Simple_Jack

Bernadette Roberts: Christian Contemplative View On Buddhism

By Simple_Jack, in Buddhist Discussion

Recommended Posts

Simple_Jack   

Simple_Jack
Posted

 

 

I admit of my extreme prejudice towards eternalist doctrines such as Vedanta. Now it's your turn.

 

Now, why are you unable to admit to your own hypocrisy?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple_Jack   

Simple_Jack
Posted

The question should be: am I allowed to offer alternatives to the dogmatism of eternalist doctrines such as Vedanta in the Buddhist sub-forum?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple_Jack   

Simple_Jack
Posted

This is the defining difference starting from Hinayana:

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_27.html

 

"For the Vedanta, non-duality (advaita) means the absence of an ultimate distinction between the Atman, the innermost self, and Brahman, the divine reality, the underlying ground of the world. From the standpoint of the highest realization, only one ultimate reality exists — which is simultaneously Atman and Brahman — and the aim of the spiritual quest is to know that one's own true self, the Atman, is the timeless reality which is Being, Awareness, Bliss. Since all schools of Buddhism reject the idea of the Atman, none can accept the non-dualism of Vedanta. From the perspective of the Theravada tradition, any quest for the discovery of selfhood, whether as a permanent individual self or as an absolute universal self, would have to be dismissed as a delusion, a metaphysical blunder born from a failure to properly comprehend the nature of concrete experience. According to the Pali Suttas, the individual being is merely a complex unity of the five aggregates, which are all stamped with the three marks of impermanence, suffering, and selflessness. Any postulation of selfhood in regard to this compound of transient, conditioned phenomena is an instance of "personality view"(sakkayaditthi), the most basic fetter that binds beings to the round of rebirths. The attainment of liberation, for Buddhism, does not come to pass by the realization of a true self or absolute "I," but through the dissolution of even the subtlest sense of selfhood in relation to the five aggregates, "the abolition of all I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendencies to conceit."

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel048.html

 

20. "Lord, can there be anxiety about unrealities, in the internal?"

 

"There can be, monk," said the Blessed One. "In that case, monk, someone has this view: 'The universe is the Self. That I shall be after death; permanent, stable, eternal, immutable; eternally the same shall I abide in that very condition.' He then hears a Perfect One expounding the Teaching for the removal of all grounds for views, of all prejudices, obsessions, dogmas and biases; for the stilling of all (kamma-) processes, for the relinquishment of all substrata (of existence), for the extirpation of craving, for dispassion, cessation, Nibbaana. He then thinks: 'I shall be annihilated, I shall be destroyed! No longer shall I exist!' Hence he grieves, is depressed and laments; beating his breast, he weeps, and dejection befalls him. Thus, monk, is there anxiety about unrealities, in the internal."

 

21. "But, Lord, can there be absence of anxiety about unrealities, in the internal?"

 

"There can be, monk," said the Blessed One. "In that case, monk, someone does not have this view: 'The universe is the Self... eternally the same shall I abide in that very condition.' He then hears a Perfect One expounding the Teaching for the removal of all grounds for views, of all prejudices, obsessions, dogmas and biases; for the stilling of all (kamma-) processes, for the relinquishing of all substrata (of existence), for the extirpation of craving, for dispassion, cessation, Nibbaana. He then does not think: 'I shall be annihilated, I shall be destroyed! No longer shall I exist!' Hence he does not grieve, is not depressed, does not lament; he does not beat his breast nor does he weep, and no dejection befalls him. Thus, monk, is there absence of anxiety about unrealities, in the internal.[25]....

 

....37. "So teaching, so proclaiming, O monks, I have been baselessly, vainly, falsely and wrongly accused by some ascetics and brahmans: 'A nihilist[38] is the ascetic Gotama; He teaches the annihilation, the destruction, the non-being of an existing individual.'[39]

 

"As I am not as I do not teach, so have I been baselessly, vainly, falsely and wrongly accused by some ascetics and brahmans thus: 'A nihilist is the ascetic Gotama; He teaches the annihilation, the destruction, the non-being of an existing individual.'

 

"What I teach now as before, O monks, is suffering and the cessation of suffering."

 

 

There is no such thing as "non-duality" nor an actual "non-dual" state in Buddhism.

 

Bump.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple_Jack   

Simple_Jack
Posted (edited)

From AEN (xabir2005) of the "Awakening to Reality" blog:

 

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/08/substantial-and-insubstantial-non.html?m=0

 

Although Bernadette Roberts' experience is closer to Buddhist enlightenment than many other non-Buddhist teachers, it is still not quite there. The experience of no-mind might be there, the realization of the dharma seal of anatta or no-self isn't.

I wrote last year:

No Mind and Anatta, Focusing on Insight

Many teachers only point to No Mind (no mind as I define it here, the complete dissolving of any subjectivity, "Where even the naked Awareness (as any sort of subject or unified mind) is totally forgotten and dissolved into simply scenery, sound, arising thoughts and passing scent." - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com. ... ctice.html) or the experience of "no self" as a stage or state of experience. Having experiences is quite common. Unfortunately not many Realize the profound insight of anatta let alone emptiness. To me, effortless, natural and liberating experience only comes from the arising of insight. The experience of no-mind sounds similar but there is a vast difference with experiential realization. It is thus important to clearly distinguish them. Even after anatta, one should further penetrate into D.O. and emptiness.


2008:

Thusness:

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com. ... en-at.html

whatever said is really “already is”.

In seeing, there is always only the seen. In hearing there is always only the sound. Never was there a seer or hearer.

All “already is”. Anatta is truly a seal. How amazing!



In 2008, a conversation with Thusness about Bernadette Roberts:

(1:31 AM) AEN: she said meister eckhart also reached anatta?
(1:58 AM) AEN: http://www.nonduality.com/berna.htm
(1:58 AM) AEN: im reading it again..
(1:58 AM) AEN: i tink its related to ur 6 stages as well (edit: referring to http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/ ... ience.html)
(2:04 AM) AEN: Chapter 1 is talking about stage 1. Chapter 2~3 is stage 2. Chapter 4 is stage 3. Chapter 5 is realising spontaneity and effortless action of stage 3. Chapter 6 is stage
(1:13 PM) AEN: Chapter 6 is stage 4-5

(1:24 PM) Thusness: Robert description is still very much in the journey of understanding the profound meaning of anatta. It is nowhere near experiencing emptiness directly.

(1:26 PM) Thusness: what she is in is in a state of non-duality struggling to understand the experience of non-dual which she call no-self. Still have not gone beyond the propensities of dualism in the deepest sense. This is not the turning point yet in my opinion.
(1:26 PM) AEN: icic..
(1:26 PM) Thusness: True turning point is a vividness of anatta is just manifestation alone.

(1:27 PM) Thusness: it is total dissolving of 'Self' in whatever sense in clear lucidity and intense luminosity.
(1:27 PM) AEN:
Now Roberts saw neither emptiness nor relationship, but what Is. And
what Is is everything, but not the self. This marked the end of the
Great Passageway.
(1:27 PM) Thusness: there is no sense of thoughts, only crystal clarity and mere lucid sensate vibration.
(1:27 PM) Thusness: there is no need to paste me further.
(1:27 PM) AEN: icic.. but wat she described is like just manifestation rite
(1:28 PM) Thusness: i know the experience is not there yet in my opinion.
(1:28 PM) AEN: oic..
(1:28 PM) Thusness: what she experienced is still not what longchen experienced.
(1:28 PM) AEN: icic..
(1:28 PM) Thusness: in no time, if longchen practice diligently, he will experience the true essence of anatta.
(1:29 PM) AEN: oic..
(1:29 PM) Thusness: but since he left temasek, i hope he can still deligate time for his practice.
(1:29 PM) AEN: icic.. ya hope so
(1:29 PM) Thusness: to have the right view penetrate into daily action, requires some time and right condition.
(1:30 PM) Thusness: if the condition is right, it might just take a year.

(2:02 PM) Thusness: wah...the url u pasted is very good.
(2:03 PM) AEN: which url
(2:03 PM) Thusness: http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=-uj ... EuHo&hl=en

Wei Yu: some relevant parts by Bernadette:

...The whole point is that as long as consciousness remains, it functions in conjunction with the senses and does not allow for "pure" sensory knowing. Thus we must keep in mind that apart froM consciousness or separate from it, the senses have their own way-of-knowing and partake of a dimension of existence not available to consciousness.

Although it is not our intention to go into the nature of "pure" sensory knowing, it is important to note that once consciousness falls away sensory knowing turns out to be quite different from what we had previously believed it to be. Where we thought the senses had been responsible for discriminating the particular and singular, and believed that consciousness and the intellect posited the universal or whole, it turns out to be the other way around. The senses do not know, and cannot focus on, the particular or singular; it is nowhere in their power to do so. Consciousness alone has this focusing and discriminating power. Thus by themselves the senses cannot discriminate the singular or particular, and without the singular there is also no plural, no parts and wholes, no one-and-the-many. Sensory knowing is not derived by reflection, intuition, feeling or any such experience; instead, whatever is to be known is simply "there" - quite flatly with no thought or feeling. The senses merely apprehend "what is" with none of the distinctions, discriminations and labeling that are so indicative of the function of consciousness. As it turns out, consciousness is a discriminator, discriminating the particular and multiple, the knower and known, subject and object. Its dimension is entirely relative, while senses are non-discriminating and non-relative, knowing neither parts nor whole. Also, pure sensory knowing is neither a different type of consciousness nor a different level of the same; rather, it is a totally different system or way of knowing - virutally a different dimension of existence. Pure sensory knowing bears no resemblance to the knowing, experiencing dimension of consciousness. Obviously there are more ways of knowing than that of consciousness...

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

In turn, this means that when the mechanism is cut off, we not only lose awareness of the self—or the agent of consciousness on a conscious level—but we lose awareness of the self on an unconscious level as well. Stated more simply: when we can no longer verify or check back (reflect) on the subject of awareness, we lose consciousness of there being any subject of awareness at all. To one who remains self-conscious, of course, this seems impossible. To such a one, the subject of consciousness is so self-evident and logical, it needs no proof. But to the unself-conscious mind, no proof is possible.

The first question to be asked is whether or not self-consciousness is necessary for thinking, or if thinking goes right on without a thinker. My answer is that thinking can only arise in a self-conscious mind, which is obviously why the infant mentality cannot survive in an adult world. But once the mind is patterned and conditioned or brought to its full potential as a functioning mechanism, thinking goes right on without any need for a self-conscious mechanism. At the same time, however, it will be a different kind of thinking. Where before, thought had been a product of a reflecting introspective, objectifying mechanism—ever colored with personal feelings and biases—now thought arises spontaneously off the top of the head, and what is more, it arises in the now-moment which is concerned with the immediate present, making it invariably practical. This is undoubtedly a restrictive state of mind, but it is a blessed restrictiveness since the continual movement inward and outward, backward and forward in time, and in the service of feelings, personal projections, and all the rest, is an exhausting state that consumes an untold amount of energy that is otherwise left free.

What this means is that thinking goes right on even when there is no self, no thinker, and no self-consciousness; thus, there is no such thing as a totally silent mind—unless, of course, the mind or brain (which I view as synonymous) is physically dead. Certainly something remains when the mind dies, but this "something" has nothing to do with our notions or experiences of a mind, or of thought, or of ordinary awareness.
(2:03 PM) AEN: oic
(2:08 PM) Thusness: it will be a good read and guide for u.
(2:08 PM) AEN: icic..
(2:08 PM) AEN: tats anatta?
(2:09 PM) Thusness: not yet
(2:09 PM) AEN: icic..
(2:09 PM) Thusness: why so?
(2:09 PM) AEN: views?
(2:09 PM) Thusness: because there is no clarity of no-self.
(2:10 PM) AEN: oic wat is clarity of no self
(2:10 PM) Thusness: though what she said is one of the important factor of transiting from non-dual to anatta, it is hardly the essence of our no-self empty nature.
(2:11 PM) AEN: oic
(2:11 PM) AEN: which is the important factor
(2:11 PM) Thusness: Though she is right that pure sensory knowing of 'forms' is different from consciousness knowing 'forms'
(2:11 PM) AEN: icic..
(2:11 PM) Thusness: there is no clear insight that even there is consciousness, it is still anatta.
(2:12 PM) Thusness: a vivid expression of our essence without any difference.
(2:12 PM) AEN: oic..
(2:12 PM) Thusness: the essence of there is thoughts, no thinker.
(2:13 PM) Thusness: and in thinking, always only thoughts is not clearly understood and vividly experienced.
(2:13 PM) AEN:
Roberts states that when we can no longer attend to the subject of our
awareness, we have no consciousness of there being a subject. One
question that arises is whether thinking goes on without a thinker.
Roberts says that when there is no self, no self-consciousness, the
conditioned mind functions at its full potential, and there is no longer
reflection, introspection or the intrusion of feelings and biases.

Instead, "whatever is to be known is spontaneously there...in the now
moment."

Therefore, thought goes on even when there is no self, no thinker.
(2:13 PM) AEN: in her previous book, http://www.nonduality.com/berna.htm
(2:13 PM) Thusness: this is different from saying and repeating it aloud in our mind.
(2:14 PM) AEN: icic..
(2:14 PM) Thusness: experientially it is liberating.
(2:14 PM) AEN: oic..
(2:14 PM) Thusness: yeah...that is right.
(2:15 PM) Thusness: but it is not thoughts goes on even there is no thinker.
(2:15 PM) Thusness: it is there is always no thinker, only thoughts.
(2:15 PM) AEN: icic..
(2:15 PM) Thusness: once u see it as a 'stage', there is no understanding of what anatta is.
(2:15 PM) AEN: oic..
(2:15 PM) Thusness: then one differentiate between the higher teachings and the lower teachings of buddhism.
(2:16 PM) Thusness: but from Theravada to Mahayana to Dzogchen, all is/are the same.
(2:16 PM) Thusness: it is taught, just that it is not known.
(2:16 PM) Thusness: anatta and DO is already self-liberation.
(2:16 PM) AEN: icic..
(2:17 PM) Thusness: Although there is a need to emphasize that Theravada fail to see the essence of the teachings, it is not right to say that Buddha did not make this clear.
(2:18 PM) AEN: oic how come theravada fail to see the essence of the teachings
(2:18 PM) Thusness: What Robert stated is like the cases of one and two in the 'clarifying of natural state'
(2:18 PM) AEN: oic..
(2:19 PM) Thusness: actually it is the same for all...it is not a problem perculiar only in Theravada.
(2:19 PM) AEN: icic..
(2:19 PM) Thusness: it is not the case 3 as stated in the innate state of thinking, perception, vision..etc
(2:19 PM) AEN: oic..
(2:20 PM) Thusness: always keep this in mind: Experiences goes with insight.
(2:20 PM) Thusness: Only after the insight, there is true experience.
(2:21 PM) AEN: icic..
(2:21 PM) AEN: in bernadette roberts' case it is insight also rite
(2:21 PM) AEN: i brb
(2:21 PM) Thusness: Otherwise, it is always a 'stage' and thus still a form of delusion.
(2:21 PM) Thusness: When it is understood that it is our natural state, that is true insight.
(2:22 PM) AEN: back
(2:22 PM) AEN: icic..
(2:22 PM) Thusness: It is insight into the non-dual nature of experience though there are glimpses of anatta....it is not the insight of stage 5.
(2:22 PM) AEN: oic..
(2:24 PM) Thusness: by the way whatever i told u, just take it as a reference.
(2:24 PM) AEN: ok
(2:24 PM) Thusness: don't take it like a bible.
(2:24 PM) AEN: lol
(2:24 PM) Thusness: u have to experience it urself.
(2:24 PM) AEN: icic..

...

(8:22 PM) Thusness: but it will take some time. Anatta will not dawn that fast.
(8:22 PM) Thusness: the furthest u go is non-duality, still mostly advaita sense.
(8:22 PM) Thusness: like that of david carse.
(8:22 PM) AEN: icic..
(8:22 PM) Thusness: for anatta to arise, it will require some time.
(8:22 PM) AEN: oic..
(8:23 PM) AEN: bernadette roberts also like non dual in the advaita sense?
(8:23 PM) Thusness: as u need to understand right 'views', its relationship with consciousness, propensities and the conceptual aspect of anatta, emptiness and DO. Their profound meaings.
(8:24 PM) Thusness: i would say so...for bernadette roberts.
(8:24 PM) AEN: icic..
(8:24 PM) Thusness: the right 'views' are very important but it is not a view really.
(8:25 PM) Thusness: for u to go from 5 onwards...even for 4 to 5. It is important.

...

Session Start: Tuesday, April 01, 2008

(9:54 PM) Thusness: what she (Bernadette Roberts) said is her own understanding.
(9:55 PM) Thusness: means she only picks on certain words like 'no-self'
(9:55 PM) Thusness: and started elaborating it.
(9:55 PM) Thusness: It is similar to a person talking about 'emptness' and treating emptiness as 'nothingness'
(9:56 PM) Thusness: but the doctrine of anatta and emptiness is the core of buddhism. She cannot speak of it using her 'skewed' understanding.
(9:56 PM) AEN: oic..
(9:57 PM) Thusness: the profound meaning of no-self requires one to experience within our deepest experience our whole life.
(9:57 PM) AEN: her writing treats no self as not a seal, but rather a stage where all self whether ego, phenomenal, feeling or knowing self, and even true self or divine self as ended
(9:57 PM) AEN: oic
(9:57 PM) Thusness: it is a the obstacles of all hindrances
(9:57 PM) AEN: icic..
(9:57 PM) Thusness: yeah
(9:57 PM) Thusness: to her, it is a stage
(9:57 PM) Thusness: to buddhism, it is a seal.
(9:58 PM) AEN: oic
(9:58 PM) Thusness: it is from before beginning...it is already so.
(9:58 PM) Thusness: 'self' is learnt
(9:58 PM) Thusness: it is not inborn
(9:58 PM) Thusness: it is a 'view' that is deeply rooted in us
(9:58 PM) Thusness: due to karmic propensities
(9:58 PM) AEN: icic..
(9:59 PM) Thusness: these 'views' are aquired.
(9:59 PM) AEN: oic..
(9:59 PM) Thusness: so once we are able to know why luminosity should not be taken as 'Self', we become clear.
(10:00 PM) Thusness: why we should not see 'things' as 'objects'
(10:00 PM) Thusness: but as emptiness and luminosity ever manifesting
(10:00 PM) AEN: icic..
(10:00 PM) AEN: btw bernadette's experience of nondual is pathless rite means no entry and exit? yet she havent understand anatta?
(10:01 PM) Thusness: u can say so except that there is no clarity of insight.
(10:02 PM) Thusness: in terms of experience she knows there is no entry or exit...but when she attempts to articulate in terms of concepts, it becomes incoherent.
(10:02 PM) AEN: oic..
(10:03 PM) Thusness: it is very difficult to convey the experience except that one should have faith in Buddha and walk the path.
(10:03 PM) Thusness: just like it is difficult to communicate the difference between stage 1 and 2.
(10:03 PM) Thusness: and stage 4 to stage 2.
(10:03 PM) Thusness: then stage 5.
(10:04 PM) Thusness: unless one experiences it or demonstrate very strong conditions of the tendencies for the awakening of certain insight.
(10:04 PM) AEN: icic..
(10:05 PM) Thusness: Like I have been telling u but u have not grasp the essence yet.
(10:05 PM) Thusness: what i can tell u are to make them into points.
(10:05 PM) Thusness: like propensities
(10:05 PM) Thusness: like luminosity
(10:05 PM) Thusness: like emptiness
(10:05 PM) Thusness: telling u that all already is.
(10:06 PM) Thusness: but it is very difficult for u to understand unless u go through cycles after cycles of refinements
(10:06 PM) AEN: oic..
(10:06 PM) Thusness: then u realised that what u r doing is merely overcoming of deeply inherent 'views'
(10:06 PM) Thusness: once that is clear and thorough, the 'already is' manifests
(10:07 PM) Thusness: and all is without much effort and self sustaining for the nature is so.
(10:07 PM) AEN: icic..
(10:07 PM) Thusness: because of our views of seeing things inherently, 'will and control' is the way we act.
(10:08 PM) Thusness: when there is arising, 'we' attempt to 'rid' it...for that 'attempt', that 'we', that 'will' are all illusions.
(10:08 PM) Thusness: they are illusions created by our inherent views and nothing else.
(10:09 PM) AEN: oic..
(10:09 PM) Thusness: like getting rid of thoughts
(10:09 PM) Thusness: like getting rid of evil thoughts
(10:09 PM) Thusness: like getting rid of something...
(10:09 PM) Thusness: then we asked if we don't get rid of it...then 'how'
(10:09 PM) Thusness: it is only insight...
(10:10 PM) AEN: icic..
(10:10 PM) Thusness: true insight
(10:10 PM) AEN: ya the getting rid and the 'how' are all extras
(10:12 PM) Thusness: without all those arbitrary inherent/dualistic views, our nature are already pristine, luminous and empty
(10:12 PM) Thusness: unconditioned
(10:13 PM) Thusness: but we can't 'see' and 'understand' in conventional terms and it is very difficult to put it across conventionally.
(10:14 PM) AEN: oic..


Early 2010:

(9:12 PM) Thusness: no...i mean from a practical aspect, anatta and which aspect belongs to anatta.
experience is different from insight
many still cannot differentiate
(9:12 PM) AEN: oic..
(9:12 PM) Thusness: no mind is an experience, it is not an insight
(9:14 PM) Thusness: ppl that have experienced no-mind knows there is such experience and aims towards achieving it again.
(9:14 PM) Thusness: but insight is different...it is a direct experiential realization.
(9:14 PM) AEN: icic..
(9:14 PM) Thusness: that all along it is so.

Early 2010:

(10:17 PM) Thusness: Next also understand that when one says "completely without the background" or "without remainder", it is not simply an experience of losing the self into just the radiant world, into complete manifestation. "Without Remainder" requires the full maturing of right view with the right experience no-mind.
(10:18 PM) AEN: oic..
(10:18 PM) AEN: no mind is like anatta experience, but must have right view to be maintained?
(10:19 PM) Thusness: yes
...

2007:

(3:31 PM) Thusness: buddhism is about wisdom, seeing.
(3:31 PM) AEN: icic
(3:31 PM) Thusness: not about attaining higher and higher stages...
(3:31 PM) Thusness: it is not gone into what and what stage
(3:31 PM) AEN: oic
(3:31 PM) Thusness: it is about seeing more and more clearly our nature.
(3:32 PM) Thusness: the nature is already so.
(3:32 PM) Thusness: only in engagement and practice we see.

2009:

(12:53 AM) Thusness: having more vivid experience of non-duality
(12:53 AM) Thusness: but that is not the insight of anatta, ur experience will not be clear, vivid and effortless

Session Start: Saturday, 5 September, 2009

(10:44 PM) AEN: hi.. how to experience nonduality effortlessly?
(10:44 PM) Thusness: only through deep insight of anatta and dependent origination
that is my experience
(10:46 PM) Thusness: however with the arising insight of anatta, with practice of vipassana, it will turn effortless.
the insight of anatta is most important
(10:46 PM) Thusness: one will only realise the true meaning of bare attention after the arising insight of anatta
(10:46 PM) AEN: oic..
but before that also can experience bare attention rite
(10:47 PM) Thusness: yeah but the essence of it will not be known without the insight of anatta
(10:48 PM) AEN: oic..
(10:51 PM) Thusness: it will come a time when the tendency to dualify dissolves due to deep insight (not just meditative stage), it will turn effortless, vivid and powerfully present.
(10:51 PM) AEN: icic..
(10:53 PM) Thusness: it almost feel like a natural state of absorption yet vivid present because there is no sense of observer, agent, self just luminous manifestation.

Session Start: Sunday, 6 September, 2009

(4:24 PM) Thusness: yes zen is about ordinary experience
(4:25 PM) Thusness: yet u must understand what is meant by ordinary mind.
the ordinary mind is the mind of anatta.
(4:27 PM) AEN: oic..
(4:27 PM) Thusness: if we pretend to be ordinary and try to 'look' for expression of ordinariness then we are deluded. If we fail to realize that true ordinari-ness comes from the realization of anatta and mistaken the finger for the moon, we are deluded.
(4:28 PM) Thusness: without the insight of anatta, how could we ever understand the essence of being natural, effortless and ordinary? This is what Buddhism meant by ordinary.
(4:30 PM) AEN: icic.. it has to do with insight that makes nondual experience from concentrative to effortless?
(4:31 PM) Thusness: yet I have seen ppl aftering 'ordinariness', try to be 'nothing special', attempting to look for expression of ordinariness. That is why for zen practitioners, they will not understand the seven phases of experience. They are caught up by 'forms', by the stages of the OX herding and missed the insight.
(4:31 PM) AEN: oic..
(4:32 PM) Thusness: unless practitioners realize clearly how these insights lead to the ordinary and natural state, there is no meaning in looking for 'sweep floor and washing dishes' or 'chop wood carry water'.

(4:36 PM) Thusness: once u realized anatta, ordinariness and the natural state mean something very different.
(4:37 PM) Thusness: u can breathe hard, u can breathe soft, yet both are considered natural and ordinary.
(4:38 PM) Thusness: u can take deep breath or short breath, still as non-dual, natural and ordinary.
(4:38 PM) AEN: oic..
(4:38 PM) Thusness: sincere practitioners can take many years to come to this natural state even after the initial glimpse of insight.
(4:39 PM) Thusness: of the anatta insight i mean.

Session Start: Friday, 23 April, 2010

(10:28 PM) Thusness: u have to put in more effort and thoughts
what is the difference between non-dual and anatta?
(10:29 PM) Thusness: this u must be very clear
(10:30 PM) AEN: back
(10:31 PM) AEN: non dual is just the non division of subject object... but anatta is seeing through the sense of an inherent one mind/consciousness by seeing consciousness as just manifestation and insubstantial?
(10:31 PM) Thusness: u r just memorizing words
(10:32 PM) Thusness: give me experiential insight
(10:34 PM) AEN: non dual before anatta still has some referencing back or clinging to something permanent... but anatta is just seeing consciousness as the transience, no referencing?
im not sure
(10:35 PM) Thusness: in non-dual, there are obsessed with behind reality
(10:36 PM) Thusness: in anatta, u realized that such an 'inherent ultimate reality' does not exist. U directly experience phenomena
(10:37 PM) AEN: oic..
(10:37 PM) Thusness: a practitioner cannot experience directly phenomena if in his inmost consciousness he still believe an inherent self
(10:39 PM) Thusness: there is no vivid, present, direct experience of thoughts, no vivid, present, direct experience of sound, no vivid, present and direct experience of taste
or simply just aggregates
(10:41 PM) Thusness: once a practitioner thoroughly seen through this and have direct perception of the transient, he realizes both the essence and nature of so called 'phenomena'
the aggregates
(10:42 PM) Thusness: the functioning of DO.
(10:42 PM) AEN: icic..
(10:42 PM) Thusness: it is not about the behind reality
(10:43 PM) AEN: oic..
(10:44 PM) Thusness: it is the pure, vivid experience of the aggregates directly as that layer called 'self' isn't there to 'blind' him
(10:44 PM) Thusness: the second important point is what is 'wu' (realization)?
(10:44 PM) Thusness: ?

(10:46 PM) Thusness: ? (realization) is what that brings about a 360 degree change
(10:47 PM) Thusness: ur entire view, life...ur entire experiential reality
(10:47 PM) Thusness: the impact of ? (realization) is transformational
(10:47 PM) Thusness: that is why i say 'seeing' arising insight
deeper seeing
(10:48 PM) Thusness: that is what that will result in powerful and transformational change
(10:48 PM) AEN: icic..
(10:48 PM) Thusness: that is practice
(10:48 PM) AEN: practice?
(10:48 PM) Thusness: to wu
(10:50 PM) AEN: dun really understand
(10:51 PM) Thusness: u must understand the impact of 'wu' or arising insight
otherwise nothing change
(10:51 PM) Thusness: nothing really transformational
get it?
(10:51 PM) AEN: ic.. yah
so u mean the whole purpose of practice is to give rise to insight
(10:52 PM) Thusness: we think that we must do this or that
(10:52 PM) Thusness: but we do not know it is the 'insight' that brought about the 360 degree transformation
(10:52 PM) Thusness: suffering too is to bring about such insight
(10:53 PM) Thusness: therefore it is not do nothing
it is about deeper seeing
(10:53 PM) Thusness: get it?
(10:53 PM) AEN: how does suffering bring such insight
(10:54 PM) Thusness: don't just write for the sake of writing...as if u r rushing to answer someone
go through it and clearly understand its implication
(10:54 PM) AEN: oic..
(10:55 PM) Thusness: For awareness practice, 'insight' is all that matters.
(10:55 PM) Thusness: u never c ppl writing so much, it is all talking about this deeper seeing
(10:56 PM) Thusness: any other thing?
it is not about 'chi' or practicing 'chi gong'
(10:56 PM) Thusness: or mudra or visualization...
get it?
(10:56 PM) AEN: oic.. yah
(10:57 PM) Thusness: so u must know from the perspective of awareness practice, what matters
and what is meant by non-doing
(10:57 PM) Thusness: it is the arising insight that brought about the change and that is all that matters to Awareness
(10:58 PM) Thusness: so the insight of anatta and DO...what do these insights bring?
get it?
(10:59 PM) Thusness: in awareness practice, it is all about 'seeing', about arising insight, about ?
(11:00 PM) AEN: oic..
(11:04 PM) Thusness: if ur insight matures, naturally everything is transparently clear and obvious
(11:05 PM) Thusness: only and purely aggregates and function like DO.
(11:05 PM) AEN: icic..
(11:05 PM) Thusness: u no more look and reference to a behind reality
(11:06 PM) AEN: oic..

(11:12 PM) Thusness: non-dual is an experience of no subject-object division
(11:12 PM) Thusness: it is the degree of clarity
(11:14 PM) Thusness: when we are still not free from the influence of the dualistic and inherent tendencies, it is difficult to experience the 'aggregates' directly
(11:15 PM) Thusness: when u realized it is also been so, no behind reality, then aggregates, thoughts, sound...etc are vividly clear
(11:16 PM) AEN: oic..

(11:51 PM) Thusness: non-dual and anatta is a matter of degree of clarity
of what?
(11:52 PM) AEN: of awareness?
of the transience
(11:52 PM) Thusness: of the relationship between awareness and transience
(11:52 PM) AEN: oic..
(11:54 PM) Thusness: one is truly existing behind reality somehow having a 'non-dual' experience.
(11:54 PM) Thusness: one is realizing that awareness is a DO manifestation
(11:55 PM) AEN: icic..
(12:02 AM) Thusness: it is the degree of clarity if the relationship between awareness and transience.
what r u talking abt?
(12:03 AM) AEN: hmm... rephrasing it: Non-dual is an experience of no subject-object division, it is the degree of clarity of the relationship between awareness and transience that matters.
(12:04 AM) Thusness: why don't u just say 'between anatta and non-dual, it is just the degree and depth of clarity between Awareness and the Transience'
(12:05 AM) AEN: oic..
ok
(12:06 AM) Thusness: i go sleep liao
nite
(12:06 AM) AEN: ok.. nite
(12:19 AM) Thusness: only and purely aggregates, only the 18 dhatus, 'only the world referencing itself'. The tendency to reference back to a 'Self/self' is replaced by the thorough insight of anatta and DO.
and write in proper english...
(12:20 AM) AEN: u're referring to "
When insight matures, naturally everything is transparently clear and obvious, only and purely aggregates and function like Dependent Origination, no more looking and referencing to a behind reality."
?
(12:20 AM) AEN: oh ya
ok..

2010, before realizing anatta, some advices by Thusness:

(4:48 PM) Thusness: a wise person that has direct insight will understand once it is said but for u, i have told u upteem times to focus on wisdom and realizations, yet you continue to deviate.

...

Thusness: This should be the natural state after the arising insight of anatta. In one of the conversation I told truthz to feel the taste as much as possible, pure taste, the touch, the texture, the skin touches the air, the vibration of train...etc. Think it is in ur forum also... ...u will understand when insight of anatta arise.

(3:46 PM) Thusness: this will only comes clear after true insight arises.

...

(7:35 PM) Thusness: therefore if u have the same insight, u have the experience.
(7:36 PM) Thusness: there is nothing special, focus on the phases of insights and realizations

...

(11:00 PM) Thusness: having realization and not having realization is world of difference
(11:00 PM) Thusness: having just experience or non-dual or no-mind is not the same as having direct realization

...

(11:51 PM) Thusness: to me anatta is not a state as i told u
so to me, that is quite meaningless as such question does not arise to me.
(11:52 PM) AEN: oic..
(11:53 PM) Thusness: when u realize what anatta is, u realize there isn't an observer behind anything... then how does the question about sensate imperfection arise?
(11:53 PM) Thusness: it is like asking questions of where is Self/self when there is no-self.
(11:54 PM) Thusness: and you insisting a way to become no-self.
and say that this is more perfect than that...
(11:54 PM) Thusness: this only happens to a particular state of attainment
it does not refer to insight
(11:55 PM) AEN: icic..
(11:56 PM) Thusness: when u see that the rope is not the snake, u don't ask question like how to tame the snake...what happen when the snake bites u...etc
(11:56 PM) AEN: oic..
(11:56 PM) Thusness: or treat the snake like a rope
misleading isn't it
(11:57 PM) Thusness: all questions relating to 'snake' becomes irrelevant
do u continue to ask such a question?
(11:57 PM) Thusness: and expect an answer to tell u how to treat a snake like a rope?
u realize and u stop asking
u just use the rope as a rope

...

(11:44 PM) Thusness: to me...i would consider that a form of efforting
(11:45 PM) Thusness: think mentioned b4 in anatta article that such mode becomes effortless when anatta insight arises.

Session Start: Tuesday, 6 July, 2010

(3:38 PM) Thusness: the center and still point will not disappear as a result of intermittent experience of no-mind. It requires deep insight of anatta to realize that the fundamental flaw of wrong view is the cause of the center. The center is the karmic tendency to hold, in actual experience, it is just the world that is self-luminous. Always and only this vivid obviousness, nothing else.
(3:39 PM) AEN: icic..
(3:40 PM) Thusness: forget about the still point, all points on the surface of a sphere are 'a center'. The article of on TATA will be helpful.
(3:41 PM) AEN: oic..
do i write that to him?
(3:41 PM) Thusness: ok
(3:41 PM) AEN: ok
(3:41 PM) Thusness: also thank him for the clear description
(3:42 PM) AEN: ok
(3:42 PM) Thusness: it will also help u to understand where u r now.
(3:42 PM) AEN: oic..
(3:58 PM) Thusness: why u just cut and paste
(3:59 PM) Thusness: where is the TATA article?
(3:59 PM) AEN: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/ ... /tada.html

July 2010:

(10:10 AM) Thusness: what u must understand is that the experience of no-mind becomes effortless when insight of anatta matures
(10:11 AM) Thusness: so u r not understanding how does the experience of no-mind arise

...

(11:45 PM) Thusness: if u have not learnt anything from ur understanding of realization and experience, then how will u able to truly understand?
(11:47 PM) Thusness: if till now u still do not understand the difference and still have the illusion that without the realization, there can be a break-through into effortless state, then there is no clarity about what leads to effortlessness and doubtlessness.

...

(12:12 AM) Thusness: not by way of non-identification.
(12:13 AM) Thusness: by realization -- the arising insight there the mirror does not exist
(12:15 AM) Thusness: if at the back of one's mind, there is this belief of a self, then will experience of no-mind be intermittent or permanent?
(12:16 AM) AEN: intermittent
(12:17 AM) Thusness: so how is one without the realization have a permanent experience of no-mind? There is no clarity, no doubtlessness of no-self, is it possible that there is a permanent and effortless experience of all sensate experiences without self?
(12:17 AM) AEN: no


On Ken Wilber:

(11:01 PM) Thusness: it is witnessing
(11:01 PM) Thusness: what ken wilber is the dissolving of that witnessing
(11:01 PM) Thusness: what i said is that the dissolving is also an illusion. That is by itself a dualistic view though the experience is there.

(11:02 PM) Thusness: ken wilber said there is a dissolving
(11:03 PM) Thusness: means he actually feel that there is a dissolving
(11:03 PM) Thusness: although he experiences the non-dual, the insight is still not there.
(11:03 PM) AEN: Ken Wilber: Because at some point, as you inquire into the Witness, and rest in the Witness, the sense of being a Witness “in here” completely vanishes itself, and the Witness turns out to be everything that is witnessed. The causal gives way to the Nondual, and formless mysticism gives way to nondual mysticism. “Form is Emptiness and Emptiness is Form.”


Session Start: Sunday, 29 May, 2011

(7:17 PM) Thusness: anatta is often not correctly understood
it is common that one progress from experience of non-dual to no-mind instead of direct realization into anatta
(7:19 PM) Thusness: many focus on the experience
and there is a lack of clarity to penetrate the differences
so u must be clear of the various phases of insights first and not mistake one for the other
at the same time, refine ur experience
these few days...have deeper sleep and exercise more
balance ur body energies

Edited by Simple_Jack

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff   

Jeff
Posted (edited)

Hi SJ,

 

 

Do you agree with Xabir and Thusness regarding their definitions and the "Thusness scale"?

 

 

Thanks,

Jeff

Edited by Jeff

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple_Jack   

Simple_Jack
Posted

@ Jeff

 

I think its valid. There are others, in various online communities, who have described the experience of what AEN and Thusness describe, as "no-mind". Jiddu Krishnamurti is an example of someone who had an experience of "no-mind". Their description and usage of the term "no-mind" does not reflect on the meaning of this term as used in the sutras, Zen, etc.; in Mahayana, the term no-mind, correlates to 2-fold emptiness. I'm just posting the above for sharing purposes, so ultimately, it's up to the individual reading any of this to decide what to make of it.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tibetan_Ice   

Tibetan_Ice
Posted

From AEN (xabir2005) of the "Awakening to Reality" blog:

 

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/08/substantial-and-insubstantial-non.html?m=0

 

Although Bernadette Roberts' experience is closer to Buddhist enlightenment than many other non-Buddhist teachers, it is still not quite there. The experience of no-mind might be there, the realization of the dharma seal of anatta or no-self isn't.

 

<snip - not worth repeating..>

 

Hi Sample Jock,

 

I was reading this the other day and for some reason I thought of the sample above that you dragged back to TTB.

 

Padmasambhava says:

 

Do not criticize other teachings and do not disparage people. All the teachings are ultimately indivisible, like the taste of salt.

 

Do not criticize any of the higher or lower vehicles. They are identical in being the path to be journeyed, just like the steps on a staircase. You cannot know another person unless you can perceive with superknowledge. So do not criticize others.

 

In general, all sentient beings are by their very nature spontaneously perfect buddhas. They possess the essence of enlightenment .

 

Do not examine other people’s faults or delusions. Do not examine the limitations of others. Examine how you can change your own.

 

Do not examine the shortcomings of others but examine your own shortcomings. The greatest of evils is to hold religious prejudice and to criticize other people without knowing their mind. So give up prejudice as if it were poison.

 

padmasambhava guru Rinpoche (2013-12-01). Dakini Teachings (p. 5-6). Rangjung Yeshe Publications. Kindle Edition.

 

About the book from whence these quote were taken:

Dakini Teachings is a collection of advice selected from several revealed “treasure teachings,” or terma. It contains Guru Rinpoche’s (Padmasambhava’s) oral instructions on Dharma practice given during his stay in Tibet in the ninth century. This advice was recorded by his chief disciple, the dakini Yeshe Tsogyal, the princess of Kharchen. According to Jamgon Kongtrul the First’s Lives of One Hundred Tertons, 1 Yeshe Tsogyal was a dakini and an emanation of the female buddha Lochana, the consort of Buddha Ratnasambhava, as well as of Vajra Yogini appearing in the form of a woman. She served Guru Rinpoche during his stay in Tibet and afterward practiced with tremendous perseverance so that she finally became equal to Guru Rinpoche himself. Her compassion is matchless and her blessings are unceasing.

 

padmasambhava guru Rinpoche (2013-12-01). Dakini Teachings . Rangjung Yeshe Publications. Kindle Edition.

 

 

Padmasambhava also says:

Do not keep company with or befriend a person who has degenerated his discipline or samayas for even a single moment. If when wearing white robes you go to an oily swamp, the black stuff will surely discolor the white. Similarly , even though your own samayas are pure you will surely still be defiled by the broken samayas of others.

 

If your own samayas are not pure, it is like black not being tainted by black. So be very careful. It is there essential not to associate with evil people or with bad company who have lost their vows.

 

padmasambhava guru Rinpoche (2013-12-01). Dakini Teachings (p. 4). Rangjung Yeshe Publications. Kindle Edition.

 

 

Do you think that that is good advice?

 

:)

TI

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple_Jack   

Simple_Jack
Posted

@ TI

 

 

I don't think it's anyone's intention to disparage any particular set of teachings by comparing and contrasting the insights between individual traditions, teachers, etc. If the above offends you, for the reason just stated, then this is something you should reflect on; instead of succumbing to a knee jerk reaction of aversion towards someone who doesn't conform to perennialism.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeker of Wisdom   

Seeker of Wisdom
Posted

...

I don't think AEN or Thusness are trying to be insulting. They're not making personal judgements about anyone or their path.

 

They're just pointing out that there are stages beyond Bernadette Roberts' attainment. It isn't possible for her to be simultaneously partway along and at the end, either she has gone as far as there is to go or she hasn't. The possibility that she hasn't ought to be addressed to help her and others keep going.

 

If I got stuck at a particular experience or insight, I would be glad for someone to come along and help me see that there's still more to do, telling me what's up ahead and where. Just as I was glad near the end of my days in AYP to see your posts criticising it, and advocating shamatha.

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

gatito   

gatito
Posted

<snip>

 

If I got stuck at a particular experience or insight, I would be glad for someone to come along and help me see that there's still more to do, telling me what's up ahead and where. Just as I was glad near the end of my days in AYP to see your posts criticising it, and advocating shamatha.

 

Ok, I'll give it a go and we'll see what happens :)

 

Let's take this classic example of copy and paste dogma: -

 

 

 

This is the defining difference starting from Hinayana:

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_27.html

 

"For the Vedanta, non-duality (advaita) means the absence of an ultimate distinction between the Atman, the innermost self, and Brahman, the divine reality, the underlying ground of the world. From the standpoint of the highest realization, only one ultimate reality exists — which is simultaneously Atman and Brahman — and the aim of the spiritual quest is to know that one's own true self, the Atman, is the timeless reality which is Being, Awareness, Bliss. Since all schools of Buddhism reject the idea of the Atman, none can accept the non-dualism of Vedanta. From the perspective of the Theravada tradition, any quest for the discovery of selfhood, whether as a permanent individual self or as an absolute universal self, would have to be dismissed as a delusion, a metaphysical blunder born from a failure to properly comprehend the nature of concrete experience. According to the Pali Suttas, the individual being is merely a complex unity of the five aggregates, which are all stamped with the three marks of impermanence, suffering, and selflessness. Any postulation of selfhood in regard to this compound of transient, conditioned phenomena is an instance of "personality view"(sakkayaditthi), the most basic fetter that binds beings to the round of rebirths. The attainment of liberation, for Buddhism, does not come to pass by the realization of a true self or absolute "I," but through the dissolution of even the subtlest sense of selfhood in relation to the five aggregates, "the abolition of all I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendencies to conceit."

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel048.html

 

20. "Lord, can there be anxiety about unrealities, in the internal?"

 

"There can be, monk," said the Blessed One. "In that case, monk, someone has this view: 'The universe is the Self. That I shall be after death; permanent, stable, eternal, immutable; eternally the same shall I abide in that very condition.' He then hears a Perfect One expounding the Teaching for the removal of all grounds for views, of all prejudices, obsessions, dogmas and biases; for the stilling of all (kamma-) processes, for the relinquishment of all substrata (of existence), for the extirpation of craving, for dispassion, cessation, Nibbaana. He then thinks: 'I shall be annihilated, I shall be destroyed! No longer shall I exist!' Hence he grieves, is depressed and laments; beating his breast, he weeps, and dejection befalls him. Thus, monk, is there anxiety about unrealities, in the internal."

 

21. "But, Lord, can there be absence of anxiety about unrealities, in the internal?"

 

"There can be, monk," said the Blessed One. "In that case, monk, someone does not have this view: 'The universe is the Self... eternally the same shall I abide in that very condition.' He then hears a Perfect One expounding the Teaching for the removal of all grounds for views, of all prejudices, obsessions, dogmas and biases; for the stilling of all (kamma-) processes, for the relinquishing of all substrata (of existence), for the extirpation of craving, for dispassion, cessation, Nibbaana. He then does not think: 'I shall be annihilated, I shall be destroyed! No longer shall I exist!' Hence he does not grieve, is not depressed, does not lament; he does not beat his breast nor does he weep, and no dejection befalls him. Thus, monk, is there absence of anxiety about unrealities, in the internal.[25]....

 

....37. "So teaching, so proclaiming, O monks, I have been baselessly, vainly, falsely and wrongly accused by some ascetics and brahmans: 'A nihilist[38] is the ascetic Gotama; He teaches the annihilation, the destruction, the non-being of an existing individual.'[39]

 

"As I am not as I do not teach, so have I been baselessly, vainly, falsely and wrongly accused by some ascetics and brahmans thus: 'A nihilist is the ascetic Gotama; He teaches the annihilation, the destruction, the non-being of an existing individual.'

 

"What I teach now as before, O monks, is suffering and the cessation of suffering."

 

 

There is no such thing as "non-duality" nor an actual "non-dual" state in Buddhism.

Bump.

 

Interestingly, Buddhism is, in fact, nondual, although I'd agree that there's no such thing as a nondual "state" (in either Buddhisnm or in Advaita Vedanta).

 

The problem is that dependent origination and anatta are very advanced teachings that have turned into misunderstood dogma for the overwhelming majority of Buddhists - for whom Buddhism is merley a set of beliefs rather direct knowledge.

 

By adopting these advanced teaching far too early (merely as part of a misunderstood belief system) they actually act as an absolute barrier to their understanding and to their progress with the Buddhist system.

 

This barrier can only be removed by dropping their dogma and examining their own direct experience - whereupon, freedom will begin to be uncovered.

 

Of course, this is not going to happen when someone has invested everything that they have in a set of incorrect beliefs. It's difficult enough to appproach the Truth with what most people would describe as an open mind, let alone a mind that is further overlaid by a further set of false beliefs, which cannot actually be understood by the mind because they're nondual teachings.

 

Perhaps some of those reading this can see the Catch 22?

 

Other major barriers for most Buddhists that I've noticed are a belief in the actual existence of mind and a failure to examine and define Consciousness/Awareness clearly for themselves.

  • Like 3

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple_Jack   

Simple_Jack
Posted

The problem is that dependent origination and anatta are very advanced teachings that have turned into misunderstood dogma for the overwhelming majority of Buddhists - for whom Buddhism is merley a set of beliefs rather direct knowledge.

 

Buddhism is not rocket science. An individual doesn't have to learn reams of complicated philosophy to understand the dependent nature of afflictions.

 

This barrier can only be removed by dropping their dogma and examining their own direct experience - whereupon, freedom will begin to be uncovered.

 

Other major barriers for most Buddhists that I've noticed are a belief in the actual existence of mind and a failure to examine and define Consciousness/Awareness clearly for themselves.

 

The barrier, for those individuals who cling to Atman, is a failure to examine the arising and passing of the aggregates, in direct experience, instead of solidifying "Consciousness/Awareness" into an actual existence or entity.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Go To Topic Listing Buddhist Discussion