Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Fate is not a predetermined set of experiences we are guaranteed to have. Rather it is the experience we will have if we do not change our patterns. For instance, a racist's fate is to hate different races. This is simple truth. Now, when it comes to change, upon the dismantling of the pattern that makes the racist, their fate is also changed.
This is the key, aMatt. It's not a plan or a design as far as we know. If we change our patterns, and we will, it is not of us; there is no self to act. We respond because of conditions, based on conditions, and become part of the next conditioned moment. This process is completely selfless, and driven by the ways in which all things act given the appropriate conditions. When we find Buddhism, learn about it, and follow it... that could not have happened any other way. We will learn, we will change, we will grow and it will all seem to us to have been because of our will; because we made it so. That, however, occurs with the "non-self" still fully intact and operational, without having been seen; without being truly known. Buddhism teaches this Non-Self concept, but it isn't "seen", or known, except through proper meditation. Regardless, a thorough conceptual knowledge of these concepts won't do any harm.
From the moment you were "born" you were nothing more than a set of aggregates that had come together because of conditions, and nothing in your life experience has been of "you". It makes us feel better to imagine we have some measure of control, but how really could we? That is a selfish, and self-based, assessment. Buddhism is about seeing reality as it truly is, which leads in most cases to eradication of this illusory self through skillful means up to Arahantship or Bodhisattvahood. There is truly no birth, and no death; only change. This change is the stream we are a part of, not separate from, and which is all-pervasive as what makes up our minds and bodies as well.
We are not only carried forth by the stream; we are part of it.
~
You don't have to believe in Destiny, because some of you are incorrectly taking me to mean that it's been determined beforehand (rather than determined by each successive moment of change). What I will encourage if anyone doesn't agree with me is merely a thorough understanding of both Dependent Origination and Non-Self, and to try... just to try... to make sure that understanding is as complete as possible by looking at it from the angles of all traditions. If it makes you uncomfortable to think about, read it again; that's how you get through difficult suttas, isn't it? What makes you uncomfortable is important to understand.
Good luck in that one. And no this isn't a pointless thread. It's a very demanding thread, and I didn't expect many would agree so I kept it to the Experienced section of the forum and added a (Not For The Lighthearted) thingy to the title. It is what it is. I actually expected the majority to disagree, because it's a difficult concept to cope with as I've explained it; yet, I didn't do it for my health ya'know...
I read much of what you're saying and think you have a come confusion between response and reaction. If you respond mindfully, or with the no-self view, then you are not acting according to pattern. There is more than aggregates.
I understand DO (your saying 'DO and no-self' seems redundant) I think once a person dissolves enough self, they see that at the level of "no death, no birth" etc, that there are very few conceptions that stick, making little of this discussion reasonable.
"We respond because of conditions, based on conditions, and become part of the next conditioned moment."
Don't forget that there is freedom from this and the path... if you're going to speak the 4NT, speak them all What you describe is precisely what Buddha was saying there is freedom from.
If you're saying that the self is composed only of patterns, and therefore it is bound by preset patterns, well... that's a tough one to make stick. The ego doesn't operate independently, its part of our overall experience. Once the ego is tamed, its not as though we become zombies.
There is freedom, but it is freedom from a state in which the mind is out of tune with reality. I never disputed that. I'm completely confident that such a state exists, and Buddhism contains that knowledge and method.
I'm not saying that Non-Self is redundant; just the opposite. I'm saying that in order to understand one or the other fully, both must be understood. They are pieces of a puzzle; you have to identify the pieces first, and then you find out that when they fit together they create a clearer and more complete image.
Find in life anything that is not the result of the immediately preceding moment. Find anything that Dependent Origination has not driven forth; and please don't let it be quantum indeterminacy. It's good to take science into account, but it can get out of hand when we get into complex mathematical/physics theorum that is even more difficult to understand than the simple truth, and marks more what we do not know than what we do.
Even freedom, liberation, is conditioned. Even the state of freedom is governed by conditions, and even the state of the aggregates after "death" is conditioned. Round and round we go, and frustration follows all along the way; yet some may see.
"Whoever sees Dependent Origination sees the Dhamma; whoever sees the Dhamma sees Dependent Origination." [M.I.191]
And yeah, that's just about the first time I've ever quoted from a direct source and given the sutta. It's not important if the sutta contains historically accurate wording, but the message. I've also seen "He who sees Dependent Arising sees me; he who sees me sees Dependent Arising." as attributed to the Buddha himself.
Once the ego is tamed, its not as though we become zombies.
hmmm...
a video game where you would have to get the enlighten zombie monks...
But how can there be so many zombie monks all of a sudden?
And the game take you along a journey where you discover the source of their enlightenment.
You eventually discover that the mastermind behind it all was Eckhart Tolle who wrote a book on behalf of the Dalai Lama, after preparing the battlefield by promoting Buddhism for 50 years, softening up the minds of millions, they finally released their wildly popular book in which you find the key to easy enlightenment.
Their goal was to free Tibet with an army of zombie monks.
a video game where you would have to get the enlighten zombie monks...
But how can there be so many zombie monks all of a sudden?
And the game take you along a journey where you discover the source of their enlightenment.
You eventually discover that the mastermind behind it all was Eckhart Tolle who wrote a book on behalf of the Dalai Lama, after preparing the battlefield by promoting Buddhism for 50 years, softening up the minds of millions, they finally released their wildly popular book in which you find the key to easy enlightenment.
Their goal was to free Tibet with an army of zombie monks.
And of course your weapon would be a Pali-Canon. Oh yes I did!
Not out of selfishness, nor of pride, nor of a feeling of accomplishment or of desired respect will I now unravel another piece of the veiled. This, out of conditionality. This, hopefully for the betterment of the reader.
Few have known that the event of stream-entry occurred for me in January before I even came to this forum. What I have seen, and what I know, are those things that one on the Buddhist path is attempting to see, to know. That there are more that disagree with me than agree with me is not a mark of error on my part; it is a mark of the difference between the mind of one who has reached such a stage and the minds of those who have not.
At the event of stream-entry, I gained unshakable knowledge of Dependent Arising (Origination), along with that which may be associated with this process; impermanence, selflessness of all phenomena, kamma as the conditions present for change to occur, dukkha in both selfish and universal terms, and others. My confidence that the Buddha unraveled the truth and that his methods would lead to liberation was no longer dependent upon faith, or belief, or the words of others.
It is the process that occurs after this event, which started before the event and continues on, that has brought me to this point. Conditions have led to a deeper and more complete understanding of both Dependent Origination and Non-Self, to the point where my mind is on the verge, the very nexus between the Sotapanna and the Sakadagami.
It is only a matter of meditation, conditions allowing, that will bring about the unshakable insight that will weaken additional fetters. I can already almost see this; the world of my mind wavers in my waking hours because the wisdom I've gained already, and the further knowledge I've gathered based upon it, are very close to another event.
These events are not attainments. They are not achievements. They are not something to point to yourself and say "hey, look at me, I did it!". It is difficult to even identify the self anymore. Each time I use pronouns, terms of possessiveness, or even my name to refer to myself I am painfully aware that they are only used on the common level and there is no self to be found.
This is no driver, only that which is driven, and it is not self. All phenomena are selfless, driven by Dependent Origination, and if I had any hope that some might understand (and I did), then it was a mistake in that sense. Yet, it happened; I posted this thread, and predictably found disagreement. So be it. It was going to happen, outside of the illusion of control.
Long ago I read on these forums that it was unlikely that there were any enlightened beings taking part in the discussions. That is probably true. It is likely however that there are at least two now on NewBuddhist that are in the same mind-range, between Sotapanna and Sakadagami.
I would invite the other, or others, to share in this discussion. Perhaps my understanding is yet flawed. Where one may find imperfection, together we may find the absolute.
An understanding of dependent origination doesn't confirm or deny either free will or determinism. It makes both irrelevant.
Yes, free will is irrelevant. One needs more than a simple understanding of Dependent Origination to see this; to agree with this. It requires detachment from the self, a process which does have markers that you may know you are actually on the path and not still seeking it. Until such time, the self of most individuals screams out against this. The most powerful attachments of the mind are not overcome simply with study of the teachings and agreement. That agreement is still untested, unverified. The unshakable, which pushes aside the self, comes through meditative insight.
And that, aMatt, answers your question also. I am not seeking anything. Life is happening, and I am seeing it. It's very likely that this will lead to higher stages of awakening, assuming I live that long. It is not a guarantee, and I'm actually more at peace right now than I've ever been. There is only conditionality; to be able to see that is peace. It is not the ultimate peace - that is Nirvana/Nibbana.
All of this, right here, is a part of the process.
The 1st we are all familiar since the beginning of the sentience, what I call the survival mode.
The 2nd mode is to experience life "directly" without any preconception, stories or ideals. This is exemplified in "in the seeing, just the seeing". Direct experience does not supply an experiencer. There is only the present moment as time is just a concept.
The concept of self, others and the universe are dependently coarisen. All are fabricated or concocted and ultimately empty.
In a sense we live in a dream but this dream neither exist nor not exist but is dependently arisen with "contact between object and sense base" and the rest of it.
Not seeking anything? There were several paragraphs that seemed like a resume, looking for some kind of open communion about something. To share that much seems like it would be moved into words by an intention.
Free will is important. It is a concept that gives many, many people a way to empower themselves into change. That it is ultimately irrelevant is what is irrelevant hehe.
Not seeking anything? There were several paragraphs that seemed like a resume, looking for some kind of open communion about something. To share that much seems like it would be moved into words by an intention.
Free will is important. It is a concept that gives many, many people a way to empower themselves into change. That it is ultimately irrelevant is what is irrelevant hehe.
With warmth,
Matt
What I'm failing to communicate is that there is no one, no self, to seek. It's difficult to see the process when you are a part of it, but we are all just part of the process of life, of change, that happens throughout all of what we call the universe.
You think you are acting out of free will and by your own choice and actions. That itself is the delusion. There is no one acting. The goal of Buddhism is to not only see this truth of selfless nature of all phenomena, but to bring the mind into complete harmony with that truth. To see selflessness, know that you are selfless, and then to become selfless.
Tick tock tick tock. Understand it's only a matter of conditions.
Buddha then asked, "What do you think, Subhuti, does one who has entered the stream which flows to Enlightenment, say 'I have entered the stream'?" "No, Buddha", Subhuti replied. "A true disciple entering the stream would not think of themselves as a separate person that could be entering anything. Only that disciple who does not differentiate themselves from others, who has no regard for name, shape, sound, odor, taste, touch or for any quality can truly be called a disciple who has entered the stream."
Exactly Wilfred. There is no self, all phenomena are selfless phenomena. These aggregates, this mind-body complex, is a conditioned process. It is to see this process and all others as a stream of change alone, and not of a self or consisting of a self, that is the true fruit of stream-entry. That is why it has come to be known as such. That is why there is nothing to be sought, and no one to seek.
They say that most stream-entrants speak to being pulled forward toward enlightenment more than by their effort. This is true because there is no one that is trying; there is no one that is exerting effort. Dependent Origination is working upon all things, and life is unfolding of its own accord in due "time". Up until this point of stream-entry, such notions as will and choice are a part of the mind. They may still be present, but a fuller understanding of Non-Self leads toward the next stage of enlightenment.
It is not that one who has entered the stream is bound for enlightenment, or that they have gained anything. It is to see that they have been on the right track and what will be, will be. All phenomena are conditioned phenomena, selfless and subject to Dependent Origination.
It would depend upon one's tradition whether they will see this clearly. The stream-entry event does not create perfect understanding. If that were so, the stream-entrant would be an Arahant. This is why the term "most" crops up even when speaking of those who should have the same knowledge. They do not. There are things that become a given, but things yet held onto by a self, including the traditions that one follows. I do think that all Buddhist traditions present the knowledge and method whereby one may find release; just each differently, and always dependent upon conditions.
I only wish there were a convention that was recognized that I might not have to use such terms as "I", "me", "mine", "myself", "Stephen", or others. Even the Buddha had to call himself something, "the Tathagata", and even that conveys the wrong implications. There is no teacher, no master, no student. When the Buddha realized all of this, he withdrew from using his name, and chose the most appropriate word that he could that conveyed what he was doing (teaching); yet it still implied a self. Difficult to get around it, I guess.
I say... that's just one opinion. When I came to this forum in the first place, I found that it was taboo to admit such things as stream-entry. I can understand the reasons for that, firstly being an imperfect stream-entry that does not understand the not-I reality, secondly being that many may claim an attainment they have not had (which is in monastic code reason for banishment), the back and forth "Yes I did. / No you didn't!" arguing, and others. Yet I don't think so. I don't think that there is more potential for negative than for positive.
If we are conditioned to not admit these things freely and honestly, when it is finally time to do so, then everyone else goes on believing that it is difficult. That there are no enlightened beings around except perhaps in monasteries after studying and practicing for 40 years. Such is not the case. If anything, I hope to inspire... hope.
The entire occurrence, from when I began studying Buddhism to when this stream-entry event happened, took around 6 months. It is now going on about 10 months, and I can see how closely the next stage approaches, all of its own accord. I'm not saying that everyone will be able to make quick progress, but that it is possible. The event/experience of stream-entry is a marker, not an attainment for there is nothing to attain. If this is your experience, then you're on the way toward liberation. The next step is to obtain a more complete understanding of Non-Self, and in so doing come upon a more complete understanding of Dependent Origination.
Don't let anyone tell you that you can not achieve your goals. If the conditions are right, it will happen. That you've found Buddhism is a good sign, because only Buddhism (tradition notwithstanding) teaches the path that the Buddha exhorted, which is meant to set up the right conditions for awakening. You are here... Exactly where you are supposed to be.
Call it fate; call it Destiny. Everything that exists now is based on the immediately preceding conditions.
"Monks, there are these three sectarian guilds that — when cross-examined, pressed for reasons & rebuked by wise people — even though they may explain otherwise, remain stuck in [a doctrine of] inaction. Which three?
I am neither of those things, for there is no self. As to this non-self, it has only entered the first Jhana, and only a limited number of times. The longest of those was between 3-4 hours. After that I have no had occasion or desire to do so again, for the desire to regain that bliss is a trap.
Nor would I call myself a Sotapanna, for that implies a static "thing" exists. Rather, the "I" that I use conventionally underwent the stream-entry event and has undergone much further change since that point toward the next stage of awakening.
I anticipated your rebuke Dhamma Dhatu, for your understanding is that of a scholar, and out of self-based assessment of your understanding you choose to deny that which I have stated. You did the same when I finally entered the first Jhana.
Yours is an extremely sticky conditioning, DD. If you are unable to extricate yourself from confusing the words for the wisdom, the conditions will not be right for your own progress. I say this out of friendship, so don't take it the wrong way. But do, by all means, take it the right way. Either that, or I entreat you to remain silently contemplative.
I stated the same, that some were stuck in such a way, when it was my intention to leave this forum and seek out a quiet place where I might reach toward full enlightenment. Such did not come to pass, but I "put it out there" hoping that you among others would read it. This was a selfless act, and in your case fruitless. Let it be otherwise.
I haven't been boasting, I have been explaining. It is your wrong view that perceives a boast. It is your wrong view, and your attachment to constructs of self, that leads to your negative replies.
You perceive a boast because you perceive that there is one who boasts, and as you do not have the same experiences, this causes a reflexive and selfish reaction. I entreat you a second time to remain silently contemplative. Each time you act out of self and lash out, which is clearly what you are doing to any observer, you only shed more light on that self. Let it be light that you can see, and let it show you where you need to put the most effort.
FYI I did not enter the first Jhana until after stream-entry. Stream-entry occurred before I came to this forum, and afterward my mind tended toward entering such a state (only toward, not actually getting there) and was causing me sleeping problems. It eventually quieted down, so when weeks later I chose to enter the first Jhana, I was easily able to and to spend hours in that state.
Your issue with me seems to be that you did not believe me then, because you did not know of my former experiences, and you are thinking the delusion is mine. It is not. That delusion is yours in this case. Don't worry though, I don't take it personally (pun intended).
I'll be the first to say that stream-entry is not perfect, and does not eradicate the self, only exposes it. That being said, will you please stop that? When I use the terms such as "I", it is out of convention and not because I think there is a self to any part of what constitutes this mind-body complex.
Your self is showing, Dhatu. Your self, and your ignorance, and it's not okay... it's unhealthy and unwarranted behavior on a public forum. If you're just going to keep acting in such a way, you should leave it be.
I stated the same, that some were stuck in such a way, when it was my intention to leave this forum and seek out a quiet place where I might reach toward full enlightenment. Such did not come to pass, but I "put it out there" hoping that you among others would read it. This was a selfless act....
No one here is boasting. No one ever was boasting on this thread, yet you again take that up as the reason why you are posting negative replies. Check yourself.
Consider. I maintain that the stream-entry event occurred before I came to the forum; I could even prove that such was my mind if needed because an accounting was offered to a moderator at the time. You have just reminded me of something I had not thought of, though I'm sure you are right. I must at some point have related that you should enter a monastery. Yet, I did so after the stream-entry event. I may have had you wrong, and it's quite clear that I offended you, but isn't it likely that what is going on now between us is a result of that?
There is no need for any spitefulness on either side. I offer peace, you've offered vehemence. I stung you, and you wish to sting back. There's no one here to sting, truly no one to offend. If I do get offended at all, a moment's thought is all it takes to reduce any anger to rubble. I am not yet selfless, but that is the direction that I'm heading. This is not the selfless state; that is not what stream-entry consists of, but what it leads to. One who has gone beyond this point is able to know the self for what it is, and conditions lead toward further awakening which eradicates that self.
If we can't be friends, let's at least be cordial. Otherwise, who is it that looks to be in the wrong? There's no need. Let's just call it what it is, and leave it be. We're all in this boat together, and moreover we are the boat. Let the stream carry us, which it will regardless of our imperfections.
Sup Deshy? You know, the thought came to mind if you combine The Matrix (free your mind) with Donnie Darko (seeing the path you're on as you walk it), it offers some conventional insight in lieu of the meditative aspect. Whatcha think? Movies... lol. Not just entertainment!
If you really are as you say, people should probably be more respectful, but this is the internet; I guess returned messiah's aint very well received on Christian forums either.
I understand "stream-entry" as being an psychological/spiritual change that occurs when apprehends anataman, conditioned arising and many to many causation (DO). Perhaps to see the causal stream and then to see that all things are just changes in that stream and then to acknowledge that all "we" are are these same kind of changes, nothing more.
I guess if we strip out your revalationary tones we are similar in view on this?
The stream-entry event is (slightly) different for different people, but leads to the same mind-state. It all depends upon conditions; some conditions have already been met, and the ones that are not but are found during insight-meditation trigger the event, at which point it all "comes together". The realization that there was no permanence to be found in any aspect of the mind-body complex, no permanence in any phenomena whatsoever, and that all things arise and fall based on conditions (Dependent Arising, which I now call Dependent Origination b/c it's more common)... became knowledge born of the mind. Just as the eyes may behold a sunset while the warmth radiates on the skin, so too can the mind "see" and thus "know", and as effective as burning one's hand on the stove is the lesson learned.
Accounts differ slightly, but it the after-effect of the event, the state of mind that the individual then finds themselves in, that is of true importance. The event itself is only one of many conditioned moments along the path. What the stream-entrant knows, with unshakable clarity and conviction, is the stream of causality. Dependent Origination. It is not a perfect knowledge, but it leads to a greater understanding of the rest of the teachings and ultimately of itself. There are also more minor effects, which my experience and state of mind are all in accord with, but they are hardly worth mentioning. I've never believed anything in my life, and so no religion has ever filled the void; I certainly would not have said for certain what this event was without much verification afterward.
If I've been "un-humble" in any way I apologize to the readers-at-large. I don't expect or desire respect, but a lack of disrespect would be nice. When we are affected by self-centered desire, this can be difficult to see, and equally difficult to show another.
Your understanding agrees with my understanding and experience, yes. The beautiful thing is a fresh set of eyes. Though I don't believe in rebirth literally, and it can be viewed metaphorically/literally as a moment-to-moment occurrence, the "stages" of awakening can also be seen as a rebirth of the mind. A mind that has undergone significant change; has abandoned fetters through replacing ignorance with self-realization, i.e. wisdom. What must be remembered, however, is that this change does not occur all at once; the event is the completion of one major part of the puzzle, and the entire puzzle is not complete until the full enlightenment of Nirvana.
Your understanding agrees with my understanding and experience, yes. ... A mind that has undergone significant change; has abandoned fetters through replacing ignorance with self-realization, i.e. wisdom.
I would imagine then that you are in a similar place to many on this forum. Most folk here would have similar understandings to you, and appreciations of the experiences involved.
For example, an understanding of emptiness, DO or 4NTs brings about a profound change in anyone who really "gets" these truths; which could be anyone, after-all.
So I guess what I would like to ask is what is it about your experience that is distinct from the experiences of others when they get the "penny drops" realizations about Buddha Dharma?
If I understand karma correctly then surely it is our own actions that determine our future. The argument that everything is predetermined is really a good excuse for any unskilful actions one might do, but in reality it is the person themself who can choose to do an action or not and the way they live their life and hence contribute to their present circumstances. Someone could fool themself into thinking it was destiny, but they cannot fool their karam. This is simple scientific and Buddhist logic. Just think about an action you did recently that led to you feeling unhappy and reflect did you have a choice, could you have done it differently. If you are more mindful of the actions you take in your life Stephen you will see that you do have a choice in your actions and how you shape your own future.
So I guess what I would like to ask is what is it about your experience that is distinct from the experiences of others when they get the "penny drops" realizations about Buddha Dharma?namaste
That's a good question, but one that I've answered already throughout this thread. I had a very full understanding of the Buddhist teachings (from multiple sides, not just one tradition) prior to the stream-entry event, but no matter how much confidence I may have had... it was still belief.
Belief, at least about some things, was removed utterly and completely at the point of the event. It is one thing to understand, and yet another to know. To know generates new conditions that lead to a fuller understanding and less "selfish" desire and outlook on life, regardless of whether one reaches a further level or not.
If I were not afforded the right conditions to reach that next level, I would be content in living a life helping others, to help condition the future-state to the best of my ability. Anything that is done for myself, and only myself, is lost upon dissolution of the aggregates. As it stands, I do hope the conditions will be right for further progress. I have stated before that I think I am close to that next level, but I could "die" tonight for all I know.
This is the path of seeing for yourself. That is the difference, and it does make all the difference.
zidangus: You speak as if we "own" karma. The teachings about about our own karma are conceptual, and testify to the thoughts and actions that occur as a part of the process and not by a "self". They show us that Dependent Origination takes those conditions and transforms them into new ones, and that if one's karma is of a skillful nature those new conditions will affect wholesome change. If you truly believe that there is an owner, I encourage you to study harder. If you're just an alt of a current member just now created to sow discord (and forgive me if not, because one who wore the guise of the malcontent did cause some unnecessary discord), then I encourage you to re-evaluate "your" karma. Either way, your opening statement of "If I understand karma correctly" is a good one for you to ponder.
To understand karma properly, a better understanding of Non-Self would be helpful. There is no doer; no self; no one that thinks or acts.
~
Belief, at least about some things, was removed utterly and completely at the point of the event. It is one thing to understand, and yet another to know. To know generates new conditions that lead to a fuller understanding and less "selfish" desire and outlook on life, regardless of whether one reaches a further level or not.
OK, I get that. But I am sure there are many here who would also claim to know these things, they are after all, what dharma practice and understanding is about.
I am still in the dark about the essence of your stream entry epiphany.
You could just say "ahh you have to experience it to understand it" but that doesn't seem like you way (thank goodness!).
That's true, and it's a difficult question to answer to your satisfaction. It is the difference between someone telling you that the sun feels warm upon your skin (while you live underground, a mutant or something lol) and for you to actually experience it for yourself. That is why the event has two levels of importance; as a "marker", so that you may know where you are on the path, and also as the moment where realization ensues and belief/faith becomes wisdom.
That kinda sounds like "you just had to be there", but without proper reference I can't think of a way to explain it to you. It's like trying to tell someone what a lime pie tastes like who has never tasted a lime, or the texture of a pineapple as felt by the tongue who has never eaten pineapple.
They say that you can not know if one is enlightened or not except by simply knowing them long enough, and even then it may be uncertain. It is certain for me, but I can not give that certainty to you any more than I can give you the wisdom that insight gave me; only the best conceptual knowledge that may be helpful as seen from this perspective. It is just the same that no one can tell you that you are enlightened; they can only believe or not.
So I guess what I would like to ask is what is it about your experience that is distinct from the experiences of others when they get the "penny drops" realizations about Buddha Dharma?
I anticipated your rebuke Dhamma Dhatu, for your understanding is that of a scholar
Belief, at least about some things, was removed utterly and completely at the point of the event. It is one thing to understand, and yet another to know. To know generates new conditions that lead to a fuller understanding and less "selfish" desire and outlook on life, regardless of whether one reaches a further level or not.
I stated the same, that some were stuck in such a way, when it was my intention to leave this forum and seek out a quiet place where I might reach toward full enlightenment.
I don't intend to sound that way, but ask yourself... if someone tells you that they know something that you don't, even out of honesty and selfless intent, do you simply scoff and rebuke? Did not many people bear anger toward the Buddha that he would be so presumptuous to claim that his path was the superior path to liberation?
Where we remove our selves from the equation, there is truth.
I could be mean, condescending, etc., just to show you how different that is from simply speaking in an open and honest way. It wouldn't be natural though. That isn't why I'm here, of my nature, or what I would like to engender understanding of.
That's true, and it's a difficult question to answer to your satisfaction...
That kinda sounds like "you just had to be there", but without proper reference I can't think of a way to explain it to you. It's like trying to tell someone what a lime pie tastes like who has never tasted a lime, or the texture of a pineapple as felt by the tongue who has never eaten pineapple.
Not quite...
To use your analogy...
I am saying many people on this forum may have eaten lime pie and yet you still seem to be telling them what lime pie tastes like...
This "Lime pie" of which you speak seems to be the bread and butter of Buddhism...
That is all the difference. Buddhism describes the bread and butter (reality), but the stream-entry event is the tasting of a part of that (at least Dependent Origination), which creates complete conviction where belief once stood in its place. That is why it is difficult, probably not even possible, to "convince" anyone of enlightenment. What it is that I have that others may not is based on the evidence (self-realization or self-knowledge) where it's just a theory to others.
Until this happens, there are areas of doubt in the mind that without being sure of... will not allow progress. One will not find the second level of enlightenment without the first. One will not find the first without all requisite conditions. The conceptual teachings, and the path, are meant to bring about those conditions. Even conditionality leads up to the point of finding out about Buddhism in the first place.
To study Buddhism is, say, to understand the atom which no one can show you. It may make perfect sense, even seem as if nothing else could be the truth, but it is all conceptual... all belief of some form, until realization ensues and the "fruit" of awakening is that unshakable conviction, that wisdom, that needs no belief.
It's almost a funny situation.
It was a predictable outcome that some might refute such a claim, but if you trace those disputes back to the very source you find conditionality, and thought/action of self; and that is Non-Self. It is not one who enters the stream who would dispute that others had entered the stream, but one who had not may dispute such a thing because they are yet in the veil of delusion. That isn't meant to be offensive only true. There is only one other person on the forums that I've seen claim the stream-entry event, and you don't see me questioning them about it. Such a thing can only be certain to the one who has experienced it, or to another who has both experienced it and has had extensive conversation with the other (and even that can not be certain).
All of it fits together, and each of us see a different view of the puzzle. I certainly don't see it in the fullest, else I would be more awake to it already. If one were to read every post in this thread, even those replying to posts that were removed, one might gather some very useful information to help them on their path. That was the point. That is the point.
You're assuming it's just a theory to others. Just as you assume DD's practice and knowledge is all scholary. You're acting like you're above us all and almost as if we're a hindrence to your practice. :crazy:
You're assuming it's just a theory to others. Just as you assume DD's practice and knowledge is all scholary. You're acting like you're above us all and almost as if we're a hindrence to your practice. :crazy:
Not all all Mundus. We're all in this together, metaphorically speaking.
I never said I was above anyone. You see, that is your perception. That is what you "feel" of the situation that one says they know such and such that can only be known at such and such a point. It is what it is, but it is how the self perceives that causes a state of unsatisfactoriness.
To find offense in that which is not meant to give offense; to find boasting in that which is not a boast; these are the things born of self. That is all, and I'm not offended because you've come to these conclusions, but I want you to understand why you came to them.
To understand the why fully is to understand the selfless. The reason I "came out" and admitted this is that there are some who may benefit from hearing the perspective of one who has not only studied and practiced, but found results. These few would have greater confidence, knowing that this perspective is one seen from where they wish to be themselves some day.
Remember that which you take as refuge, for the same are my refuges, and do not let the self throw you a curve ball and show you that you do not truly believe that. That is why you are here, why I am here, and it is worthy to know.
I never said you did. You see, that is your perception. That is what you "feel" of the situation that one says they know such and such that can only be known at such and such a point. It is what it is, but it is how the self perceives that causes a state of unsatisfactoriness.
I said your behaviour is indicative of it.
Naturally, this is just my perception, and I recognize it as such and can assure you it's not causing a "state of unsatisfactoriness." :crazy: I'm simply making an observation based on your remarks, such as those I quoted above and those in your "fare ye well" Thread:
There are a lot of people that are "lost" here.....
there are some who are lost also in mistaking their vast knowledge (scholarly, some might say) of the textual teachings for the actual wisdom gained through the awakening experience. All of these types are stuck in the mud because of attachments; attachments they must let go of on their own steam.
There are a few here that I would call friends; that are humble, always willing to help, speak rightly and wisely. Of these I would think two have also attained stream-entry, but as they would not say so I would not say it for them (besides, I could be wrong).
To find offense in that which is not meant to give offense; to find boasting in that which is not a boast; these are the things born of self.
Firstly, I never said I was offended by what you said or thought you were boasting. I never said I thought you were intending to do either of those things, either.
But perception is not born of self. Clinging to perception as objective reality is born of self.
That is all, and I'm not offended because you've come to these conclusions, but I want you to understand why you came to them.
The reason I "came out" and admitted this is that there are some who may benefit from hearing the perspective of one who has not only studied and practiced, but found results. These few would have greater confidence, knowing that this perspective is one seen from where they wish to be themselves some day.
I really don't know why you continue to babble on defending yourself like this. I never said anything about your claiming stream-entry. Only you yourself can know that for absolute certain - of course only you can also delude yourself into believing you've hit that road mark. It's irrelevant to me. As you said, it's nothing special. Yet you continue to assume that nearly everyone else here is not posting from experience and only regurgitating scholarly knowledge, and you are the only one to have experienced the teachings directly and attained stream-entry. DD, for example, who is very well-versed in the suttas, quotes them, I imagine, because they perfectly illustrate the understandings he has gained through personal practice. He's also able to relate to others' situations and provide them with relevant Buddhist teachings in an appropriate way. You're mistaking his tendency to quote the suttas, I imagine, as "merely scholarly knowledge." That is your perception. Don't get all selfy and cling to it as reality. :buck:
Comments
Now this is the kind of contribution we can all hope to live up to.
From the moment you were "born" you were nothing more than a set of aggregates that had come together because of conditions, and nothing in your life experience has been of "you". It makes us feel better to imagine we have some measure of control, but how really could we? That is a selfish, and self-based, assessment. Buddhism is about seeing reality as it truly is, which leads in most cases to eradication of this illusory self through skillful means up to Arahantship or Bodhisattvahood. There is truly no birth, and no death; only change. This change is the stream we are a part of, not separate from, and which is all-pervasive as what makes up our minds and bodies as well.
We are not only carried forth by the stream; we are part of it.
~
You don't have to believe in Destiny, because some of you are incorrectly taking me to mean that it's been determined beforehand (rather than determined by each successive moment of change). What I will encourage if anyone doesn't agree with me is merely a thorough understanding of both Dependent Origination and Non-Self, and to try... just to try... to make sure that understanding is as complete as possible by looking at it from the angles of all traditions. If it makes you uncomfortable to think about, read it again; that's how you get through difficult suttas, isn't it? What makes you uncomfortable is important to understand.
Good luck in that one. And no this isn't a pointless thread. It's a very demanding thread, and I didn't expect many would agree so I kept it to the Experienced section of the forum and added a (Not For The Lighthearted) thingy to the title. It is what it is. I actually expected the majority to disagree, because it's a difficult concept to cope with as I've explained it; yet, I didn't do it for my health ya'know...
~
I understand DO (your saying 'DO and no-self' seems redundant) I think once a person dissolves enough self, they see that at the level of "no death, no birth" etc, that there are very few conceptions that stick, making little of this discussion reasonable.
Don't forget that there is freedom from this and the path... if you're going to speak the 4NT, speak them all
If you're saying that the self is composed only of patterns, and therefore it is bound by preset patterns, well... that's a tough one to make stick. The ego doesn't operate independently, its part of our overall experience. Once the ego is tamed, its not as though we become zombies.
With warmth,
Matt
I'm not saying that Non-Self is redundant; just the opposite. I'm saying that in order to understand one or the other fully, both must be understood. They are pieces of a puzzle; you have to identify the pieces first, and then you find out that when they fit together they create a clearer and more complete image.
Find in life anything that is not the result of the immediately preceding moment. Find anything that Dependent Origination has not driven forth; and please don't let it be quantum indeterminacy.
Even freedom, liberation, is conditioned. Even the state of freedom is governed by conditions, and even the state of the aggregates after "death" is conditioned. Round and round we go, and frustration follows all along the way; yet some may see.
"Whoever sees Dependent Origination sees the Dhamma; whoever sees the Dhamma sees Dependent Origination." [M.I.191]
And yeah, that's just about the first time I've ever quoted from a direct source and given the sutta. It's not important if the sutta contains historically accurate wording, but the message. I've also seen "He who sees Dependent Arising sees me; he who sees me sees Dependent Arising." as attributed to the Buddha himself.
~
a video game where you would have to get the enlighten zombie monks...
But how can there be so many zombie monks all of a sudden?
And the game take you along a journey where you discover the source of their enlightenment.
You eventually discover that the mastermind behind it all was Eckhart Tolle who wrote a book on behalf of the Dalai Lama, after preparing the battlefield by promoting Buddhism for 50 years, softening up the minds of millions, they finally released their wildly popular book in which you find the key to easy enlightenment.
Their goal was to free Tibet with an army of zombie monks.
And of course your weapon would be a Pali-Canon. Oh yes I did!
Few have known that the event of stream-entry occurred for me in January before I even came to this forum. What I have seen, and what I know, are those things that one on the Buddhist path is attempting to see, to know. That there are more that disagree with me than agree with me is not a mark of error on my part; it is a mark of the difference between the mind of one who has reached such a stage and the minds of those who have not.
At the event of stream-entry, I gained unshakable knowledge of Dependent Arising (Origination), along with that which may be associated with this process; impermanence, selflessness of all phenomena, kamma as the conditions present for change to occur, dukkha in both selfish and universal terms, and others. My confidence that the Buddha unraveled the truth and that his methods would lead to liberation was no longer dependent upon faith, or belief, or the words of others.
It is the process that occurs after this event, which started before the event and continues on, that has brought me to this point. Conditions have led to a deeper and more complete understanding of both Dependent Origination and Non-Self, to the point where my mind is on the verge, the very nexus between the Sotapanna and the Sakadagami.
It is only a matter of meditation, conditions allowing, that will bring about the unshakable insight that will weaken additional fetters. I can already almost see this; the world of my mind wavers in my waking hours because the wisdom I've gained already, and the further knowledge I've gathered based upon it, are very close to another event.
These events are not attainments. They are not achievements. They are not something to point to yourself and say "hey, look at me, I did it!". It is difficult to even identify the self anymore. Each time I use pronouns, terms of possessiveness, or even my name to refer to myself I am painfully aware that they are only used on the common level and there is no self to be found.
This is no driver, only that which is driven, and it is not self. All phenomena are selfless, driven by Dependent Origination, and if I had any hope that some might understand (and I did), then it was a mistake in that sense. Yet, it happened; I posted this thread, and predictably found disagreement. So be it. It was going to happen, outside of the illusion of control.
Long ago I read on these forums that it was unlikely that there were any enlightened beings taking part in the discussions. That is probably true. It is likely however that there are at least two now on NewBuddhist that are in the same mind-range, between Sotapanna and Sakadagami.
I would invite the other, or others, to share in this discussion. Perhaps my understanding is yet flawed. Where one may find imperfection, together we may find the absolute.
~
And that, aMatt, answers your question also. I am not seeking anything. Life is happening, and I am seeing it. It's very likely that this will lead to higher stages of awakening, assuming I live that long. It is not a guarantee, and I'm actually more at peace right now than I've ever been. There is only conditionality; to be able to see that is peace. It is not the ultimate peace - that is Nirvana/Nibbana.
All of this, right here, is a part of the process.
~
There are 2 modes of seeing, both are valid.
The 1st we are all familiar since the beginning of the sentience, what I call the survival mode.
The 2nd mode is to experience life "directly" without any preconception, stories or ideals. This is exemplified in "in the seeing, just the seeing". Direct experience does not supply an experiencer. There is only the present moment as time is just a concept.
The concept of self, others and the universe are dependently coarisen. All are fabricated or concocted and ultimately empty.
In a sense we live in a dream but this dream neither exist nor not exist but is dependently arisen with "contact between object and sense base" and the rest of it.
Free will is important. It is a concept that gives many, many people a way to empower themselves into change. That it is ultimately irrelevant is what is irrelevant
With warmth,
Matt
clever.
You think you are acting out of free will and by your own choice and actions. That itself is the delusion. There is no one acting. The goal of Buddhism is to not only see this truth of selfless nature of all phenomena, but to bring the mind into complete harmony with that truth. To see selflessness, know that you are selfless, and then to become selfless.
Tick tock tick tock. Understand it's only a matter of conditions.
~
They say that most stream-entrants speak to being pulled forward toward enlightenment more than by their effort. This is true because there is no one that is trying; there is no one that is exerting effort. Dependent Origination is working upon all things, and life is unfolding of its own accord in due "time". Up until this point of stream-entry, such notions as will and choice are a part of the mind. They may still be present, but a fuller understanding of Non-Self leads toward the next stage of enlightenment.
It is not that one who has entered the stream is bound for enlightenment, or that they have gained anything. It is to see that they have been on the right track and what will be, will be. All phenomena are conditioned phenomena, selfless and subject to Dependent Origination.
It would depend upon one's tradition whether they will see this clearly. The stream-entry event does not create perfect understanding. If that were so, the stream-entrant would be an Arahant. This is why the term "most" crops up even when speaking of those who should have the same knowledge. They do not. There are things that become a given, but things yet held onto by a self, including the traditions that one follows. I do think that all Buddhist traditions present the knowledge and method whereby one may find release; just each differently, and always dependent upon conditions.
I only wish there were a convention that was recognized that I might not have to use such terms as "I", "me", "mine", "myself", "Stephen", or others. Even the Buddha had to call himself something, "the Tathagata", and even that conveys the wrong implications. There is no teacher, no master, no student. When the Buddha realized all of this, he withdrew from using his name, and chose the most appropriate word that he could that conveyed what he was doing (teaching); yet it still implied a self. Difficult to get around it, I guess.
~
better to help others staying behind the curtain:winkc:
If we are conditioned to not admit these things freely and honestly, when it is finally time to do so, then everyone else goes on believing that it is difficult. That there are no enlightened beings around except perhaps in monasteries after studying and practicing for 40 years. Such is not the case. If anything, I hope to inspire... hope.
The entire occurrence, from when I began studying Buddhism to when this stream-entry event happened, took around 6 months. It is now going on about 10 months, and I can see how closely the next stage approaches, all of its own accord. I'm not saying that everyone will be able to make quick progress, but that it is possible. The event/experience of stream-entry is a marker, not an attainment for there is nothing to attain. If this is your experience, then you're on the way toward liberation. The next step is to obtain a more complete understanding of Non-Self, and in so doing come upon a more complete understanding of Dependent Origination.
Don't let anyone tell you that you can not achieve your goals. If the conditions are right, it will happen. That you've found Buddhism is a good sign, because only Buddhism (tradition notwithstanding) teaches the path that the Buddha exhorted, which is meant to set up the right conditions for awakening. You are here... Exactly where you are supposed to be.
~
The answer can be found at this link.
:coffee:
Nor would I call myself a Sotapanna, for that implies a static "thing" exists. Rather, the "I" that I use conventionally underwent the stream-entry event and has undergone much further change since that point toward the next stage of awakening.
I anticipated your rebuke Dhamma Dhatu, for your understanding is that of a scholar, and out of self-based assessment of your understanding you choose to deny that which I have stated. You did the same when I finally entered the first Jhana.
Yours is an extremely sticky conditioning, DD. If you are unable to extricate yourself from confusing the words for the wisdom, the conditions will not be right for your own progress. I say this out of friendship, so don't take it the wrong way. But do, by all means, take it the right way. Either that, or I entreat you to remain silently contemplative.
I stated the same, that some were stuck in such a way, when it was my intention to leave this forum and seek out a quiet place where I might reach toward full enlightenment. Such did not come to pass, but I "put it out there" hoping that you among others would read it. This was a selfless act, and in your case fruitless. Let it be otherwise.
~
You perceive a boast because you perceive that there is one who boasts, and as you do not have the same experiences, this causes a reflexive and selfish reaction. I entreat you a second time to remain silently contemplative. Each time you act out of self and lash out, which is clearly what you are doing to any observer, you only shed more light on that self. Let it be light that you can see, and let it show you where you need to put the most effort.
FYI I did not enter the first Jhana until after stream-entry. Stream-entry occurred before I came to this forum, and afterward my mind tended toward entering such a state (only toward, not actually getting there) and was causing me sleeping problems. It eventually quieted down, so when weeks later I chose to enter the first Jhana, I was easily able to and to spend hours in that state.
Your issue with me seems to be that you did not believe me then, because you did not know of my former experiences, and you are thinking the delusion is mine. It is not. That delusion is yours in this case. Don't worry though, I don't take it personally (pun intended).
~
It occurs to the mind. In both conventional & ultimate language, stream entry occurs to the mind.
Your self is showing, Dhatu. Your self, and your ignorance, and it's not okay... it's unhealthy and unwarranted behavior on a public forum. If you're just going to keep acting in such a way, you should leave it be.
~
~
There is no need for any spitefulness on either side. I offer peace, you've offered vehemence. I stung you, and you wish to sting back. There's no one here to sting, truly no one to offend. If I do get offended at all, a moment's thought is all it takes to reduce any anger to rubble. I am not yet selfless, but that is the direction that I'm heading. This is not the selfless state; that is not what stream-entry consists of, but what it leads to. One who has gone beyond this point is able to know the self for what it is, and conditions lead toward further awakening which eradicates that self.
If we can't be friends, let's at least be cordial. Otherwise, who is it that looks to be in the wrong? There's no need. Let's just call it what it is, and leave it be. We're all in this boat together, and moreover we are the boat. Let the stream carry us, which it will regardless of our imperfections.
~
<a href='http://www.mysmiley.net/free-cool-smileys.php' title='cool smileys'><img src='http://serve.mysmiley.net/tongue/tongue0011.gif' alt='cool smileys' border='0'></a>
Tee-hee
I don't think you have been boasting, but can see why others might.
Recognizing one's egolessness doesn't necessitate one's humility.
If you really are as you say, people should probably be more respectful, but this is the internet; I guess returned messiah's aint very well received on Christian forums either.
I understand "stream-entry" as being an psychological/spiritual change that occurs when apprehends anataman, conditioned arising and many to many causation (DO). Perhaps to see the causal stream and then to see that all things are just changes in that stream and then to acknowledge that all "we" are are these same kind of changes, nothing more.
I guess if we strip out your revalationary tones we are similar in view on this?
namaste
Accounts differ slightly, but it the after-effect of the event, the state of mind that the individual then finds themselves in, that is of true importance. The event itself is only one of many conditioned moments along the path. What the stream-entrant knows, with unshakable clarity and conviction, is the stream of causality. Dependent Origination. It is not a perfect knowledge, but it leads to a greater understanding of the rest of the teachings and ultimately of itself. There are also more minor effects, which my experience and state of mind are all in accord with, but they are hardly worth mentioning. I've never believed anything in my life, and so no religion has ever filled the void; I certainly would not have said for certain what this event was without much verification afterward.
If I've been "un-humble" in any way I apologize to the readers-at-large. I don't expect or desire respect, but a lack of disrespect would be nice.
Your understanding agrees with my understanding and experience, yes. The beautiful thing is a fresh set of eyes. Though I don't believe in rebirth literally, and it can be viewed metaphorically/literally as a moment-to-moment occurrence, the "stages" of awakening can also be seen as a rebirth of the mind. A mind that has undergone significant change; has abandoned fetters through replacing ignorance with self-realization, i.e. wisdom. What must be remembered, however, is that this change does not occur all at once; the event is the completion of one major part of the puzzle, and the entire puzzle is not complete until the full enlightenment of Nirvana.
~
I would imagine then that you are in a similar place to many on this forum. Most folk here would have similar understandings to you, and appreciations of the experiences involved.
For example, an understanding of emptiness, DO or 4NTs brings about a profound change in anyone who really "gets" these truths; which could be anyone, after-all.
So I guess what I would like to ask is what is it about your experience that is distinct from the experiences of others when they get the "penny drops" realizations about Buddha Dharma?
namaste
That's a good question, but one that I've answered already throughout this thread. I had a very full understanding of the Buddhist teachings (from multiple sides, not just one tradition) prior to the stream-entry event, but no matter how much confidence I may have had... it was still belief.
Belief, at least about some things, was removed utterly and completely at the point of the event. It is one thing to understand, and yet another to know. To know generates new conditions that lead to a fuller understanding and less "selfish" desire and outlook on life, regardless of whether one reaches a further level or not.
If I were not afforded the right conditions to reach that next level, I would be content in living a life helping others, to help condition the future-state to the best of my ability. Anything that is done for myself, and only myself, is lost upon dissolution of the aggregates. As it stands, I do hope the conditions will be right for further progress. I have stated before that I think I am close to that next level, but I could "die" tonight for all I know.
This is the path of seeing for yourself. That is the difference, and it does make all the difference.
zidangus: You speak as if we "own" karma. The teachings about about our own karma are conceptual, and testify to the thoughts and actions that occur as a part of the process and not by a "self". They show us that Dependent Origination takes those conditions and transforms them into new ones, and that if one's karma is of a skillful nature those new conditions will affect wholesome change. If you truly believe that there is an owner, I encourage you to study harder. If you're just an alt of a current member just now created to sow discord (and forgive me if not, because one who wore the guise of the malcontent did cause some unnecessary discord), then I encourage you to re-evaluate "your" karma. Either way, your opening statement of "If I understand karma correctly" is a good one for you to ponder.
To understand karma properly, a better understanding of Non-Self would be helpful. There is no doer; no self; no one that thinks or acts.
~
OK, I get that. But I am sure there are many here who would also claim to know these things, they are after all, what dharma practice and understanding is about.
I am still in the dark about the essence of your stream entry epiphany.
You could just say "ahh you have to experience it to understand it" but that doesn't seem like you way (thank goodness!).
namaste
That kinda sounds like "you just had to be there", but without proper reference I can't think of a way to explain it to you.
They say that you can not know if one is enlightened or not except by simply knowing them long enough, and even then it may be uncertain. It is certain for me, but I can not give that certainty to you any more than I can give you the wisdom that insight gave me; only the best conceptual knowledge that may be helpful as seen from this perspective. It is just the same that no one can tell you that you are enlightened; they can only believe or not.
~
I don't intend to sound that way, but ask yourself... if someone tells you that they know something that you don't, even out of honesty and selfless intent, do you simply scoff and rebuke? Did not many people bear anger toward the Buddha that he would be so presumptuous to claim that his path was the superior path to liberation?
Where we remove our selves from the equation, there is truth.
I could be mean, condescending, etc., just to show you how different that is from simply speaking in an open and honest way.
Not quite...
To use your analogy...
I am saying many people on this forum may have eaten lime pie and yet you still seem to be telling them what lime pie tastes like...
This "Lime pie" of which you speak seems to be the bread and butter of Buddhism...
namaste
Until this happens, there are areas of doubt in the mind that without being sure of... will not allow progress. One will not find the second level of enlightenment without the first. One will not find the first without all requisite conditions. The conceptual teachings, and the path, are meant to bring about those conditions. Even conditionality leads up to the point of finding out about Buddhism in the first place.
To study Buddhism is, say, to understand the atom which no one can show you. It may make perfect sense, even seem as if nothing else could be the truth, but it is all conceptual... all belief of some form, until realization ensues and the "fruit" of awakening is that unshakable conviction, that wisdom, that needs no belief.
It's almost a funny situation.
It was a predictable outcome that some might refute such a claim, but if you trace those disputes back to the very source you find conditionality, and thought/action of self; and that is Non-Self. It is not one who enters the stream who would dispute that others had entered the stream, but one who had not may dispute such a thing because they are yet in the veil of delusion. That isn't meant to be offensive only true. There is only one other person on the forums that I've seen claim the stream-entry event, and you don't see me questioning them about it. Such a thing can only be certain to the one who has experienced it, or to another who has both experienced it and has had extensive conversation with the other (and even that can not be certain).
All of it fits together, and each of us see a different view of the puzzle. I certainly don't see it in the fullest, else I would be more awake to it already. If one were to read every post in this thread, even those replying to posts that were removed, one might gather some very useful information to help them on their path. That was the point. That is the point.
.
Well said.
_/\_
.
I never said I was above anyone. You see, that is your perception. That is what you "feel" of the situation that one says they know such and such that can only be known at such and such a point. It is what it is, but it is how the self perceives that causes a state of unsatisfactoriness.
To find offense in that which is not meant to give offense; to find boasting in that which is not a boast; these are the things born of self. That is all, and I'm not offended because you've come to these conclusions, but I want you to understand why you came to them.
To understand the why fully is to understand the selfless. The reason I "came out" and admitted this is that there are some who may benefit from hearing the perspective of one who has not only studied and practiced, but found results. These few would have greater confidence, knowing that this perspective is one seen from where they wish to be themselves some day.
Remember that which you take as refuge, for the same are my refuges, and do not let the self throw you a curve ball and show you that you do not truly believe that. That is why you are here, why I am here, and it is worthy to know.
I said your behaviour is indicative of it.
Naturally, this is just my perception, and I recognize it as such and can assure you it's not causing a "state of unsatisfactoriness." :crazy: I'm simply making an observation based on your remarks, such as those I quoted above and those in your "fare ye well" Thread:
Firstly, I never said I was offended by what you said or thought you were boasting. I never said I thought you were intending to do either of those things, either.
But perception is not born of self. Clinging to perception as objective reality is born of self.
I really don't know why you continue to babble on defending yourself like this. I never said anything about your claiming stream-entry. Only you yourself can know that for absolute certain - of course only you can also delude yourself into believing you've hit that road mark. It's irrelevant to me. As you said, it's nothing special. Yet you continue to assume that nearly everyone else here is not posting from experience and only regurgitating scholarly knowledge, and you are the only one to have experienced the teachings directly and attained stream-entry. DD, for example, who is very well-versed in the suttas, quotes them, I imagine, because they perfectly illustrate the understandings he has gained through personal practice. He's also able to relate to others' situations and provide them with relevant Buddhist teachings in an appropriate way. You're mistaking his tendency to quote the suttas, I imagine, as "merely scholarly knowledge." That is your perception. Don't get all selfy and cling to it as reality.