Sahn’s tradition.
10/20/2012 11:21 AM: Thusness: Dogen
10/20/2012 11:21 AM: AEN: I see
10/20/2012 11:21 AM: Thusness: No...Theravada also when understood correctly. This total exertion is not the result of effort, but full integration of view/experience/realization. When we say this arising thought is just a thought, don't believe in the story...or this thought is empty...nothing to hold...that is only half understanding. The other half is the total exertion of this thought. All past/present/future tendencies, ignorance, wisdom is in this one thought...
10/20/2012 11:27 AM: AEN: I was reading Walpola Rahula’s book (“What The Buddha Taught”). I guess he realized anatta and is very clear about this too. He said {quotes passage from Walpola Rahula’s book}
10/20/2012 11:30 AM: Thusness: Yes...and insight of anatta opens the gate.
10/20/2012 11:32 AM: AEN: Ic.. Delma tells me today her total exertion has stabilized, “Interesting times. Nondual is becoming more and more stable. I don't understand it, but just reading your material and deeply contemplating it seems to have tremendous affect. Yesterday while driving home from work and walking to my house, there was just walking, just driving. This was is what is becoming more and more sustained.

I do follow your advice and follow the breath without counting. Then there is only breath. It's more effortless these days. So, thank you… …luminosity, but not awareness as a thing or entity. just the senses, experienced as independent streams. It's the walking experience which seems different and sustained. No one is walking. At first this would be experienced with a bit of effort, but it's becoming more natural and the feeling of it always having been this way is there."
10/20/2012 11:38 AM: Thusness: Quite good
10/20/2012 11:51 AM: Thusness: When the gap between actor and action is refined till none, that is non-action and that non-action is total action. Whether this total action is understood as the natural way will depend on whether the insight of anatta has arisen. Anatta is the insight that allows the practitioner to see clearly that this has always been the case.
Labels: , , 0 comments | | edit post