In "Contemplative fitness" Kenneth Folk proposes that there are two types of perspectives when it comes to fulfilling dharma. One is saint Arahat's perspective and the other is the pragmatic model of Arahatship. But ET basically falls into the first perspective. He seems to wish just good for everyone, he seems to not compare himself to others, he seems like he wishes the ultimate good for absolutely everyone  How come morality came with his enlightenment (if only perhaps seemingly) since I know that it's not the aspect of enlightenment that you get with it according to pragmatic dharma tradition?

Eckhart Tolle has not reached MCTB 4th path in terms of depth of realisation.

His level of realisation is Thusness Stage 1 and 2: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html

Also in his interviews and talks, Eckhart Tolle admitted that there were instances even after his awakening that he had outbursts of irritation and even anger. Probably your image of Eckhart Tolle as a flawless saint is based on your projection, no offense. I personally like Eckhart Tolle's books and often give them out to friends as gifts as I find it a great introduction to spirituality that is also easy to read.

Personally, I believe the fetterless saint arahant is possible, but just not anyone I've personally met yet.

I know people who wish people well in a nearly saint-like way without being on the path at all. They all still have difficult emotions, but that doesn't stop them from caring for others and behaving utterly selfless. 

Awakening would probably make it easier, but the intent has got to be there.

Please describe the precise practice that one would do to become enlightened and then start referring to oneself non-ironically as "Thusness."

Want to make sure I never do that practice.  Thanks.

why the disdain?

ET may or may not be an arahant, and he may or may not be a saint And it actually it doesn't matter too much.

If he is someone who inspires you to "awaken" and "do good things for others", then that is great! Likewise, if some of the material he puts out there is useful as part of your practice and helps you progress towards these, then also great!

​​​​​​​

What is the basis of this belief?

Personally speaking, afflictions do disappear in my practice. I see no reason why fetterless arahant wouldn't be possible somewhere down the path.

I see the same trend too, I just think there's a very low probability that the limit is actually realizable. But who really knows. 

Do you know of anyone who has actually given a clear account of dropping all the fetters in 4 distinct paths? Maha Bua is vague about it, even although he's very clear about everything else. Accounts of the Buddha's awakening don't mention 4 paths ...

To me he has always offerered inspiration text but no methods. There are no real meditations

"Sainthood" is a form of clinging.

The buddha offered no saints, no sinners, no animals, no trees, no sun, no moon, no darkness, no light, no form, no formlessness, no bliss, no pain. None of these are required, although all are optional. 

Or to put it another way - a saint is an "other", which is to say, fuel for the fire. 

Just a thought I had recently... If we practice, let's say, breath retention, with practice we can hold breath for longer and longer periods. But that doesn't mean that somewhere along the path we could live without breathing. Even if we get to some advances super-jhana breathless state, it's only temporary. Maybe it's the same with afflictions.

Hey Griffin, just to offer my perspective. 

Yes I think you are on to something. We cannot reduce fetters to the point that we extinguish the five aggregates of clinging - form, feeling, peceptions, mental activity, consciousness.  These are the core process of life, and the key is to see them as not-self, rather than to extinguish them.

Every arahant has a residue remaining in the five aggregates of clinging, and the perfected 'saint' arahant is in my view someone with pari-nibbana, not nibbana - otherwise why bother with the nibbana/pari-nibbana distinction?  I don't see pari-nibbana as something to be sought, but rather a kind of technical explanation that while we live, we are human.

The danger is that deep commitment to the ten perfections has the potential to be a massive form of clinging. Pursuit of unattainble goals also has the danger of emotional suppression, which will pop out in some kind of subconscious ego extension, hence preventing people from waking up. Uncle Sid identifies this problem precisely in the Sutta of the Lute player - don't practice with the strings too loose, but don't practice with the strings too tight, either.  This advice is often ignored, unfortunately.

Those who are most critical of pragmatic arahantship often seem to have pretty tight strings (I am not including Kenneth here). They can show a lot of:

- Views
- Lust for jhana 
- Ill will
- Conceit
- Ignorance
- Restlessness

... from which I invite people to draw their own conclusions.

Don't practice with the strings too tight. 

Metta

Malcolm

"Sutta of the Lute player - don't practice with the strings too loose, but don't practice with the strings too tight, either.  This advice is often ignored, unfortunately"

Only a non-musician would say this One can perfectly fine practice on an up (more tight) or down (more loose) tuned guitar These give different respose and feel. Its a bit like wet and dry. How much wet and how much dry? You can go any way really and still call it practice.

You can up tune the guitar to the point of strings snapping any time now (very tight), however if you play it hard with a pick they will snap, but if you choose to play soft finger style and just gently stroking them you might get some fine music. 

Or you can down tune guitar so the strings are loose and in this case the player can mindlessly strum and hit the strings with a hard pick without breaking the strings. But this is heavy metal playing

So, its not about the stings really and if they are under much tension (anxiety) or very slack (sloth) but about the ATTITUDE used. If stuff seems tense, use gentle touch to practice. If the stuff is too loose/slack, use harder strumming to practice.

Please excuse me rumling again  

The 'residue' that sutta's arahants have remaining are the pure sensations. They do not have passion, aggression, and delusion, and any manner of other afflictive emotions: fears, sorrow, grasping, etc etc, those have been ended and will never arise again for an arahant, Buddha: "And how is a monk well-released in discernment? There is the case where a monk discerns, 'Passion is abandoned in me, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising.' He discerns, 'Aversion is abandoned in me, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising.' He discerns, 'Delusion is abandoned in me, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising.' This is how a monk is well-released in discernment". This may not accord with Daniel's view in MCTB and whether readers here accept this view is up to them, but this is just how things are presented by Buddha in the Pali canon and I feel compelled to offer people a correct understanding of how things are presented in the scriptures. Parinibbana refers to the post mortem state of an arahant: free from rebirth.

Buddha: "“What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbāna-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of attachment, hate, and delusion in him that is called the Nibbāna-element with residue left.“

Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbāna-element with no residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant … completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbāna-element with no residue left.
"

Now, this also relates to a couple of teachings by Buddha distinguishing "fetter" from pure sensations:
Fetter

"The eye is not the fetter of forms, nor are forms the fetter of the eye. Whatever desire & passion arises in dependence on the two of them: That is the fetter there. The ear is not the fetter of sounds... The nose is not the fetter of aromas... The tongue is not the fetter of flavors... The body is not the fetter of tactile sensations... The intellect is not the fetter of ideas, nor are ideas the fetter of the intellect. Whatever desire & passion arises in dependence on the two of them: That is the fetter there." -- Buddha, SN 35.191 (PTS: S IV 162) "My son, we are not bound by appearances; we are bound by our clinging to them." - Tilopa to Naropa"The five senses arising with their objects are unimpeded radiance.What is born from not grasping at objects is the unborn basic state.Attachment to appearances may be unceasing but reverse it: meditate naturally settled.Empty appearances arising free from the intellect is the path of natural expressions.Do not see appearances as problems, let go of clinging.There will come a time when you will arrive in the valley of one taste meditation." - Yang Gönpa    update: for further reading, read these three suttas.Astus: There is no consciousness apart from the aggregates (SN 22.53). It's not appearances but clinging that causes suffering (SN 35.191), and when there is no clinging, nirvana is attained in this life (SN 35.118). - https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=36909&p=587939&hilit=CLINGING#p587939 (article continued at http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2019/06/fetter.html )About 'feelings' (vedana):Regarding the relationship between vedana and "emotions," American-born Theravada teacher Bhikkhu Bodhi has written:"The Pali word vedana does not signify emotion (which appears to be a complex phenomenon involving a variety of concomitant mental factors), but the bare affective quality of an experience, which may be either pleasant, painful or neutral."[12]Similarly, Oxford-trained Vajrayana teacher Trungpa Rinpoche has written:

"In this case 'feeling' is not quite our ordinary notion of feeling. It is not the feeling we take so seriously as, for instance, when we say, 'He hurt my feelings.' This kind of feeling that we take so seriously belongs to the fourth and fifth skandhas of concept and consciousness."[13]"

Here's my perspective, for what it's worth ...

There comes a point (sotapanna?) when not-self and dependent origination are seen clearly enough that the idea is no longer sustainable of there ever being an individual who could choose to practice which fetters to attenuate to what degree. When it's seen that all dhamma are not-self and even the smallest thing/action requires the co-operation of the entire universe to exist/happen, then it's clear that life is just happening "by itself" and doing whatever it needs to do to try to survive in the face of increasing entropy/impermanence. Monasticism, lineages, schools, traditions etc are all socio-economic constructs subject to their own unique survival pressures, "random" mutations and adaptive responses. Whether you call it dependent origination, "laws of nature" or "god's will", it's a completely impersonal process and it's absolutely amazing, but there's no one who can hold onto it, control it or even know it or describe it really.

It must however be emphasized that no doer does not mean nothing can be done. There is action, no doer, there is choosing, no chooser. ( http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/06/choosing.html )

Also relevant:

Excerpt from the AtR guide:

Neo-Advaitic “No-Practice Doctrine” is Wrong and Unhelpful

This is related to “No Actor does not Imply No Action”

The Neo Advaitins, as well as some Buddhists these days, teach that you should not do any practices, since there is no one to do them and so on. That is based on the faulty premise the practices and actions require a doer, and that they are ineffective, or that they necessarily perpetuate the notion of a self or doer. That is lacking the discernment into conditionality, karmic conditionings, the role and relationships of path, view, experience, realization, fruition. It requires people with deep wisdom like Buddha, or like John Tan to be able to discern this.

From a conversation in 2010:
(4:24:08 PM) Thusness: the man with the cellphone... rather than seeing it as universe doing it...see that the deeper dispositions causing the frustration. see the subtle holding of pces. see that there is rigidity in holding. you know about the fox zen koan?
(4:28:31 PM) AEN: yea
(4:28:55 PM) Thusness: you know the importance of it? it is considered hard to penetrate even among the enlightened.
(4:29:45 PM) AEN: it’s talking about the importance of causality
(4:30:08 PM) Thusness: buddhism causality is the theory of conditionality. you must clearly see the causes and conditions. now if you are not trying to 'maintain' a state of non-dual presence, will the walkman cell phone pose as a problem? isn't that worse than a by passer that is not distracted by the cellphone?
(4:38:26 PM) AEN: yea
(4:39:30 PM) Thusness: if you do not see the cause of 'division', can there be non-dual and anatta experience? without the experience of "I AMness", your experience of non-dual and anatta will be different.
(4:40:37 PM) AEN: oic
(4:40:38 PM) AEN: how different
(4:40:58 PM) Thusness: very different in terms of intensity and realization. most will skew towards first stanza. the directness and immediacy is also different. the experience will re-surface if you practice non-dual dropping, but not by way of one-pointedness concentration
(4:43:41 PM) Thusness: how is your PCEs sustained?
(4:46:03 PM) AEN: yeah its like those who practice vipassana or mctb focuses on the first stanza right
(4:46:14 PM) AEN: hmm.. via dropping like you said. theres no concentration needed cos everything is by nature nondual already, just the clinging to a sense of self obscuring the direct perception
(4:47:46 PM) AEN: bahiya sutta is a mix of both stanzas right
(4:48:05 PM) Thusness: by clear seeing, by penetrating the cause and conditions, by letting go non-dually...
(4:48:22 PM) Thusness: bahiya sutta yes...very deep, clear and precise.
(4:49:06 PM) AEN: through contemplating bahiya sutta experientially I realised what it mean which I later wrote in the article... I think its a v important sutta
(4:49:19 PM) Thusness: yes. therefore I do not want you to misunderstand and falls into fox zen. there must be clear understanding of the supporting conditions… not everything is the universe causing it… you have no choice...kok your head
(4:50:34 PM) AEN: haha
(4:50:50 PM) Thusness: in fact that is one of the disease of non-dual and desync of views
(4:51:00 PM) AEN: so there is choice? there is intentions right and choice
(4:51:11 PM) Thusness: yes
(4:51:14 PM) AEN: ic..
(4:51:16 PM) Thusness: there is no control. there is influences of the outcome. no perfect control… it is no different from having a self. except that there is no division. no someone standing out apart from the flow of phenomenality. the inter-dependencies are too complex and subtle to penetrate, and this moment of whatever arises are the result of such dependencies. chanting has its effect. do merit has its effect. insights are transformational. the path of practice has their effect. self enquiry help you to realize "I AM". no-self lead you to realize non-division and anatta. allow the direct experience of the transient. what you wrote and your summary provide you the penetrating insight of non-duality and insight into anatta. how is it that there is no way to impact? it just does not manifesting the way the dualistic and inherent mind perceive it to be. means reality is not what it seems to be. not the way dualistic and inherent mind sees it. DO (dependent origination) and emptiness is the way to correctly understand it
(5:00:32 PM) AEN: oic.. yeah everything impacts everything... even right view is important and the right practice... the notion that 'there’s nothing to do for enlightenment' or that enlightenment is some random event is really off the mark
(5:02:31 PM) Thusness: if you practice chanting a billion times, your consciousness in the 3 states will be affected. mere will in the conscious state will not be able to stop the momentum . that is self view...get it?
(5:05:18 PM) AEN: yeah
(5:05:28 PM) Thusness: even in deep dreamless sleep
(5:05:47 PM) AEN: yea… what do you mean by even in deep dreamless sleep
(5:06:14 PM) Thusness: even in deep dreamless sleep... Your mind/body rhythm, heart beats are affected by this practice. if penetrate anatta deeply...from moment to moment...thoroughly letting go of self and grasping and vivid presence, how is it that such practice will not affect the 3 states?
(5:14:39 PM) AEN: hmm… but in deep dreamless sleep if there is no conscious awareness how can there be an ongoing practice?
(5:16:26 PM) Thusness: the entire movement is not a matter of conscious awareness. the momentum continues...the body, the cells are imprinted too. much like your deep held attachments. all inter-penetrates. your body can contract unnecessarily. so you may have the experience but you have to refine your understanding. there are still some good pointers. when you practice dropping, it will help. when your insight deepens, it will help. so the mind can be clear. thoughts create fear... the mind engages in story has fear this is true. and being thoughtless, fear does not arise at that moment when we do away with thoughts and stop engaging in stories. but the cause is the 'attachment'. if the holding is there, there is no overcoming of the problem, get it? knowing that it is just a thought, engaging in stories helps as a form of practice... ultimately, that deep held tendency must be relinquished.
(5:30:25 PM) AEN: ic.. so you mean the main focus is not thoughtlessness but relinquishing the tendency of holding? and that’s by insight and dropping?
(5:31:16 PM) Thusness: yes. and because there is no holding, no attachment, there is thoughtlessness. as I said certain teachings are good to a certain point... after you arise the insight, you have to have other pointers. before that, it can be helpful to get you there...they are good 'supporting conditions'. but some of the expressions are beautiful. Sometimes just a few of these beautiful phrases help to articulate expressions… and that is what I look for because it is so hard to express.
(5:35:39 PM) AEN: ic.. "Learned Audience, when we use Prajna for introspection we are illumined within and without, and in a position to know our own mind. To know our mind is to obtain liberation. To obtain liberation is to attain Samadhi of Prajna, which is 'thoughtlessness'. What is 'thoughtlessness'? 'Thoughtlessness' is to see and to know all Dharmas (things) with a mind free from attachment. When in use it pervades everywhere, and yet it sticks nowhere. What we have to do is to purify our mind so that the six vijnanas (aspects of consciousness) , in passing through the six gates (sense organs) will neither be defiled by nor attached to the six sense-objects. When our mind works freely without any hindrance, and is at liberty to 'come' or to 'go', we attain Samadhi of Prajna, or liberation. Such a state is called the function of 'thoughtlessness'. But to refrain from thinking of anything, so that all thoughts are suppressed, is to be Dharma-ridden, and this is an erroneous view."
(5:36:27 PM) AEN: - hui neng
(5:37:53 PM) Thusness: yes

Of course - thinking, choosing and doing all continue, apparently 

Soh Wei Yu, I enjoy what you write and quote and find it excellent. To offer a little more of my own views, not so much in disagreement as elaboration, I would propose the following. 

The base sensations are always there, but we build structures on top of them to create a frame of reference that enables interaction with the world. Some structures are biologically determined and some are habits - karma, or skandhara if you like. To not have any of these biological drives or habits is to be 'dead'. The arahant prior to pari-nibanna will still get hungry and eat, still wish to answer questions, and so forth and these are driven by something built on top of the field of sensations. To me these tendencies are the residue remaining. But the application of concepts such as 'residue remaining' depends on a particular frame of reference, and on a particular metaphor, and is neither right not wrong if you dig in deeply enough, although it may be right or wrong within a particular context. There is no orthodoxy, only pointing.

To consider feelings, passions, emotions ... we can construct these in various different ways according to our frame of reference (e.g. put them in the basket of mental activity and consciousness, or alternatively see vedana as one selection of a deeper basket of activities).  The conceptual definitions don't matter too much, what is more important are the empirical referents and testable claims.  So I agree that 'passion' is extinguished, by which I mean that the unthinking clinging that arises from the perception of self and other as separate enduring essences is gone.  But 'passion' is used in different senses.  Wordly urges are not extinguished, just the relationship to them.

Trungpa Rinpoche, whom you cite, is the perfect example of this, although there are many.  He is widely attested to have smoked and drunk, slept with students and teachers, married a 16 year old, had a reckless car crash and died of over indulgence in alcohol.  I am perfectly willing to accept that he did so without clinging.  And perfectly willing to accept that he did not have passion in the Sutta sense of the word, but he obviously had enough passion in the western sense of the word to have sex and father a child.  So whether arahants have passion depends on your definition of the word.  

May all beings be free from clinging!  

Malcolm

I like that approach.

Eckhart is so popular because he is relatable.
Some people interpret it as low development level, some as high development level.

In reality who cares?
No, I do not mean it in this silly interpretation of non-duality way but in "what does it matter what level he is?"
From anything that can be taken one does not take everything but only what is needed/useful and leave the rest.
Also if there is silver or gold in the piece of sheet then does it make it less valuable? It might need rinsing it a lot but it is the same gold. It might not be worth effort to extract it.

Some people have problem of the type: they see chunk of gold and would drop everything and move to make mines and dig more. Maybe there is more maybe not. Those who call Eckhard a saint really want there to be more of the gold. I do not think to be the case. It is the same gold just healthy common sense gives. This is by all means already a lot but if you have your own mine in your own mind you wouldn't get so excited by anyone else mines. Wouldn't you? Besides that is the whole point of his books, at least from what I have read (I read part of one book, enough to know everything about the guy ;)) is to confirm own common sense, find own gold. Not bother him. If anything give gold to him back if he helped you in some way.

​​​​​​​What gold? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

I think, ... hence ET exists!

What is ET? ... ... ? ... ... ?

Ah, look! A butterfly!!! ... ... (runs after it in excitement) ... run Forest run!