No self......So what

thumbnail
jason william barton, modified 10 Years ago.

No self......So what

Posts: 2 Join Date: 10/3/09 Recent Posts
I get no self, but not the "liberation" behind it.
If there is such a shift then why all the vehemence and vitriol surrounding the Ruthless Truth practice?
If any practitioners can enlighten me I'd appreciate the dialog.
thumbnail
Nemo Anatta, modified 10 Years ago.

RE: No self......So what

Posts: 4 Join Date: 7/18/11 Recent Posts
Hi Jason, I am happy to work with you.

When the shift happens, everything changes and yet nothing changes. A frustrating thing to hear I know, but it becomes clear later, so let's try to focus less on what this "shift" might entail and more on simply making it happen.

As for things like vehemence and vitriol, or any other perceived qualities a practice might take on, it's like this: the finger might appear to have a hairy knuckle, or maybe some shiny pink nail polish. Doesn't matter, as long as it is pointing to the moon.

So, tell me more about no self. You get it, but do you see it? Do you want to see it? To use one of my favourite quotes; "Having the answer isn't enough. You have to do the math."

So, let's do it.

Is there a you? Check it out. Be thorough in your search.
thumbnail
Jason Barton, modified 10 Years ago.

RE: No self......So what

Posts: 2 Join Date: 10/3/09 Recent Posts
Thank you for your time, my curiosity is definitely piqued.
The YOU that I identify with is physiologically and phenomenologically
in a constant state of flux. I realize thoughts, emotions, conditioned responses
etc make up what Jason "is" and how Jason perceives and interacts with reality.
So in a traditional sense there is no YOU and it isn't possible to maintain a static YOU, but where do I go beyond that?
thumbnail
Ne Mo, modified 10 Years ago.

RE: No self......So what

Posts: 4 Join Date: 7/18/11 Recent Posts
No worries Jason.

Flux will always happen, it is simply the play of life, reality. After realization of no-self, sense of self and thoughts about self may still arise. But they aren't attached to anything. Reality can only be direct experience, right? So as soon as you try to separate experience from experiencer, in attributing things to a self, reality start becoming mighty inauthentic. A gap is created where there shouldn't be one. So we're closing this (also illusory) gap here.

Ask yourself this: Does there need to be an experiencer for experience to exist?

So, you understand the Jason is a fiction. Thoughts, emotions, conditioned responses happen, but can you find a centre to or from which they are happening? Let's try rewriting what you wrote there, but replacing "Jason" with "reality", just as a little experiment:
"Reality realize(s) thoughts, emotions, conditioned responses
etc make up what reality "is" and how reality perceives and interacts with reality."

So really, reality has a Jason superimposed over it. You can't become enlightened or liberated if there is no you. The aim is to liberate reality from the lie of self.
thumbnail
Ne Mo, modified 10 Years ago.

RE: No self......So what

Posts: 4 Join Date: 7/18/11 Recent Posts
(Also - some people find it easier or prefer to work privately via email or in chat/instant messaging. If you should decide you want to do that instead, it can always be posted here afterward as well if you choose. I'll send you a pm with my email address so you can have that option.)
thumbnail
Ne Mo, modified 10 Years ago.

RE: No self......So what

Posts: 4 Join Date: 7/18/11 Recent Posts
If anyone else reading this might also be interested in some one on one direct pointing work, please contact me.
Here is a link to my BLOG.
An Eternal Now, modified 10 Years ago.

RE: No self......So what

Posts: 638 Join Date: 9/15/09 Recent Posts
There are two benefits, in my experience, to no-self realization and experience.

1) liberation


By liberating the view that there is a real self, it stops clinging. To what? Clinging to a sense that there is a 'me', a solid subject, or more subtly a sense of being or awareness... apart from the flow of sensate phenomenality.

All sufferings come from clinging (clinging to something as 'me', something as 'mine'), and all clingings/attachments basically come down to two views: 'is', and 'is not'. If there is no self or agent, then 'is' and 'is not' of a self does not apply. For example: imagine you are deluded about the nature of wind, and you think that there is a windness behind the blowing, so you grasp onto this construct of an inherent windness and obviously when the blowing changes from what you want or see it to be, 'you' suffer. But when you truly see that there is no 'windness' of wind, that 'wind' is merely a label for an ungraspable process of blowing, then what is left is simply the blowing activities. There is no more clinging to 'windness' or relating particular activities as 'belonging to a wind'.

Relating back to 'self': there is no 'self', 'awareness', 'subject' being 'here' to be clung to. There is no me, no I, no ownership... only the aggregates that simply 'flows'. There is nothing that is inherently 'me', or 'mine'. There is no more clinging or relating things back to a self or owner which results in craving and aversion, and this is very liberating.

What's left: referenceless, ownerless, disjoint, bubble-like, insubstantial, self-releasing and self-luminous experience.

As you progress from the initial no-self realization by transforming the five skandhas to eighteen dhatus (discussed in some of my earlier posts), you will also see that fetters (craving, fear, anger, etc) begin to lose hold and disappear from your life. However the overcoming of subtler fetters be an immediate effect and the insights and experience may not sink in so deeply as to remove all the latent tendencies and habits (it also depends on whether he has former meditative practice, for RT their experience may not be as stable due to the nature of the direct path which is to result in direct insight quickly without necessarily having the meditative foundation, as they do not have years of vipassana and samadhi practice as a foundation). I consider the no-self realization as Buddha's Sotapanna, since it entails the end of 'self-view', and the further stages to Arhantship are the removal of remaining fetters.


2) happiness


Most people are not really enjoying their experience. They are always either in aversion of the moment, or in desire of something better, therefore they can never be truly happy even if they get a billion dollars. The resting of dualistic and self-referencing tendencies leaves us with simply immersing in selfless pure sensate clarity which results in great bliss. There is a sense of perfection in the here and now and a non-contingent happiness. The bliss/happiness (I am using both terms synonymously here) of pure sensate enjoyment without clinging to a separate experiencer is beyond imagination. Everything ordinary becomes intensely alive and wonderful.
thumbnail
Elena Joy, modified 9 Years ago.

RE: No self......So what

Posts: 98 Join Date: 6/30/11 Recent Posts
Hey, I did answered you line by line what you asked in another thread. Where are you, Eternal Now?
An Eternal Now, modified 9 Years ago.

RE: No self......So what

Posts: 638 Join Date: 9/15/09 Recent Posts
Sorry I can't remember... did I ask anything? What thread are you talking about?
thumbnail
deci belle, modified 7 Years ago.

RE: No self......So what

Posts: 10 Join Date: 7/13/14 Recent Posts
What Ne Mo said.❤

Jason Barton said:
"I get no self, but not the "liberation" behind it. 
If there is such a shift then why all the vehemence and vitriol surrounding the Ruthless Truth practice? 
If any practitioners can enlighten me I'd appreciate the dialog."


This may get a little extraneous, Jason— but the nature of no self is entry into the inconceivable.

"So what" actually makes sense when the concept of selfless being is grasped intellectually, but "liberation" is activated in actually seeing it and accepting one's function in seeing through situations without denying their characteristics.  Unless one sees selfless nature as the ground of reality "no self" has no power to transcend situations by virtue of situations.  So what?  This only possible to act on when one is no longer fascinated by characteristics relative to conditions, i.e.: as long as you are afraid of missing out on anything, you're dead meat (utterly caught up in karmic existence and the rounds of birth and death).  One must be beyond the world while in the midst of the world.  C'est la vie.

This is what living in the midst of conditions without going along with the nature of conditions is all about.

One could just as easily say "so what" about that too.  A good question to ask is not "so what", but "why".

As long as one sees oneself as an originated self possessing the nature of ego-identity, one cannot partake of experience beyond this habitual state of existence.  It is really a matter of being possessed by the nature of ego-identity.  Ask, "How is that?"

Nonbeing is the nature of nonexistence.  Unless you know nonexistence, how can you be free of the existence of the self that thinks it exists?

The answer is that you cannot experience the power of enlightening function of authentic liberation of the self that exists unless you actually know that it does not exist by virtue of the fact that reality has never begun— the essence of what you take for reality is its potential.  Only the uncreated (Mind) is real.  And the reason why the concept of no self doesn't mean anything to you is because you don't see potential.

Potential is the real essence of unity, selfless energy, living awareness.  Creation is just this, if you see it as such.  Otherwise you are bound to karmic evolution, with no hope of  l i b e r a t i o n.  Seeing that existence is really nonexistent is the basis of  o b j e c t i v i t y.

Phenomena must be seen as unreal while adapting to its characteristics in order to activate the power of no self to transcend karma.  Endless transformation is easy, adapting without minding is hard.

Yes?  There is no reason why, it is just the way it is.  Wisdom has been passed down through the ages based on Mind itself.  Mind itself is the source of nonbeing— that is nonoriginated awareness.  It is not some other awareness.  Mind is one.  That is no self.  It is you who asks "so what"  …which, in the context of no-self voicing the statement, does make a lot of sense after all.

As for the shift, it is seamless.  It is already one's mind right now.  Your own aware nature is Mind itself, your mind void of identity.  When you begin to see reality as is, it will not look any different.  Why?  Because delusion and enlightenment are the same mind.

Reality and illusion are the same.  Delusion is simply due to the fact of not seeing this and not being able to adapt selflessly to conditions.  Mind void of identity is the world being the same as oneself— no different than reality.  Basically delusion is not knowing you are deluded.  Delusion is all there is, really, in terms of created existence.  Sudden enlightenment is simply Mind before creation.  That's not real either.

Suchness is the buddhist term to describe reality as neither the nature of conditions nor absolute.  The Great Vehicle is embodying the power to partake of Suchness without clinging to the two extremes of absolute and conditional, either of which in isolation are delusion.

The reason for ruthless practice is to see for oneself that the mind that thinks it exists has overstepped its valid function and has usurped the real identity of the organism that is going to die.

Ruthless practice is the same as taoism's gradual practice of self-refinement.  What is refined?  The human mentality.





ed note: fix Jason's quote cuz I don't know how to do things on this site yet…
thumbnail
Eric M W, modified 7 Years ago.

RE: No self......So what

Posts: 288 Join Date: 3/19/14 Recent Posts
Jason Barton:
I get no self, but not the "liberation" behind it.
If there is such a shift then why all the vehemence and vitriol surrounding the Ruthless Truth practice?
If any practitioners can enlighten me I'd appreciate the dialog.

Direct pointing has its uses, but I personally haven't had much luck with it. It isn't necessary to dialogue with someone to see no-self in action, as the three characteristics manifest all the time. Try dropping down to the level of bare sensations-- flickering color and form-- and investigating the following:

Are there any sensations that seem to be observing, controlling, or separate from any other sensations? 

Are there any sensations that are bigger or more special than other sensations?

Are there any sensations that are not subject to impermanence, and thus could possibly be a permanent self?