Self vs No-Self and direct pointing methods - Discussion
Hello everybody,
I would like to discuss the notion of "no-self" and direct pointing methods to realize it such as Ciaran's, with which I gained a state of no-self without actually trying to do it, just by reading the forum. You can see my other topic "False Awakening with Ruthless Truth" to know more about what I feel about it.
I have done some reasearch and now I will explain what imho are the pitfalls of this method of recognition.
First, no-self experience is called Anatta, and that is not Enlightenment, at all. It is part of the first of four stages of enlightnement known as Sotapanna.
According to wikipedia there are 3 fetters which the sotapanna eradicates, the first is:
" Identity view - The speculative view that a so-called self exists in the five aggregates (physical forms, feelings/sensations, perception, mental formations and consciousness) is eradicated because the Sotāpanna gains insight into the selfless nature of the aggregates."
The others 2 are: Skeptical Doubt and Clinging to rites and rituals, which in my case are still present in part. So I am not even a Sotapanna, fuck it
Nevertheless Identity View is what interest us for the topic being talked here, because this is exactly what happens to who successfully adopts the Cieran method. So I invite everyone on the forum and all Ruthless Trues to stop calling themselves enlightened because they are just one step closer to real liberation. The liberation which is talked about and experienced by them (and me, unfortunately), is the one from a self to attach conditions to.
This in my experience created even more stress and pain at first... go figure. In fact Buddha himself did not answer when asked if there is a self or no-self. He knew perfectly well that clinging to both can cause more harm than benefit on the path. This is explained very well by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, here, by quoting scriptures and the method adopted by the Buddha: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/notself2.html
An excerpt: "So, instead of answering "no" to the question of whether or not there is a self — interconnected or separate, eternal or not — the Buddha felt that the question was misguided to begin with. Why? No matter how you define the line between "self" and "other," the notion of self involves an element of self-identification and clinging, and thus suffering and stress. This holds as much for an interconnected self, which recognizes no "other," as it does for a separate self. If one identifies with all of nature, one is pained by every felled tree. It also holds for an entirely "other" universe, in which the sense of alienation and futility would become so debilitating as to make the quest for happiness — one's own or that of others — impossible. For these reasons, the Buddha advised paying no attention to such questions as "Do I exist?" or "Don't I exist?" for however you answer them, they lead to suffering and stress." - Q.E.D.
Then, Ciaranists talk about "deepening" the state. This is because really everything inside is just like before and only the experience of it changes, to non-experience. This is another pitfall... just because it makes no sense to do this "deepening" later, imho. It should be done first.
To be precise: there are cravings, negativity, emotional turmoils and diseases that should be cleansed before accessing to anatta. Anatta is the next step... if you come to that without preperation it can be uncomfortable (as it was for me, because of spiritual impreparation) and can cause more pain since there is no actual experience of important states of awareness and insight before of that. Let me make a clear example:
It is like you are on a race in which you must to take objects disseminated on the path. One of the goals of this race is called Anatta, for some. Using a direct pointing method like the one talked before is like teleporting from one place of the race to another, more ahead, where you just passed the Anatta goal. But you still have to take the objects (that represents awareness, purifications, emotional cleansing and so on), on the path you were doing linearly before. Also you clearly see that the anatta goal is not the finishing line which lies so ahead that you still can't see it.
To "deepen" the goal of no-self is to take what you haven't previously taken... so you must still get back and do it. You can do it, but that's make no sense in my opinion... maybe for some it will be easier now. Maybe not... anyway I really encourage everyone to contemplate Buddha's silent advice.
I would really like to know what you think of this... especially those who adopted the method.
I would like to discuss the notion of "no-self" and direct pointing methods to realize it such as Ciaran's, with which I gained a state of no-self without actually trying to do it, just by reading the forum. You can see my other topic "False Awakening with Ruthless Truth" to know more about what I feel about it.
I have done some reasearch and now I will explain what imho are the pitfalls of this method of recognition.
First, no-self experience is called Anatta, and that is not Enlightenment, at all. It is part of the first of four stages of enlightnement known as Sotapanna.
According to wikipedia there are 3 fetters which the sotapanna eradicates, the first is:
" Identity view - The speculative view that a so-called self exists in the five aggregates (physical forms, feelings/sensations, perception, mental formations and consciousness) is eradicated because the Sotāpanna gains insight into the selfless nature of the aggregates."
The others 2 are: Skeptical Doubt and Clinging to rites and rituals, which in my case are still present in part. So I am not even a Sotapanna, fuck it
Nevertheless Identity View is what interest us for the topic being talked here, because this is exactly what happens to who successfully adopts the Cieran method. So I invite everyone on the forum and all Ruthless Trues to stop calling themselves enlightened because they are just one step closer to real liberation. The liberation which is talked about and experienced by them (and me, unfortunately), is the one from a self to attach conditions to.
This in my experience created even more stress and pain at first... go figure. In fact Buddha himself did not answer when asked if there is a self or no-self. He knew perfectly well that clinging to both can cause more harm than benefit on the path. This is explained very well by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, here, by quoting scriptures and the method adopted by the Buddha: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/notself2.html
An excerpt: "So, instead of answering "no" to the question of whether or not there is a self — interconnected or separate, eternal or not — the Buddha felt that the question was misguided to begin with. Why? No matter how you define the line between "self" and "other," the notion of self involves an element of self-identification and clinging, and thus suffering and stress. This holds as much for an interconnected self, which recognizes no "other," as it does for a separate self. If one identifies with all of nature, one is pained by every felled tree. It also holds for an entirely "other" universe, in which the sense of alienation and futility would become so debilitating as to make the quest for happiness — one's own or that of others — impossible. For these reasons, the Buddha advised paying no attention to such questions as "Do I exist?" or "Don't I exist?" for however you answer them, they lead to suffering and stress." - Q.E.D.
Then, Ciaranists talk about "deepening" the state. This is because really everything inside is just like before and only the experience of it changes, to non-experience. This is another pitfall... just because it makes no sense to do this "deepening" later, imho. It should be done first.
To be precise: there are cravings, negativity, emotional turmoils and diseases that should be cleansed before accessing to anatta. Anatta is the next step... if you come to that without preperation it can be uncomfortable (as it was for me, because of spiritual impreparation) and can cause more pain since there is no actual experience of important states of awareness and insight before of that. Let me make a clear example:
It is like you are on a race in which you must to take objects disseminated on the path. One of the goals of this race is called Anatta, for some. Using a direct pointing method like the one talked before is like teleporting from one place of the race to another, more ahead, where you just passed the Anatta goal. But you still have to take the objects (that represents awareness, purifications, emotional cleansing and so on), on the path you were doing linearly before. Also you clearly see that the anatta goal is not the finishing line which lies so ahead that you still can't see it.
To "deepen" the goal of no-self is to take what you haven't previously taken... so you must still get back and do it. You can do it, but that's make no sense in my opinion... maybe for some it will be easier now. Maybe not... anyway I really encourage everyone to contemplate Buddha's silent advice.
I would really like to know what you think of this... especially those who adopted the method.
