Someone informed me the contact us page on this blog was down. I could not receive any messages from that form. I checked and it seems to be down for the past few years. If you have attempted to send us any message through the Contact Us page from 2018 onwards and I have not replied, please try again using the new form in the Contact Us page.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Buddhism/comments/x3cmrq/is_this_a_scam_cult_should_we_be_careful/



xabir = Soh 



Sort By: Top


User avatar

level 1

ClingToNothing

·

22 hr. ago

tibetan

u/xabir has always encouraged me to find a legitimate teacher in my interactions with him, and offers a space for people to share how the dharma can be realized.


I haven't seen anything cult-y about it. The teachers he generally recommends are lineage teachers in multiple traditions.


I don't think he claims he is enlightened.



29



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 2

xabir

·

22 hr. ago

Yes the term enlightened can be a little confusing. One can be awakened to the nature of mind but it is a long way from Buddhahood or even arahantship. Nobody is claiming to have attained full enlightenment.



7



Reply

Share

Save

Edit

Follow



User avatar

level 2

TheHiddenData

·

22 hr. ago

I can confirm this. u/xabir has encouraged me to find a real life teacher near where I live, and I've seen nothing cult-y on his blog or in his interactions with me.



6



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 3

Comment deleted by user

·

22 hr. ago


level 2

Comment deleted by user

·

22 hr. ago


level 1

xabir

·

22 hr. ago

By the way the purpose of my sharing is simply to share an understanding on anatta. Some people benefitted. I don’t take up students though and I have no interest in proclaiming enlightenment. Having an insight into the nature of mind is however not something very uncommon (although not yet common enough, unfortunately).



27



Reply

Share

Save

Edit

Follow



User avatar

level 2

mysticoscrown

·

19 hr. ago

How can someone get an insight into the nature of mind?



3



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 3

Comment removed by moderator

·

18 hr. ago


level 3

xabir

·

11 hr. ago

·

edited 11 hr. ago

There are many ways. Here is a way that worked for myself and many I know, although I don’t consider it restricted to Vajrayana only as similar approaches have been taught in Zen and even Theravada:


Thrangu Rinpoche: In the Vajrayana there is the direct path to examining mind. In everyday life we are habituated to thinking, "I have a mind and I perceive these things." Ordinarily, we do not directly look at the mind and therefore do not see the mind. This is very strange because we see things and we know that we are seeing visual phenomena. But who is seeing? We can look directly at the mind and find that there is no one seeing; there is no seer, and yet we are seeing phenomena. The same is true for the mental consciousness. We think various thoughts, but where is that thinking taking place? Who or what is thinking? However, when we look directly at the mind, we discover that there is nobody there; there is no thinker and yet thinking is going on. This approach of directly looking in a state of meditation isn't one of reasoning, but of directly looking at the mind to see what is there. Source: Shentong and Rangtong



If we look for a perceiver, we won’t find one. We do think, but if we look into the thinker, trying to find that which thinks, we do not find it. Yet, at the same time, we do see and we do think. The reality is that seeing occurs without a seer and thinking without a thinker. This is just how it is; this is the nature of the mind. The Heart Sutra sums this up by saying that “form is emptiness,” because whatever we look at is, by nature, devoid of true existence. At the same time, emptiness is also form, because the form only occurs as emptiness. Emptiness is no other than form and form is no other than emptiness. This may appear to apply only to other things, but when applied to the mind, the perceiver, one can also see that the perceiver is emptiness and emptiness is also the perceiver. Mind is no other than emptiness; emptiness is no other than mind. This is not just a concept; it is our basic state. The reality of our mind may seem very deep and difficult to understand, but it may also be something very simple and easy because this mind is not somewhere else. It is not somebody else’s mind. It is your own mind. It is right here; therefore, it is something that you can know. When you look into it, you can see that not only is mind empty, it also knows; it is cognizant. All the Buddhist scriptures, their commentaries and the songs of realization by the great siddhas express this as the “indivisible unity of emptiness and cognizance,” or “undivided empty perceiving,” or “unity of empty cognizance.” No matter how it is described, this is how our basic nature really is. It is not our making. It is not the result of practice. It is simply the way it has always been. Source: Crystal Clear



More of such quotes by Thrangu Rinpoche here https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/08/thrangu-rinpoche-on-nature-of-mind.html



1



Reply

Share

Save

Edit

Follow



User avatar

level 1

Hot4Scooter

·

22 hr. ago

ཨོཾ་མ་ཎི་པདྨེ་ཧཱུྃ

🐟


20



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 1

xabir

·

21 hr. ago

·

edited 20 hr. ago

Just full disclosure and openness to everyone here, this is an example of a message I often send to people who have posted or are inquiring on anatta, for example:


“Hi


Thought this might interest you, on nondual awareness, anatta and its nature and the subtleties of insight:


http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html


http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/03/on-anatta-emptiness-and-spontaneous.html”


Those articles, written by my mentor, are actually essential Buddhadharma insights. It is not shared for purpose of proclaiming enlightenment, but as a pointer for contemplating the nature of mind.


Alternatively if you prefer to read the same subject from established teachers, you can also read Thich Nhat Hanh for similar teachings, for example. I do not wish to set up myself as a teacher, it is purely for internet sharing and inspiration, that’s all. It will be good if people will find a good teacher on their own, my purpose is only to set people on the correct direction and have a clearer understanding of dharma, that’s all.


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'.""..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....""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."


Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh:"When we say it's raining, we mean that raining is taking place. You don't need someone up above to perform the raining. It's not that there is the rain, and there is the one who causes the rain to fall. In fact, when you say the rain is falling, it's very funny, because if it weren't falling, it wouldn't be rain. In our way of speaking, we're used to having a subject and a verb. That's why we need the word "it" when we say, "it rains." "It" is the subject, the one who makes the rain possible. But, looking deeply, we don't need a "rainer," we just need the rain. Raining and the rain are the same. The formations of birds and the birds are the same -- there's no "self," no boss involved. There's a mental formation called vitarka, "initial thought."


When we use the verb "to think" in English, we need a subject of the verb: I think, you think, he thinks. But, really, you don't need a subject for a thought to be produced. Thinking without a thinker -- it's absolutely possible. To think is to think about something. To perceive is to perceive something. The perceiver and the perceived object that is perceived are one.When Descartes said, "I think, therefore I am," his point was that if I think, there must be an "I" for thinking to be possible. When he made the declaration "I think," he believed that he could demonstrate that the "I" exists. We have the strong habit or believing in a self. But, observing very deeply, we can see that a thought does not need a thinker to be possible. There is no thinker behind the thinking -- there is just the thinking; that's enough. Now, if Mr. Descartes were here, we might ask him, "Monsieur Descartes, you say, 'You think, therefore you are.' But what are you? You are your thinking. Thinking -- that's enough. Thinking manifests without the need of a self behind it."Thinking without a thinker. Feeling without a feeler. What is our anger without our 'self'? This is the object of our meditation. All the fifty-one mental formations take place and manifest without a self behind them arranging for this to appear, and then for that to appear. Our mind consciousness is in the habit of basing itself on the idea of self, on manas.


But we can meditate to be more aware of our store consciousness, where we keep the seeds of all those mental formations that are not currently manifesting in our mind. When we meditate, we practice looking deeply in order to bring light and clarity into our way of seeing things. When the vision of no-self is obtained, our delusion is removed. This is what we call transformation. In the Buddhist tradition, transformation is possible with deep understanding. The moment the vision of no-self is there, manas, the elusive notion of 'I am,' disintegrates, and we find ourselves enjoying, in this very moment, freedom and happiness."



19



Reply

Share

Save

Edit

Follow



User avatar

level 1

optimistically_eyed

·

22 hr. ago

·

edited 18 hr. ago

SN 1:71

Edit: starting to feel a bit like a witch-hunt in here. I regret chiming in. 🙏



17



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 2

xabir

·

22 hr. ago

What I have to share about anatta is in fact pretty mainstream and consistent with mainstream teachers.


For example,


Ajahn brahmavamso on anatta insight: Excerpt from https://www.dhammatalks.net/.../Ajahn_Brahm_BAHIYA_S... The Final Part of Bāhiya's Teaching "Bāhiya, you should train yourself thus: in the seen will be merely what is seen, ... in the cognized will merely be what is cognized. Practising in this way, Bāhiya, you will not be 'because of that'. When you are not 'because of that', you will not be 'in that'. And when you are not 'in that', you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two. Just this is the end of suffering." What does it mean "you will not be 'because of that'"? The Pāli is na tena. Tena is the instrumental of the word for 'that'. Na is the negative. It means, literally, "not because of that, not through that, not by that". It means in essence, you will not assume that there is a self, a soul, a me; because of, through, or by; the seen or the heard or the sensed or the cognized. The Buddha is saying that once you have penetrated the truth of sensory experience, by suppressing the Hindrances through Jhāna, you will see that there is no 'doer', nor a 'knower', behind sensory experience. No longer will you be able to use sensory experience as evidence for a self. Descartes' famous "I am because I think" is refuted. You will not be because of thinking, nor because of seeing, hearing or sensing. In the Buddha's words, "You will not be because of that (any sensory experience)". When the sensory processes are discarded as tenable evidence for a self, a soul or a me, then you are no longer located in the sensory experience. In the Buddha's words, "You will not be 'in that'". You no longer view, perceive or even think that there is a 'me' involved in life. In the words of the doctor in the original series of Star Trek, "It is life, Jim, but not as we know it"! There is no longer any sense of self, or soul, at the centre of experience. You are no more 'in that'. Just to close off the loophole that you might think you can escape non-existence of a self or soul by identifying with a transcendental state of being beyond what is seen, heard, sensed or cognized, the Buddha thunders, "and you will be neither here (with the seen, heard, sensed or cognized) nor beyond (outside of the seen, heard, sensed or cognized) nor in between the two (neither of the world nor beyond the world). The last phrase comprehensively confounded the sophists! In summary, the Buddha advised both Bāhiya and Venerable Mālunkyaputta to experience the Jhānas to suppress the Five Hindrances. Thereby one will discern with certainty the absence of a self or a soul behind the sensory process. Consequently, sensory experience will never again be taken as evidence of a 'knower' or a 'doer': such that you will never imagine a self or a soul at the centre of experience, nor beyond, nor anywhere else. Bāhiya's Teaching put in a nutshell the way to the realization of No-Self, Anattā. "Just this", concluded the Buddha "is the end of suffering".



4



Reply

Share

Save

Edit

Follow



level 3

Comment deleted by user

·

22 hr. ago


level 4

xabir

·

22 hr. ago

I am also not interested in persuading people of the validity of my experience. I just want people to get the right view which is an important condition for awakening. But I understand some people who hold tightly to Ven Thanissaro’s interpretations of anatta for example, may not like it.



3



Reply

Share

Save

Edit

Follow



level 2

xabir

·

22 hr. ago

“They” or just me 😂



2



Reply

Share

Save

Edit

Follow



User avatar

level 2

TheHiddenData

·

22 hr. ago

No, they don't spam everyone, I was not contacted. Also they don't claim to be enlightened, only to have some insight, and they admit publicly that they have more to do on the path. Also they continually quote well-respected teachers and are very close to Buddhist orthodoxy in basically everything.



-1



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 3

Comment deleted by user

·

22 hr. ago


User avatar

level 4

TheHiddenData

·

21 hr. ago

I answered this question below, but if anyone is curious, they can confirm that me and xabir are not the same person by going to r/AwakeningToReality and seeing that I made a post there three days ago where I ask how to contact xabir.



-2



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 1

[deleted]

·

20 hr. ago

[unavailable]


Share

Report

Save


User avatar

level 1

ZootedFlaybish

·

18 hr. ago

·

edited 18 hr. ago

non-affiliated

He contacted me a few weeks ago. Although he may be evangelizing the primacy of Anatta, he seems innocent enough to me. We disagreed on some things - I’m fairly critical of the dangers of the intellect on the Mahayana path - but his responses were always cordial and earnest, if not copypasta from his previous posts or website. 🤷‍♂️


I wish him well. ☺️



15



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 2

Arbacrux-

·

17 hr. ago

Dangers of the intellect? Could you elaborate?



3



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 3

ZootedFlaybish

·

17 hr. ago

·

edited 16 hr. ago

non-affiliated

Mahayana tends to focus on non-dualism, Anatta (no self), and emptiness in its teachings. These are highly conceptual teachings, as compared to pragmatic teachings on meditation - like how to pay attention in the correct way, how to play with the breath and energies of the body, what kind of thoughts to look out for, and which kinds to cultivate, etc.


I’m not saying non-dualist thinking isn’t true or isn’t valuable, nor that Anatta isn’t true - but that so often I see so many people (my younger self included) think that they are enlightened or close to enlightenment, just because they can spout non-dualist jibberish, or think in terms of no self, etc. I have come to see that enlightenment is much more a physical thing, rather than a mental thing. It manifests in the way one breathes, the way one moves, the way one pays attention, and what garners one’s attention - rather than an ability to spout the correct forms and interpretations of non dualist, no self, emptiness talk. Of course there is a large mental aspect to enlightenment - but in terms of one’s own intellect being duped by itself, it’s best to mark one’s course by focusing on the physical.


The intellect is a wonderful servant, but a terrible master. - Ram Dass


The concept of Anatta and emptiness, is like a view from the other side - the other side being enlightenment. But the self - as empty as it is, is like a raft - and we need that raft to get to the other side. If you let go of the raft too soon, you’ll be swept away by the currents of samsara. Whether a self really exists or not, we need to cultivate a sense of self, one that is on the Buddhist path, one that practices the eightfold path and the dhamma, before you can just chuck the concept out the window. There is a real danger in the teaching of Anatta and emptiness in ‘putting the cart before the horse’ - it’s all too alluring to think yourself atop the mountain just because you can think in the right way, before you’ve even put in the work of climbing the mountain. The mind is an expert deceiver.


I’m sorry, I actually have quite a lot more to say on the topic, and what I’ve already said really isn’t as coherent as I’d like, but this is already getting long and I have to go make dinner. 😬 I would mention that Thanissaro Bhikkhu has something very important to say on the matter of Anatta. Here And Here


So to conclude - the intellect will readily use enlightenment concepts to delude itself into thinking it is enlightened. I’ve seen it in my younger self, and I see it all the time in others and especially in would be teachers. There is an appeal to teaching the Dhamma, and it is tempting to skip to the end of the path.



10



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 4

External-Shelter-342

·

15 hr. ago

I especially love Thich Nhat Hanh but have also been fascinated by some perspectives that ram Dass has (I haven't been able to get into his writing but the comedian Pete Holmes talks about him in his book and the concept of a "witness" helped me kind of think in terms of nonself a little) but I would very much like to also look into the aspects of Buddhism you are referring to (more pragmatic teachings). Thank you!



2



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 5

ZootedFlaybish

·

15 hr. ago

·

edited 15 hr. ago

non-affiliated

For more pragmatic teachings I recommend Thanissaro Bhikkhu. His YouTube channel. ☺️ virtually every single one of his Dhamma talks (and there are years and years worth) are crystalline and practical. I tend to be an extremely abstract, head in the clouds, kinda thinker/person - so for me, the down to earth practicality of Thanissaro is what I need. Although I’ve made that comment to another once before and they thought Thanissaro was very abstract - which I found really hard to imagine. Anyway - I guess these things are relative. 🤷‍♂️☺️


I like Ram Dass’s teachings - he also has many talks on YouTube. He’s an eclectic - taking from whatever sort of traditions he found useful and enlightening. I guess he’s technically coming from a tradition of Hinduism and academic training in psychology and experience in psychedelics - he is unafraid to draw from a diverse body of human traditions and experiences to paint his tapestry of truth and understanding. 👍



0



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 6

External-Shelter-342

·

13 hr. ago

thank you so so much!



2



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 4

AmenableHornet

·

14 hr. ago

This is a very good point, and It's something I'm struggling with now. Thinking you're close to enlightenment because you have a good intellectual understanding of Buddhist concepts is like congratulating yourself for getting to your destination because you have obtained a very good map.



2



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 5

ZootedFlaybish

·

14 hr. ago

·

edited 12 hr. ago

non-affiliated

Exactly! Good analogy! But for those who don’t have sufficient wisdom - young people especially - they can be easily duped by others who are good with language and concepts and can readily be led astray by people who truly believe themselves to be enlightened. The best liars are those who are good at lying to themselves - and the intellect is a masterful deceiver. 🤷‍♂️



2



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 4

Dietrich_Vance

·

13 hr. ago

Honestly thank you for this comment, it’s a wonderful perspective as someone who behaves like your former self in going for the non dualist perspective without having put all the work in



1



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 4

xabir

·

11 hr. ago

Actually I advise people to take a direct approach to realize anatta (preferably under guidance of an enlightened teacher if they can fine one), not based on a path of reasoning.


Similar to how Thrangu Rinpoche explains here: https://www.lionsroar.com/directly-experience-the-nature-of-mind/amp/


And here (although I must add this is not unique to Vajrayana but is also taught in Zen and Theravada), excerpts from https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/08/thrangu-rinpoche-on-nature-of-mind.html


Thrangu Rinpoche: In the Vajrayana there is the direct path to examining mind. In everyday life we are habituated to thinking, "I have a mind and I perceive these things." Ordinarily, we do not directly look at the mind and therefore do not see the mind. This is very strange because we see things and we know that we are seeing visual phenomena. But who is seeing? We can look directly at the mind and find that there is no one seeing; there is no seer, and yet we are seeing phenomena. The same is true for the mental consciousness. We think various thoughts, but where is that thinking taking place? Who or what is thinking? However, when we look directly at the mind, we discover that there is nobody there; there is no thinker and yet thinking is going on. This approach of directly looking in a state of meditation isn't one of reasoning, but of directly looking at the mind to see what is there. Source: Shentong and Rangtong


….


If we look for a perceiver, we won’t find one. We do think, but if we look into the thinker, trying to find that which thinks, we do not find it. Yet, at the same time, we do see and we do think. The reality is that seeing occurs without a seer and thinking without a thinker. This is just how it is; this is the nature of the mind. The Heart Sutra sums this up by saying that “form is emptiness,” because whatever we look at is, by nature, devoid of true existence. At the same time, emptiness is also form, because the form only occurs as emptiness. Emptiness is no other than form and form is no other than emptiness. This may appear to apply only to other things, but when applied to the mind, the perceiver, one can also see that the perceiver is emptiness and emptiness is also the perceiver. Mind is no other than emptiness; emptiness is no other than mind. This is not just a concept; it is our basic state. The reality of our mind may seem very deep and difficult to understand, but it may also be something very simple and easy because this mind is not somewhere else. It is not somebody else’s mind. It is your own mind. It is right here; therefore, it is something that you can know. When you look into it, you can see that not only is mind empty, it also knows; it is cognizant. All the Buddhist scriptures, their commentaries and the songs of realization by the great siddhas express this as the “indivisible unity of emptiness and cognizance,” or “undivided empty perceiving,” or “unity of empty cognizance.” No matter how it is described, this is how our basic nature really is. It is not our making. It is not the result of practice. It is simply the way it has always been. Source: Crystal Clear



1



Reply

Share

Save

Edit

Follow



User avatar

level 1

GrampaMoses

·

21 hr. ago

non-affiliated

Hi, just adding my own experience that he once messaged me as well and linked that blog. I didn't get any cultish vibes and he's not stalking anyone. I believe his intentions are good.


The blog itself used more "mystic" terminology and may be helpful to some people. I personally am focusing on Buddha Dharma, so I'm not spending time reading the blog, but instead will continue to do my chanting at home and visit my temple on Sunday.


What you do is up to you.



14



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 1

[deleted]

·

22 hr. ago

·

edited 18 hr. ago

[unavailable]


Share

Report

Save


User avatar

level 2

m0rl0ck1996

·

22 hr. ago

chan

Wow. I didnt get one, i feel left out. :(


Give Award

Share

Report

Save


level 3

[deleted]

·

22 hr. ago

[unavailable]


Share

Report

Save


level 4

xabir

·

22 hr. ago

👍 I always recommend people to find a good sangha.


I often send out a list of potential dharma centers people can join in their own cities.


Share

Save

Edit



User avatar

level 5

TheHiddenData

·

22 hr. ago

I can confirm this is true.


Give Award

Share

Report

Save


level 6

[deleted]

·

21 hr. ago

[unavailable]


Share

Report

Save


User avatar

level 7

TheHiddenData

·

21 hr. ago

If you think this is a sockpuppet, you can simply head over to r/AwakeningToReality to see that I posted there 3 days ago in order to contact xabir.


Give Award

Share

Report

Save


User avatar

level 5

kikosmash

·

19 hr. ago

U have any for portland?


Give Award

Share

Report

Save


User avatar

level 6

bodhiquest

·

16 hr. ago

vajrayana / shingon mikkyō

There's a very good Shingon temple in Portland https://sites.google.com/view/shingon-pdx/home


Give Award

Share

Report

Save


User avatar

level 3

Nulynnka

·

22 hr. ago

chan

Me too 😢


Give Award

Share

Report

Save


level 2

xabir

·

22 hr. ago

I don’t have any other agenda than to share dharma. But only as a friend, as I do not take students nor do I have the time to personally mentor people.


Share

Save

Edit



User avatar

level 1

truuseeker

·

17 hr. ago

·

edited 17 hr. ago

vajrayana

I talk to u/xabir from time to time. It's not a cult. Trust me, I'm super wary of cults or anything that tries to scam people for spirituality lol. All we do is just discuss anatta/dharma amongst each other just like on reddit, that's all.



11



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

ChanceEncounter21

·

20 hr. ago

theravada

We are in the digital age of Buddhism. And once in awhile we receive unsolicited dharma pics/messages/links. And people like sharing their insights (and in this case the user was documenting it in his blog). It's up to us to take it or leave it.


P.S. to the blogger in question: Sorry for being unable to reply to your messages. Best of luck with your blogs.



6



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

biodecus

·

18 hr. ago

vajrayana

It's an excellent blog run by an extremely experienced and knowledgeable practitioner.


It's unfortunate you've had this reaction to it /u/medinerdcy. If you don't connect to the writing there that's perfectly understandable, everyone connects with different things when it comes to Dharma, but it's a shame you've turned other people away in this thread from what is a perfectly legit source.



8



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

unicornpicnic

·

21 hr. ago

I've been contacted by them. There was another user who sent me the same thing.



5



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 2

Comment deleted by user

·

20 hr. ago


User avatar

level 3

unicornpicnic

·

20 hr. ago

I think it was diamondnxg or something.



4



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

Background_Nature497

·

20 hr. ago

You should always be careful -- are you planning to give money? If no, then you're fine.



4



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

Zestyclose_Brain_812

·

17 hr. ago

U/xabir has contacted me before, and I’m very thankful they did. They offered me free resources on topics I felt lost on. I’m beyond thankful they contacted me



4



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

AlexCoventry

·

17 hr. ago

Xabir has contacted me relatively recently. I looked at the links he shared, and while they weren't helpful for me at this point, they looked legit, FWIW.



4



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

BuddhistFirst

·

22 hr. ago

·

edited 15 hr. ago

Tibetan Buddhist

Since you are secular, you can pretty much do whatever you want. Even if you are reading about the Jews or Incan religion and looking for the path to heaven using those religions, I support you.


But for Buddhist readers here, I would remind you that we have responsibilities. The Refuge, looking after our monks, observing our liturgy, our role in the 6 directions, our responsibilities to the vihara. And those are just the basics. We each have our own teacher and practices we do on top of our regular Buddhist lives.


Given we have all these responsibilities, reading a blog on spirituality like awakeningtR is in my opinion a sign that one may be overlooking many of the responsibilities we have. How many times have you spoken with your monk-teachers this week? How many times have you been at the temple? Have you mentioned to the teachers about this blog?


Since the path to spiritual development in general is available in all religions already, yes you can advance to certain heights by following the Mormons, but are you consumed by the writings of Gordon Hinckley tho? I doubt it. You're a Buddhist first right? So focus on your monastery's responsibilities, looking after our monks, learning from our teachers at the temple classes in person. This is the priority in my opinion.








Edit as per u/Titanium-Snowflake reminder:


Those of us who aren't living in an area with a monastery/temple can access them virtually through livestream. r/vihara has a lot of these livestream temples. At the time of this writing for example, I just finished attending Columbus KTC's lecture with Lama Kathy and after this post, I am heading over to receive teaching from Acharya Jigme. In other words, distance is not an issue anymore. We can be busy with the dharma regardless of our location or distance.



4



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 2

Titanium-Snowflake

·

15 hr. ago

Be mindful that some people don’t live near a monastery. For example, it’s a four hour drive for me, and it is also not a lineage that suits me. There have to be other avenues for practice in such cases.



3



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 3

BuddhistFirst

·

15 hr. ago

Tibetan Buddhist

Yes. Plenty.


r/vihara - Live Stream Virtual Temples Online


Do go to that 4-hour drive temple once a month or quarterly


Pray that a center opens near you, it worked for me.


Email monk-teachers if they'd be willing to teach you remotely.



1



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 4

Titanium-Snowflake

·

15 hr. ago

Of course there are options. I am just reminding you that the connection to a temple that you speak of, with weekly participation, is not accessible to all people who live in extremely remote locations. Nevertheless, we find our way. It’s not as straightforward and traditional as you would advocate, but is still good.



2



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

genivelo

·

21 hr. ago

Tibetan Buddhism

I was contacted by them as well. I would recommend being cautious of self-appointed teachers.



3



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 2

TheHiddenData

·

20 hr. ago

They don't consider themselves teachers and don't take students, they just share stuff about the Dharma they have found useful. Also they have ties with Acharya Malcolm Smith, do you know if he's legit?



2



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 3

genivelo

·

20 hr. ago

Tibetan Buddhism

"have ties to"? As far as I have seen, all they said is they are receiving teachings from that Acharya.


It does seem to me the user in question is presenting their mentor as an enlightened teacher, and themselves as a representative of said mentor.



4



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 4

TheHiddenData

·

20 hr. ago

·

edited 20 hr. ago

The user u/krodha is a student of Acarya Malcolm and is occasionally featured on the blog. I don't know if they have any ties beyond that, you can ask u/xabir for more information. Also Acarya Malcolm was recommended to me by xabir, so he clearly holds him in high esteem. And yes, his mentor (Thusness/John Tan) has at least some insight, but I don't think xabir is presenting himself as John Tan's "representative".


Edit: also, krodha is a mod of r/Dzogchen.



2



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 5

xabir

·

20 hr. ago

Krodha made me a mod of Dzogchen subreddit too, unfortunately I am clearly not doing a great job there. Very inactive.



2



Reply

Share

Save

Edit

Follow



User avatar

level 5

genivelo

·

20 hr. ago

·

edited 16 hr. ago

Tibetan Buddhism

I don't know if you are new to Buddhism, but the things you list are not as convincing as you seem to think they are.


That being said, if u/krodha confirms that the Acharya has "endorsed" John Tan, then I would consider that more meaningful.



1



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 6

krodha

·

18 hr. ago

There are no “official endorsements” but Malcolm has said he has no issue with xabir and John Tan’s views or presentation of buddhadharma and he said their views do not run contrary to the buddhadharma.


It is also my opinion that their views are very clear, and I consider them friends.



5



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 7

genivelo

·

18 hr. ago

Tibetan Buddhism

I understand. Thank you.



3



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 6

TheHiddenData

·

19 hr. ago

Guess you've just got to wait for u/krodha's answer then.



2



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

SeriousMoFo

·

18 hr. ago

It's not a scam. It's not a cult. I have read many articles on the blog and I am a member of the Facebook group. There are a bunch of people who are very interested in topics of awakening and enlightenment. It's a very intellectual crowd, and I perceive a lot of generosity and genuine curiosity when I read stuff there. And, I'm sure faults can be found! Ego lurks in every corner!


That being said, please just trust your own instincts! If you are concerned about receiving unsolicited messages, that is completely understandable in today's world. I think I would be at least somewhat skeptical if I got a message like that. (As it turns out, I was introduced to the group by someone I had met in person.) And if that is enough to turn you off, then that is quite alright. You are under no obligation to respect or follow anyone!


There are also resources I've seen, such as lists of the qualities of cults. You could compare that list to your experience. Same with scams.



4



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

Menaus42

·

17 hr. ago

ekayāna

That blog is just an exegesis of Mahayana Buddhism in modern language. It's mostly quotes involving other teachers and conversations between members. Thusness/John Tan explains his lineage and names exactly the teachers he has learned from. What makes any of this suspicious?



4



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

purelander108

·

15 hr. ago

mahayana

Bro visit my blog bro please its insight into anatta, john is enlightened bro its legit I swear you just have to visit the blog and get enlightened too bro please.



3



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

dizijinwu

·

15 hr. ago

Anyone who claims to be enlightened merits intense scrutiny. Anybody who claims to have enlightened on their own is almost certainly a manipulator.



3



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 1

[deleted]

·

21 hr. ago

[unavailable]


Share

Report

Save


level 2

xabir

·

21 hr. ago

I am not interested in fame, only the wisdom life of sentient beings. This is why I share to begin with. And I will continue sharing in any way I can.


I also share to many other subreddits, Buddhism is not the main one I share to. I share to nonduality, meditation, awakened, etc etc. all kinds of subreddit. most of them have not even heard of buddhism but many have mystical realizations and awakenings. It is my hope that this may inspire them to look into Buddhadharma, especially when they read and resonate with the descriptions of the earlier stages.


Share

Save

Edit



level 2

xabir

·

21 hr. ago

Making people uncomfortable may be unavoidable


Buddha recommended sharing of dharma:


“Go forth for the good of the many, for the happiness of the many, out of compassion for the world, for the welfare, the good and the happiness of gods and men. Let no two of you go in the same direction. Teach the Dharma which is beautiful in the beginning, beautiful in the middle and beautiful at the end. Proclaim both the letter and the spirit of the holy life completely fulfilled and perfectly pure. — Buddha, Mahavagga, Vinaya Pitaka.”


Not all will be comfortable with the message but some may resonate


Share

Save

Edit



User avatar

level 1

hashtagron

·

20 hr. ago

How did you make a post with text AND a photo? Reddit always makes me choose one or another



2



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 2

Comment deleted by user

·

20 hr. ago


User avatar

level 3

hashtagron

·

20 hr. ago

May all beings benefit



1



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

suremanhellsley

·

16 hr. ago

My whole thing with Buddhism is it isn’t evangelical. Granted it comes from my American cultural conditioning but anyone trying to convince others is either selling something or trying to convince themselves - but AGAIN I am deeply disillusioned thanks to Christianity



2



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 2

xabir

·

9 hr. ago

·

edited 9 hr. ago

Buddha advices us to spread the dharma to people in all directions out of compassion, how similar it is to Christian evangelism I’m not sure:


“Go forth for the good of the many, for the happiness of the many, out of compassion for the world, for the welfare, the good and the happiness of gods and men. Let no two of you go in the same direction. Teach the Dharma which is beautiful in the beginning, beautiful in the middle and beautiful at the end. Proclaim both the letter and the spirit of the holy life completely fulfilled and perfectly pure. — Buddha, Mahavagga, Vinaya Pitaka.”


But Buddha’s approach clearly worked and thousands of his students attained awakening and liberation during the Buddha’s lifetime. Thousands. How many teachers today can say the same?


This is because Buddha encouraged a policy of openly sharing the dharma to as many people as they can. I hope Buddhists are more active at sharing the message. Of course this is not the same as shoving down teachings on another’s throat, that is not how things work. You either resonate with the message or not.. you either have the conditions and karma to accept the dharma or not, no use trying to force things on others. But a gentle and polite sharing is ok and good, IMO. And karma is not an excuse to do nothing as Buddhists to spread the dharma. Karma is not fatalism and does not excuse us of our responsibility to do what is right. But whether the others want to look it up further after our sharing is up to them.



2



Reply

Share

Save

Edit

Follow



User avatar

level 3

suremanhellsley

·

2 hr. ago

Hey makes sense, but context is key. Gotta understand how many have been deceived and hurt specifically through online solicitation. When I read that quote about spreading dharma I see it as engaging community with good intentions and good actions, not necessarily spreading philosophical ideation. But I’m just one dude over here with his bias and attitudes chilling in a thicket.



1



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

Mayayana

·

18 hr. ago

It sounds all made up to me. There are lots of similar things around, where people make up their own 2 cents. They often mean well. If you look at the references you can see that they're all over the map, from Ken Wilbur to Ramana Maharshi. It's that New Age misconception that realization is something that can be understood or "gotten".



1



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

growbot_3000

·

15 hr. ago

👽🥏🌠



1



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

vicshayne

·

21 hr. ago

Since this is a Buddhist thread I am not sure what this has to do with anything related to Buddhism.


Also, I have read some information from the Thusness person. One of the problems is that it is not difficult to speak of certain things, like enlightenment, simply by having a good memory and repeating things you've read from Ramana, Nisargadatta, Krishnamurti, and so on. In the final analysis it just doesn't matter what people say, because ultimately each of us must personally enquire into what we are. After all, this was the Buddha's message as well. He said Life is suffering, so what does this mean? It's an invitation to look into the sense of self to find this kernel of suffering and where it comes from. No one can do this on your behalf, not even a so-called enlightened person.


When someone declares that they are enlightened it's a red flag. The reason for this is quite simple. The sense of self is an illusion and can therefore never be enlightened. And the consciousness, which is the totality of all there is, is already complete and undivided so that it cannot become enlightened either. Someone who has a sense of this, a realization, knows this and doesn't go around making declarations about himself.


For anyone who wants to get to the bottom of suffering and therefore also get to the essence of what they are, I would say not to become distracted by promises or teachings. Your life is your own, so find out what is true for yourself.



-5



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


level 2

Comment deleted by user

·

21 hr. ago


User avatar

level 3

vicshayne

·

20 hr. ago

anatta


Anatta refers to the idea that there is no self. While the self is an illusion, it does exist as a belief system, and this system is what causes desire as well as suffering.



1



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 1

solacetree

·

20 hr. ago

theravada

I see red flags here



-3



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow


User avatar

level 2

purelander108

·

3 hr. ago

mahayana

Its obvious. Dharma is requested. This is soliciting.



0



Reply

Give Award

Share

Report

Save

Follow

Buddha's teaching on the importance of practicing tranquility and insight together for liberation of mental afflictions.

https://suttacentral.net/an4.170/en/thanissaro?reference=none&highlight=false

  • Aṅguttara Nikāya
  • Book of the Fours

4.170. In Tandem

On one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying in Kosambi, at Ghosita’s monastery. There he addressed the monks, “Friends!”

“Yes, friend,” the monks responded.

Ven. Ananda said: “Friends, whoever—monk or nun—declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of four paths. Which four?

“There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by tranquillity. As he develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it—his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed.

“Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it—his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed.

“Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in tandem with insight. As he develops tranquillity in tandem with insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it—his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed.

“Then there is the case where a monk’s mind has its restlessness concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it—his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed.

“Whoever—monk or nun—declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of these four paths.”

Highly enlightened Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh’s guided meditations on a mobile app. Free.

iOS: https://apps.apple.com/app/id1273719339?fbclid=IwAR3Wl2aDj8EXh1pgcAuE8xivCu2F4ZcX5KXr-qm1W1pkozD8wxxvLYuy_gQ 


Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.plumvillageapp&hl=en_AU&gl=US

https://www.facebook.com/groups/AwakeningToReality/posts/7958912437483450/



Mara Martins


  · 

sSdrpootnema0

1

m4h9u17852

h

chffcm11chf1a38305ma326fham556g1umi

  · 

Hello. 

I'm wondering something related to the "atr levels of enlightenment." To any of those who have attained the 7th level of buddhist enlightenment according to atr, are you free from suffering?

For example, if you arrive later at home today and find your pet/children/wife/husband dead, will you suffer or not? Maybe Soh Wei Yu can reply. 

Thanks!

17 Comments

Mara Martins

Author


As a side not, I’ve read in the ebook Awakening to Reality, written by Soh Wei Yu, the fruition of the atr’s 7th level of enlightenment. For example, it says:

“freedom from any sense of self”

And then it says

“high degree of attenuation of craving, anger, fears, sorrow, attachments, or any afflictive emotions”

High degree of attenuation of attachments? Who has attachments? If you have realized anatta, how do you still have attachments? Who is the “no-self” who has attachments? Attachments are still delusion, it implies that there is someone who clings to something.

Sorrow or afflictive emotions? Isn’t sorrow just a sensation? Why is it labeled as sorrow? Sorrow implies suffering, and a sufferer, a self.

There are more examples, but these should suffice for now.

Looking forward to get clarified on this. Thanks!

Reply1hEdited

Simon Wagner

Mara Martins actually suffering or attachment does not imply a self. the imputation that any phenomena must belong to or be experienced by a self, IS the dream

Reply1h

Neil Kaiser

Simon Wagner I would second this. It's not that suffering does not exist but you see it for what it is, and for that you cannot identify with it.

Reply1h

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Mara Martins on your OP: it depends on your level of attainment. I did write that as you practice, post-anatta, your afflictive emotions will get attenuated, even possibly quite early on. And then, when you reach fetter model Arahantship, or 8th bhumi bodhisattva, all afflictions are permanently ended.

Kyle Dixon just shared this days ago:

I don’t like to talk about myself really but doctrinally you would be referring to the “taming” ('dul ba, damya), which is as my teacher says “the process of obtaining the mental and emotional resilience on a deep level. When one has tamed one's afflictions, even if they are still present in the mind stream, one has reached the level of patience (bzod pa, kṣānti).” This occurs at the 3rd bhūmi, and is characterized by pretty much a total absence of negative emotions like sadness or anger, but with the ability to still feel immense gratitude, joy and happiness in proper contexts.

In my past I would sometimes form healthy attachments to some women and have relationships with them, this is really no issue.

The view of Vajrayāna and ati in general is actually defined as “attachment without clinging” this means we allow our senses to come into contact with their respective objects of sensation without accepting or rejecting. This means that even in the act of sex, the sensations are arising and you are fully with the sensations. If you aren’t in equipoise then you are fully experiencing the sensation, and you can play with how that sensation lacks a subject and object if you understand how that principle is applied in the view. That is the meaning of training in pure vision. Everything is the mandala of the deity, in ati for example, this means everything is innately the mandala of vidyā.

- https://www.reddit.com/.../com.../wu3rwa/comment/il86rx9/...

Also he wrote previously, some quotations in AtR guide:

"...The anatta definitely severed many emotional afflictions, for the most part I don't have negative emotions anymore. And either the anatta or the strict shamatha training has resulted in stable shamatha where thoughts have little effect and are diminished by the force of clarity. I'm also able to control them, stopping them for any amount of desired time etc. But I understand that isn't what is important. Can I fully open to whatever arises I would say yes. I understand that every instance of experience is fully appearing to itself as the radiance of clarity, yet timelessly disjointed and unsubstantiated.." - Kyle Dixon, 2013

Someone had the misunderstanding that Kyle Dixon is a “follower” of Soh and John Tan. Soh clarified,

“Kyle Dixon is not a student or follower of mine or John Tan in any way. His realizations happened prior to his encountering us, about eight years ago. He is a dzogchen practitioner and I am not. The fact that our insights coincide is simply a coincidence. There are some others who have had insights triggered by my writings, but Kyle is not one of them. Furthermore, I do not have “students”. I also do not claim “full enlightenment”.” Kyle has written a very nice account back in 2012 of his own realization: Advice from Kyle Dixon - https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../advise-from...

(Update: Kyle Dixon learns Dzogchen from Chogyal Namkhai Norbu and since around 2012 has started learning from Dzogchen teacher Acarya Malcolm Smith. Had the good karma to meet Malcolm and Kyle in California in 2019 [completely coincidental because Malcolm does not live there and just happened to be visiting]. Malcolm said Kyle is the first to totally get his view. Also, in 2020 John Tan and I started attending Malcolm’s Dzogchen teachings which we think is very clear: http://www.zangthal.com/, https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/.../clarification... . Although I would add, Kyle did say he had learnt things from John Tan and I too. But I would say it is not some sort of formal student-teacher relation. I have learnt many things from Kyle too.)

“The conditions for this subtle identification are not undone until anatta is realized.

Anatta realization is like a massive release of prolonged tension, this is how John put it once at least. Like a tight fist, that has been tight for lifetimes, is suddenly relaxed. There is a great deal of power in the event. The nature of this realization is not often described in traditional settings, I have seen Traga Rinpoche discuss it. Jñāna is very bright and beautiful. That brightness is traditionally the “force” that “burns” the kleśas.

The reservoir of traces and karmic imprints is suddenly purged by this wonderful, violent brightness. After this occurs negative emotions are subdued and for the most part do not manifest anymore. Although this is contingent upon the length of time one maintains that equipoise.” - Kyle Dixon, 2019

“Prajñā “burns” karma, only when in awakened equipoise. Regular meditation does not.” - Kyle Dixon, 2021

“On hand I have this:

The Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra states:

Affecting the mind, kleśa and vāsanā can be destroyed only by a wisdom [prajñā], a certain form of omniscience [sarvajñatā].

There is a lesser form of prajñā that is able to eradicate the kleśas, and then a superior form of prajñā that destroys vāsanās. Only buddhas possess the superior form and have therefore dispelled both the kleśas and vāsanās.

The Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra continues:

There is no difference between the different destructions of the conflicting emotions [kleśaprahāna]. However, the Tathāgatas, arhats and samyaksaṃbuddhas have entirely and definitively cut all the conflicting emotions [kleśa] and the traces that result from them [vāsanānusaṃdhi]. The śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas themselves have not yet definitively cut vāsanānusaṃdhi... these vāsanās are not really kleśas. After having cut the kleśas, the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas still retain a small part of them: semblances of love (attachment) [rāga], hate (aversion) [dveṣa] and ignorance [moha] still function in their body [kāya], speech [vāc] and mind [manas]: this is what is called vāsanānusaṃdhi. In foolish worldly people [bālapṛthagjana], the vāsanās call forth disadvantages [anartha], whereas among the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas they do not. The Buddhas do not have these vāsanānusaṃdhi.” - Kyle Dixon, 2021

Reply1hEdited

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

.....

Other quotes from AtR guide:

“Though anatta is a seal [Soh: i.e. a truth that is always already so, pertaining to the nature of mind/experience], it also requires one to arise the insight to feel liberated. When a practitioner realizes the anatta nature of manifestation, at that moment without the sense of observer, there is no negative emotions. There is only vivid sensation of all the arising as presence. When you are angry, it is a split. When you realized its anatta nature, there is just vivid clarity of all the bodily sensations. Even when there is an arising thought of something bad, it dissolves with no involvement in the content [Soh: i.e. mental contents like stories, imagination and conceptualization along with emotional involvement]. To be angry, a 'someone' must come into the content. When there is no involvement of the extra agent, there is only recoiling and self liberations. One should differentiate arising thought from the active involvement of the content a practitioner that realizes anatta is only involved fully in the vivid presence of the action, phenomena but not getting lost in content.” - John Tan, 2009

Also see J Krishnamurti speaking on awareness without a background observer leads to never being angry again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=share&v=65uft-8u4gU

“Not creating an idea of a self frees us completely from anger. You cannot have anger unless there is a self. There is no boundless and omniscient self somewhere in the sky that created the whole universe, and there is no tangible and limited self that inhabits this bag of skin. All of reality is simply infinite

dharmas that arise and disappear in accord with the laws of karma. There is not one thing standing against another.” - Zen Master John Daido Loori

Krishnamurti on Awareness and the Observer (Extract from Talk 7, Saanen 1976)

YOUTUBE.COM

Krishnamurti on Awareness and the Observer (Extract from Talk 7, Saanen 1976)

Krishnamurti on Awareness and the Observer (Extract from Talk 7, Saanen 1976)

ReplyRemove Preview1h

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

John Tan basically said before, if you have stable momentum [in equipoise], your radiance bright and stable, you will be able to remain calm and stable in spacious openness in the midst of adversities and loss. The momentum in equipoise must be strong, free from all elaborations, no I nor identity, only natural radiance, pellucid, pure and radiance bright. Then 'things' don't affect you due to no sense of identity.

Are you also familiar with the fetter model four paths, because this is important to understand in the context of this topic: http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../early-buddhism...

https://www.reddit.com/r/streamentry/comments/igored/insight_buddhism_a_reconsideration_of_the_meaning/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf%20

http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../insight-buddhism...

It is important to understand that attaining anatta and insight into dependent origination initially is akin to Buddha's fetter model stream entry (not the Daniel or MCTB system). In Mahayana system, the Mahayana stream entry is the first bhumi out of 10 or 13 or 16. In the Sravaka system, stream entry is followed by sakadagami, anagami and arahant.

Also here is a description of the 3rd stage of the sravaka stages of awakening -- anagami -- one stage before fetter model fourth path [arahantship]:

Excerpt from the AtR guide:

Now, back to discussing MN73: No anagamis or arahants are said to enjoy sensual pleasures, unlike stream enterer and once returners.

An anagami and arahant would have no desires or clinging to a relationship either. An anagami simply asked whether his wifes want to leave and he could arrange it, and didn’t have issues either way. Didn’t felt sad or perturbed that they are leaving either. I read that some anagamis remain as lay persons (in the suttas) as they need to take care of parents and so on.

As someone wrote, “As for lifestyle changes upon abandoning the five fetters, this is what the non-returner Ugga has to say: “I had four young wives. I then went to them and said: ‘Sisters, I have undertaken the training rules with celibacy as the fifth. If you want, you can enjoy wealth right here and do merits, or go back to your own family circle, or inform me if you want me to give you over to another man.’ My eldest wife then said to me: ‘Young sir, give me to such and such a man.’ I sent for that man, and with my left hand I took my wife, with my right hand I took the ceremonial vase, and I gave her to that man. But even while giving away my young wife, I don’t recall that any alteration took place in my mind. This is the third astounding and amazing quality found in me.”

Reply1hEdited

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

"Who has attachments? ", "Sorrow implies suffering, and a sufferer, a self."

It is important to understand this:

http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../difference-between...

Difference between "neo advaita nihilism" and Anatta

“[3:29 PM, 6/25/2020] John Tan: Thought of how to explain the difference in anatta and advaita nihilism.

[3:40 PM, 6/25/2020] John Tan: When a person in ignorance, why is he so blinded? If there is no I, shouldn't him be already free?

Sentient being: if there is no I in ignorance, then you are therefore free.

Anatta: There is no I in ignorance, you are precisely THAT ignorance, therefore fully and entirely blinded.

What anatta insight is telling us is the "I" and "ignorance" are the same phenomenon. This also tells us that even when in ignorant, there is complete and effortless non-dual experience, anatta is a seal.

[2:52 PM, 6/27/2020] Soh Wei Yu: The Beauty of Virtue

Thought is movement between “what is” and “what should be.” Thought is the time to cover that space, and as long as there is division between this and that psychologically, the movement is the time of thought. So thought is time as movement. Is there time as movement, as thought, when there is only observation of “what is”? That is, not observation as the observer and the observed, but only observation without the movement of going beyond “what is.” It is very important for the mind to understand this, because thought can create most marvelous images of what is sacred and holy, which all religions have done. All religions are based on thought. All religions are the organization of thought, in belief, in dogma, in rituals. So unless there is complete understanding of thought as time and movement, the mind cannot possibly go beyond itself.

We are trained, educated, drilled to change “what is” into “what should be,” the ideal, and that takes time. That whole movement of thought to cover the space between “what is” and “what should be” is the time to change “what is” into “what should be”—but the observer is the observed, therefore there is nothing to change, there is only “what is.” The observer doesn’t know what to do with “what is,” therefore he tries various methods to change “what is,” controls “what is,” tries to suppress “what is.” But the observer is the observed: the “what is” is the observer. Anger, jealousy, are also the observer; there isn’t jealousy separate from the observer—both are one. When there is no movement as thought in time to change “what is,” when thought perceives that there is no possibility of changing “what is,” then that which is—“what is”—ceases entirely, because the observer is the observed.

Go into this very deeply and you will see for yourself. It is really quite simple. If I dislike someone, the dislike is not different from the “me” or the “you.” The entity that dislikes is dislike itself; it is not separate. And when thought says, “I must get over my dislike,” then it is movement in time to get over that which actually is, which is created by thought. So the observer—the entity—and the thing called “dislike” are the same. Therefore there is complete immobility. It is not the immobility of being static, it is complete motionlessness and therefore complete silence. So time as movement, time as thought achieving a result, has come totally to an end, and therefore action is instantaneous. So the mind has laid the foundation and is free from disorder; and therefore there is the flowering and the beauty of virtue. In that foundation is the basis of relationship between you and another. In that relationship there is no activity of image; there is only relationship, not one image adjusting itself to the other image. There is only “what is” and not the changing of “what is.” The changing of “what is,” or transforming of “what is,” is the movement of thought in time.

When you have come to that point, the mind and the brain cells also become totally still. The brain which holds memories, experience, knowledge, can and must function in the field of the known. But now that mind, that brain, is free from the activity of time and thought. Then the mind is completely still. All this takes place without effort. All this must take place without any sense of discipline, control, which belong to disorder.

You know, what we are saying is totally different from what the gurus, the “masters,” the Zen philosophers say, because in this there is no authority, there is no following another. If you follow somebody, you are not only destroying yourself but also the other. A religious mind has no authority whatsoever. But it has intelligence and it applies that intelligence. In the world of action there is the authority of the scientist, the doctor, the man who teaches you how to drive, but otherwise there is no authority, there is no guru.

So, if you have gone as deeply as that, then the mind has established order in relationship, and understands the whole complex disorder of our daily lives. Out of the comprehension of that disorder, out of the awareness of it, in which there is no choice, comes the beauty of virtue, which is not cultivated, which is not brought about by thought. That virtue is love, order, and if the mind has established that with deep roots, it is immovable, unchangeable. And then you can inquire into the whole movement of time. Then the mind is completely still. There is no observer, there is no experiencer, there is no thinker.

There are various forms of sensory and extrasensory perception. Clairvoyance, healing, all kinds of things take place, but they are all secondary, and a mind that is really concerned with the discovery of what is truth, what is sacred, will never touch them.

The mind then is free to observe. Then there is that which man has sought through centuries, the unnameable, the timeless. And there is no verbal expression of it. The image that is created by thought completely and utterly ceases because there is no entity that wants to express it in words. Your mind can only discover it, or come upon it, when you have this strange thing called love, compassion, not only for your neighbor, but for the animals, the trees, for everything.

Then such a mind itself becomes sacred.

~ J Krishnamurti, 'This Light in Oneself: True Meditation'

[2:53 PM, 6/27/2020] Soh Wei Yu: reminds me of what you said 'you are the ignorance'

[6:52 AM, 6/28/2020] John Tan: Yes”

p.s. John Tan also said years ago,

Difference between "neo advaita nihilism" and Anatta

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

Difference between "neo advaita nihilism" and Anatta

Difference between "neo advaita nihilism" and Anatta

ReplyRemove Preview56mEdited

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

"After this insight, one must also be clear of the way of anatta and the path of practice. Many wrongly conclude that because there is no-self, there is nothing to do and nothing to practice. This is precisely using "self view" to understand "anatta" despite having the insight.

It does not mean because there is no-self, there is nothing to practice; rather it is because there is no self, there is only ignorance and the chain of afflicted activities. Practice therefore is about overcoming ignorance and these chain of afflictive activities. There is no agent but there is attention. Therefore practice is about wisdom, vipassana, mindfulness and concentration. If there is no mastery over these practices, there is no liberation. So one should not bullshit and psycho ourselves into the wrong path of no-practice and waste the invaluable insight of anatta. T

hat said, there is the passive mode of practice of choiceless awareness, but one should not misunderstand it as the "default way" and such practice can hardly be considered "mastery" of anything, much less liberation."

In 2013, Thusness said, "Anapanasati is good. After your insight [into anatta], master a form of technique that can bring you to that the state of anatta without going through a thought process." and on choiceless awareness Thusness further commented, "Nothing wrong with choice. Only problem is choice + awareness. It is that subtle thought, the thought that misapprehend (Soh: falsely imputes/fabricates) the additional "agent"."

“A state of freedom is always a natural state, that is a state of mind free from self/Self. You should familiarize yourself with the taste first. Like doing breathing meditation until there is no-self and left with the inhaling and exhaling... then understand what is meant by releasing.”

Labels: Anatta, John Tan, Karmic Tendencies |

Reply55m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/06/choosing.html

Choosing

John Tan:

The logic that since there is no agency, hence no choice to be made is no different from "no sufferer, therefore no suffering".

This is not anatta insight.

What is seen through in anatta is the mistaken view that the conventional structure of "subject action object" represents reality when it is not. Action does not require an agent to initiate it. It is language that creates the confusion that nouns are required to set verbs into motion.

Therefore the action of choosing continues albeit no chooser.

"Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found;

The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there;

Nibbāna is, but not the man that enters it;

The path is, but no traveler on it is seen."

[continued in link]

Choosing

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

Choosing

Choosing

ReplyRemove Preview54m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../no-self-no-doer...

"Mere suffering is, not any sufferer is found

The deeds exist, but no performer of the deeds:

Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it,

The path is, but no wanderer is to be seen."

No doer of the deeds is found,

No one who ever reaps their fruits,

Empty phenomena roll on,

This view alone is right and true.

No god, no Brahma, may be called,

The maker of this wheel of life,

Empty phenomena roll on,

Dependent on conditions all." Visuddhimagga XIX.

No Self, No Doer, Conditionality

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

No Self, No Doer, Conditionality

No Self, No Doer, Conditionality

ReplyRemove Preview53m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

"Action does not require an agent to initiate it."

Something I wrote recently:

http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../no-nouns-are...

No nouns are necessary to initiate verbs

Xabir = Soh

User avatar

level 1

Fishskull3

· 9 hr. ago

Everything isn’t made of awareness, it quite literally is awareness itself. In your direct experience there isn’t anything inside looking out at something. the very thing that you presently think is the “seen” is the ongoing activity of the “seer” or awareness.

3level 2

xabir

· just now

I like your answer. Also, I would like to add, awareness is none other than the ongoing activity. It is not the case that awareness is an unchanging substance modulating as everything. 'Awareness' is just like a word like 'weather', a mere name denoting the ongoing dynamic activities of raining wetting sun shining wind blowing lightning strike and so on and on. 'Awareness' has no intrinsic existence of its own than moment to moment manifestation, even if at that moment it is just a mere sense of formless Existence, that too is another 'foreground' non-dual manifestation and not an unchanging background.

Just like there is no lightning besides flash (lightning is flashing -- lightning is just another name for flash and is not the agent behind flash), no wind besides blowing, no water besides flowing, no nouns or agents are needed to initiate verbs. There never was an agent, a seer, or even a seeing, besides colors, never an agent, a hearer, or even a hearing, besides sound. Anatta.

Some excerpts from the 2nd most famous Buddhist masters (right after the Dalai Lama) of our time, the Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh :

Excerpts from http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../sun-of-awareness...

some other quotations which Thusness/PasserBy liked from the book --"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'.""..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....""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."

----------------

Comments by Thusness/PasserBy: "...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."

.............

Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh:"When we say it's raining, we mean that raining is taking place. You don't need someone up above to perform the raining. It's not that there is the rain, and there is the one who causes the rain to fall. In fact, when you say the rain is falling, it's very funny, because if it weren't falling, it wouldn't be rain. In our way of speaking, we're used to having a subject and a verb. That's why we need the word "it" when we say, "it rains." "It" is the subject, the one who makes the rain possible. But, looking deeply, we don't need a "rainer," we just need the rain. Raining and the rain are the same. The formations of birds and the birds are the same -- there's no "self," no boss involved. There's a mental formation called vitarka, "initial thought."

When we use the verb "to think" in English, we need a subject of the verb: I think, you think, he thinks. But, really, you don't need a subject for a thought to be produced. Thinking without a thinker -- it's absolutely possible. To think is to think about something. To perceive is to perceive something. The perceiver and the perceived object that is perceived are one.When Descartes said, "I think, therefore I am," his point was that if I think, there must be an "I" for thinking to be possible. When he made the declaration "I think," he believed that he could demonstrate that the "I" exists. We have the strong habit or believing in a self. But, observing very deeply, we can see that a thought does not need a thinker to be possible. There is no thinker behind the thinking -- there is just the thinking; that's enough. Now, if Mr. Descartes were here, we might ask him, "Monsieur Descartes, you say, 'You think, therefore you are.' But what are you? You are your thinking. Thinking -- that's enough. Thinking manifests without the need of a self behind it."Thinking without a thinker. Feeling without a feeler. What is our anger without our 'self'? This is the object of our meditation. All the fifty-one mental formations take place and manifest without a self behind them arranging for this to appear, and then for that to appear. Our mind consciousness is in the habit of basing itself on the idea of self, on manas.

But we can meditate to be more aware of our store consciousness, where we keep the seeds of all those mental formations that are not currently manifesting in our mind. When we meditate, we practice looking deeply in order to bring light and clarity into our way of seeing things. When the vision of no-self is obtained, our delusion is removed. This is what we call transformation. In the Buddhist tradition, transformation is possible with deep understanding. The moment the vision of no-self is there, manas, the elusive notion of 'I am,' disintegrates, and we find ourselves enjoying, in this very moment, freedom and happiness."

1

Labels: Anatta |

No nouns are necessary to initiate verbs

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

No nouns are necessary to initiate verbs

No nouns are necessary to initiate verbs

ReplyRemove Preview51m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

This is also good:

http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../phagguna-sutta-to...

Phagguna Sutta: To Phagguna

Also see: Flawed Mode of Enquiry

SN 12.12

PTS: S ii 13

CDB i 541

Phagguna Sutta: To Phagguna

translated from the Pali by

Nyanaponika Thera

© 2006–2012

Alternate translation: Thanissaro

"There are, O monks, four nutriments for the sustenance of beings born, and for the support of beings seeking birth. What are the four? Edible food, coarse and fine; secondly, sense-impression; thirdly, volitional thought; fourthly, consciousness."

After these words, the venerable Moliya-Phagguna addressed the Exalted One as follows:

"Who, O Lord, consumes[1] the nutriment consciousness?"

"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say that 'he consumes.'[2] If I had said so, then the question 'Who consumes?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be: 'For what is the nutriment consciousness (the condition)?'[3] And to that the correct reply is: 'The nutriment consciousness[4] is a condition for the future arising of a renewed existence;[5] when that has come into being, there is (also) the sixfold sense-base; and conditioned by the sixfold sense-base is sense-impression.'"[6]

"Who, O Lord, has a sense-impression?"

"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One.

"I do not say that 'he has a sense-impression.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who has a sense-impression?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of sense-impression?' And to that the correct reply is: 'The sixfold sense-base is a condition of sense-impression, and sense-impression is the condition of feeling.'"

"Who, O Lord, feels?"

"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say that 'he feels.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who feels?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of feeling?' And to that the correct reply is: 'sense-impression is the condition of feeling; and feeling is the condition of craving.'"

"Who, O Lord, craves?"

"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One. "I do not say that 'he craves.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who craves?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of craving?' And to that the correct reply is: 'Feeling is the condition of craving, and craving is the condition of clinging.'"

"Who, O Lord, clings?"

"The question is not correct," said the Exalted One, "I do not say that 'he clings.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who clings?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of clinging?' And to that the correct reply is: 'Craving is the condition of clinging; and clinging is the condition of the process of becoming.' Such is the origin of this entire mass of suffering.[7]

"Through the complete fading away and cessation of even these six bases of sense-impression, sense-impression ceases;[8] through the cessation of sense-impression, feeling ceases; through the cessation of feeling, craving ceases; through the cessation of craving, clinging ceases; through the cessation of clinging, the process of becoming ceases; through the cessation of the process of becoming, birth ceases; through the cessation of birth, old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering."

Phagguna Sutta: To Phagguna

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

Phagguna Sutta: To Phagguna

Phagguna Sutta: To Phagguna

ReplyRemove Preview48m

Justin Forrest Miles


Sadness is an inescapable human experience and display of our Buddha nature.

Reply45m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Justin Forrest Miles It is inescapable for unenlightened beings, but for totally liberated beings like Buddha and the arahants (but not necessarily newly awakened like the stream enterers and first bhumi whose afflictions are attenuated but not completely ended), they are totally free.

Salla Sutta: The Arrow

translated from the Pali by

John D. Ireland

© 1994

Alternate translation: Thanissaro

"Unindicated and unknown is the length of life of those subject to death. Life is difficult and brief and bound up with suffering. There is no means by which those who are born will not die. Having reached old age, there is death. This is the natural course for a living being. With ripe fruits there is the constant danger that they will fall. In the same way, for those born and subject to death, there is always the fear of dying. Just as the pots made by a potter all end by being broken, so death is (the breaking up) of life.

"The young and old, the foolish and the wise, all are stopped short by the power of death, all finally end in death. Of those overcome by death and passing to another world, a father cannot hold back his son, nor relatives a relation. See! While the relatives are looking on and weeping, one by one each mortal is led away like an ox to slaughter.

"In this manner the world is afflicted by death and decay. But the wise do not grieve, having realized the nature of the world. You do not know the path by which they came or departed. Not seeing either end you lament in vain. If any benefit is gained by lamenting, the wise would do it. Only a fool would harm himself. Yet through weeping and sorrowing the mind does not become calm, but still more suffering is produced, the body is harmed and one becomes lean and pale, one merely hurts oneself. One cannot protect a departed one (peta) by that means. To grieve is in vain.

"By not abandoning sorrow a being simply undergoes more suffering. Bewailing the dead he comes under the sway of sorrow. See other men faring according to their deeds! Hence beings tremble here with fear when they come into the power of death. Whatever they imagine, it (turns out) quite different from that. This is the sort of disappointment that exists. Look at the nature of the world! If a man lives for a hundred years, or even more, finally, he is separated from his circle of relatives and gives up his life in the end. Therefore, having listened to the arahant,[1] one should give up lamenting. Seeing a dead body, one should know, "He will not be met by me again." As the fire in a burning house is extinguished with water, so a wise, discriminating, learned and sensible man should quickly drive away the sorrow that arises, as the wind (blows off) a piece of cotton. He who seeks happiness should withdraw the arrow: his own lamentations, longings and grief.

"With the arrow withdrawn, unattached, he would attain to peace of mind; and when all sorrow has been transcended he is sorrow-free and has realized Nibbana.

Reply42mEdited

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

For example, Ananda cried at the thought of Buddha passing into Parinibbana. At that time he was only a stream enterer. However, all the arahant disciples of Buddha did not cry at all. They have transcended sorrow.

Reply40m

Justin Forrest Miles


I hear you and I read the teachings, I just don't know a fully actualized human being who is or should be free from sadness. Its an indicator of human heartedness and not a flaw or weakness.

Reply39m

Justin Forrest Miles


The Buddha was correct about the things he studied and knew, in particular the nature of self, others and objective reality. The things he didn't study or know, he didnt know. I also question the benefit of a world full of Buddhas who don't get sad.

Reply36m