The Experience of No-Self

• JitKiat

  14 Sep 09, 20:53

  Hmm... discrimination ...related quotes from Master Yin Shun's

   

  �證的般若，�無分別智；證悟的法性，�無分別法性。在修習般若時，經中常說：�應念，�應�，�應分別。證悟的且�說，修習般若而�應念，�應�，�應分別，那怎麼修觀──分別，抉擇，尋�呢？這也難怪有些修� [P365] 佛法的，勸人什麼都����，直下體會去。也難怪有些人，以無觀察的無分別定，看作甚深無分別智證了�所以無論是無分別智證，無分別的觀慧，「真實�的「無分別�義，應善巧正解，切「勿�似是而�的，「�於邪�外的「計�執，故�與佛說的正觀為難��知無分別的�義，是多種��的，�能儱侗的誤解。如木，石，也是無分別的，這當然�是佛法所說的無分別了。無想定，心心所法都�起，也是無分別的，但這是外�。自然而然的�作�，也�無分別，這也�能說是無分別慧。因為，無功用，�作�的無分別，有�五識��悶等，都是那樣的。�二禪以上，無尋無�；這種無尋�的無分別，二禪以上都是的，也與無分別慧��。所以慧學的無分別，�是�作�，�尋�，或�起心念等分別。那到底是什麼呢？「修習中觀行�的無分別，是以正觀而「無�那「自性�的「分別�；從自性分別��得，而入於無分別法性的�證。

   

  　　自性分別，是�於�真實而似真實的戲論相，著相而以為自性有的。上來已一�說到，自性有，是我我所執的著處；如起自性分別，就�能�我法空，而離我我所執了。所以，應分別，抉擇，觀察，此自性有是��得的，一絲毫的自性有都沒有，�能盡離自性有分別。離此自性有分別，就是觀空──無自性分別。分別，�一定是自性分別，而分別自性分別��得──空觀，�但�是執著，而且是通�離言無分別智證的大方便�經說的�應念，�應�，�應分別，是說：�應念自性有，�應如自性有而�，�應起自性有的分別。�是說修學般若，什麼都�念，��，�分別。

   

   

• Weychin

  14 Sep 09, 21:35

  Just for laughs!,  

  Your last line of rendering, by taking it out of context, translated by google into:-

  "Wisdom does not mean further studies, what not to study, not thinking ,not separately"

  What if students were to read it?!! heh! heh!

• JitKiat

  14 Sep 09, 22:49

  Hah hah, that's why it will be a big challenge to translate Mahayana Sutras into English. That's why my kowtow respect to great translators like Kumarajiva & Xuan Zang. 

   

   

• Sgforumposter

  14 Sep 09, 23:24

  Originally posted by SevenEleven:

  
  words have its limitation. You can't see gravity. does that mean gravity doesn't exist?

     You seem to have gone off track. 

  We were discussing sights and sounds in buddhist epistemology. You interjected with "things we could not see nor hear" and I replied with the meaning of "sight and sound" as is conventionally understood as well as in Buddhist epistemology we were discussing. .

• Sgforumposter

  14 Sep 09, 23:45

  Originally posted by JitKiat:

  AEN is right. Anatta is not exactly non-attachment to self as that too is dualistic. However, it is probably a skillful mean to preach it to certain group of people. It is like in Pureland, it is normal to practise dualistic 事相念佛 first. 实相念佛 is beyond many people including myself.

   Can or does an arahant have a sense of self ?   If not how could he/she operate within the realm of perception ?   False self is a product of mental factors (feelings, perception, mental formation). 

    If he/she a self but is not attached to it, wouldn't he/she be very forgetful ?   Perception and mental formation are also dependent on memory and memory like-wise depended on it.

  So was AEN right ?   Or am I just been difficult and argumentative ;-)   ? 

   

   

• JitKiat

  15 Sep 09, 10:27

  When Arhat listens to a beautiful song, it does not mean it is unpleasant. It could be like wind blowing past, without stirring emotion or desire. At the end of song, there is no clinging to the memory too.

  What is important is Arhats will not have a single selfish thought no matter what happens. For normal person like me, when someone scolds me, I feel hurt straightaway (becos somehow I fell there is an "I" that get hurt).

• An Eternal Now

  15 Sep 09, 20:07

  Whether Arhants have mental factors is of no concern -- since whatever manifests just self-liberates on their own accord when there is Anatta, no Self to detach or attach to things -- there is only phenomena arising and subsiding with nobody behind doing or observing them.

  -----------------------------------
  
  "...it seems that lots of effort need to be put in -- which is really not the case. The entire practice turns out to an undoing process. It is a process of gradually understanding the workings of our nature that is from beginning liberated but clouded by this sense of ‘self’ that is always trying to preserve, protect and ever attached. The entire sense of self is a ‘doing’. Whatever we do, positive or negative, is still doing. Ultimately there is not-even a letting go or let be, as there is already continuous dissolving and arising and this ever dissolving and arising turns out to be self-liberating. Without this ‘self’ or ‘Self’, there is no ‘doing’, there is only spontaneous arising. "
  
  ~ our forummer, Thusness (source: Non-dual and karmic patterns)
  
  "...When one is unable to see the truth of our nature, all letting go is nothing more than another from of holding in disguise. Therefore without the 'insight', there is no releasing.... it is a gradual process of deeper seeing. when it is seen, the letting go is natural. You cannot force urself into giving up the self... purification to me is always these insights... non-dual and emptiness nature...."
  
  ~ Thusness
  --------------
  
  From a pure insight practice point of view, you can’t ever fundamentally “let go” of anything, so I sometimes wish the popularity of this misleading and indifference-prod

  ucing admonition would decline, or at least be properly explained. However, if you simply investigate the truth of the Three Characteristics of the sensations that seemed to be a solid thing, you will come to the wondrous realization that reality is continually “letting go” of itself! Thus, “let it go” at its best actually means, “don’t give a bunch of transient sensations an excessive sense of solidity.” It does not mean, “stop feeling or caring,” nor does it mean, “pretend that the noise in your mind is not there.”
  
  ~ Theravadin teacher, Dharma Dan
  
  --------------
  
  ...The particular method of Dzogchen is called the Path of Self-Liberation, and to apply it nothing need be renounced, purified, or transformed. Whatever arises as one's karmic vision is used as the path. The great master Pha Tampa Sangye [South Indian Yogin of the 11 century (ed.)] once said: It is not the circumstances which arise as one's karmic vision that condition a person into the dualistic state; it is a person's own attachment that enables what arises to condition him. If this attachment is to be cut through in the most rapid and effective way, the mind's spontaneous capacity to self-liberate must be brought into play. The term self-liberation should not, however, be taken as implying that there is some 'self' or ego there to be liberated. It is a fundamental assumption...at the Dzogchen level, that all phenomena are void of self-nature. 'Self -Liberation', in the Dzogchen sense, means that whatever manifests in the field of experience of the practitioner is allowed to arise just as it is, without judgement of it as good or bad, beautiful or ugly. And in that same moment, if there is no clinging, or attachment, without effort, or even volition, whatever it is that arises, whether as a thought or as a seemingly external event, automatically liberates itself, by itself, and of itself. Practicing in this way the seeds of the poison tree of dualistic vision never even get a chance to sprout, much less to take root and grow.(p33)
  
  So the practitioner lives his or her life in an ordinary way, without needing any rules other than one's own awareness, always remaining in the primordial state through integrating that state with whatever arises as part of experience -- with absolutely nothing to be seen outwardly to show that one is practicing. This is what is meant by self-liberation, this is what is meant by the name Dzogchen - which means Great Perfection - and this is what is meant by non-dual contemplation, or simply contemplation....
  
  ~ Dzogchen teacher, Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche
  
  -------------------
  
  Self-liberation does not mean that a self liberates himself or herself from delusorily valued thoughts or delusory experiences; what it means is that delusorily valued thoughts and delusory experiences liberate themselves spontaneously (which may take place in three main ways). (Source: http://eliascapriles.dzogchen.ru/self-liberation.pdf)
  
  -------------------
  The Great Undoing
  
  When disturbing mind states are simply left unrejected and unaltered, it is seen that they undo themselves naturally, without effort or struggle. It is seen that all states, all experiences whether labeled as positive, negative or neutral are forever undoing and resolving themselves, moment by timeless moment.
  
  Self-Liberation Upon Arising
  
  To practice is to realize that no practice was ever necessary.
  
  To rest is to see that everything is always and already naturally at rest.
  
  To maintain awareness is to see that awareness is self-maintained.
  
  To allow everything to be as it is is to see that all things self-liberate upon arising.
  
  - John Astin
  -------------------
  

  Then the venerable Sariputra said to the goddess, "Goddess, how long have you been in this house?"
  
  The goddess replied, "I have been here as long as the elder has been in liberation."
  
  Sariputra said, "Then, have you been in this house for quite some time?"
  
  The goddess said, "Has the elder been in liberation for quite some time?"
  
  At that, the elder Sariputra fell silent.
  
  The goddess continued, "Elder, you are 'foremost of the wise!' Why do you not speak? Now, when it is your turn, you do not answer the question."
  
  Sariputra: Since liberation is inexpressible, goddess, I do not know what to say.
  
  Goddess: All the syllables pronounced by the elder have the nature of liberation. Why? Liberation is neither internal nor external, nor can it be apprehended apart from them. Likewise, syllables are neither internal nor external, nor can they be apprehended anywhere else. Therefore, reverend Sariputra, do not point to liberation by abandoning speech! Why? The holy liberation is the equality of all things!
  
  Sariputra: Goddess, is not liberation the freedom from desire, hatred, and folly?
  
  Goddess: "Liberation is freedom from desire, hatred, and folly" that is the teaching of the excessively proud. But those free of pride are taught that the very nature of desire, hatred, and folly is itself liberation.

  ~ Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra

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

   

  "Good sons, all hindrances are none other than ultimate enlightenment. Whether you attain mindfulness or lose mindfulness, there is no non-liberation. Establishing the Dharma and refuting the Dharma are both called nirvana; wisdom and folly are equally prajna; the method that is perfected by bodhisattvas and false teachers is the same bodhi; ignorance and suchness are not different realms; morality, concentration and wisdom, as well as desire, hatred and ignorance are all divine practices; sentient beings and lands share the same dharma nature; hell and heaven are both the Pure Land; those having Buddha-nature and those not having it equally accomplish the Buddha's enlightenment. All defilements are ultimately liberation. The reality-realms's ocean-like wisdom completely illumines all marks to be just like empty space. This is called 'the Tath�gata's accordance with the nature of enlightenment.' "

  ~ The Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment

• An Eternal Now

  17 Sep 09, 03:38

  A nice post by someone called 'Kannada' (who clearly realised anatta in direct experience) from Zen Forum International:

  
  Hi Carol,
  
  Thanks for your comment.
  
  Yes, the Hindus call it "Hridya Granthi" - The knot of the Heart... I no longer refer to 'realities' or 'absolutes' - there aren't any - for me anyway.
  
  I hope you don't think I'm preaching... I used to think all this nirvana 'no self' / 'no other' thing was so complicated, then oneday in the midst of 'doing' it occured to me that there was just a 'doing', it wasn't 'me' that was doing, it wasn't anything doing, just action - plain, pure and simple. The problem was that thought would jump into the activity. It would say that 'I' was sweeping the floors, or washing the dishes or whatever. Thought would not only define 'me' but it would define what was done and the process involved.
  
  After learning to drop thought (by paying attention to the space between thoughts) all this naming ceased to be, no sweeper or washer, no sweeping or washing, no thing swept or washed, just peace where all activity continues unhindered and undefined. It seems to be a default setting for us humans to overlay existence or life with a continuous running commentary, an everlasting set of definitions just in case we may cease to be if the definitions fall silent.
  
  I don't try to figure it out anymore, I don't think in terms of Dharma or nirvana or reality or work toward a goal - Buddhist or otherwise, it is far less of a hassle to drop it all, to give up the continuous mental machinations and simply leave it be - enough is enough. Of course the curse of over-thinking (uninvited thought) still arises but now there's an escape route, a knowing of what need be done when it all gets too much.
  
  I wouldn't call it 'nirvana', Theravadin or Zen, but it is a cessation of sorts, and a very nice one at that...
  
  Regards
  
  k

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

  Roughly speaking, the difference between Heart and Mind is that the mind is the seat of conditionality whereby conceptuality subdivides perceptions into 'subject' and 'object', 'this' and 'that', 'self' and 'other', it is Awareness with differentiation or conditionality. The Heart however is that Pure Awareness with no differentiation - the 'unconditioned'. Living experience, without mind-created conditions, without an imagined 'I' standing in contradistinction to the imagined 'other', allows the senses a clarity that is altogether absent through the thick fog of conceptuality. The practitioner discovers for him/herself a sense of lightness, clarity, freedom and peace that was missing in the darkness of delusion.
  
  The question "how can I not attach to the experience" is somewhat misdirected (a common problem indeed), for it assumes an 'I' to whom the experience occurs, an 'I' (the product of delusion) that desires to manage attachment to an experience whereby the fog of delusion temporarily lifts and delusion temporarily ceases. Attachment to conditionality would be a more likely candidate as a cause of suffering. The cessation of suffering is the cessation of the 'I' (that wishes to manage meditation experiences). The characteristics of this 'I' is of course greed, aversion and delusion...

  ...........

  Cessation is merely the cessation of that which never existed except in the imagination. Dropping the self/other notions does not leave a cold lifeless, emotionless shell. It simply removes the imaginary ownership of arisings. Feelings of warmth, love, caring etc still arise but as ownerless processes untill their antecedent causes (as samskaras and vasanas) subside. The imaginary notion that a self is responsible for these arisings is completely erroneous.

  ...........

  Awakening is a delusory notion centred on the belief that there is someone to awaken.
  
  Awakening is awakening to the fact that there is no-one to awaken.
  
  Seeing without the seer
  
  Hearing without the hearer
  
  Tasting without the taster etc
  
  Perception without the notions of seeing, hearing, tasting etc
  
  Neither 'I' nor 'other'

• Sgforumposter

  18 Sep 09, 10:12

  Originally posted by JitKiat:

  When Arhat listens to a beautiful song, it does not mean it is unpleasant. It could be like wind blowing past, without stirring emotion or desire. At the end of song, there is no clinging to the memory too.

  What is important is Arhats will not have a single selfish thought no matter what happens. For normal person like me, when someone scolds me, I feel hurt straightaway (becos somehow I fell there is an "I" that get hurt).

    Does it mean also that it is neutral ?  Many believed, wrongly, that an arahant do not have likes and dislikes or do not have experience of pleasant or unpleasant.  An incident will perhaps clarify the capacity of a Buddha or an arahant.

    Buddha was walking with ananda one evening. When they reached the padi field Buddha exclaimed that it was indeed very beautiful and they stopped to appreciate the splendour of nature. Ananda then suggested that the image of the padi fields with the red setting sun reflected by the padi field be used as the image on the monks frock.

     So if an Arahant do not have a single selfish thought and when they scolded you or being mean to you they are doing it out of compassion for you ?   Or do you think that an arahant is not capable of being "mean"  ?

   

   

   

   

• JitKiat

  18 Sep 09, 12:39

  Actually, mean is relative. If your kid is naughty, to teach him a lesson, you punish him to stand at the corner for 5 minutes. To him, he may feel that you are mean. But are you really mean? By achieving emptiness of self, Arhat has completed got rid of greed, anger and ignorance ... they do not have even sexual desire

   

• JitKiat

  18 Sep 09, 12:49

  And one of the Buddha's 10 disciples, Mahamoggallana, actually beaten to death by bandits due his negative karma in past life ... although he knew it was coming but he was not afraid of death.

• Weychin

  18 Sep 09, 20:51

  Spontaneous arising, non clinging :-

  No preconcieved notions, no hangups!