Ten fetters, Four stages of enlightenment

An Eternal Now SG

Someone asked me to write something about the ten fetters, so this is what I wrote:

In the Pali suttas, the Buddha teaches two types of persons destined towards stream entry, and four types or stages of aryans (awakened beings).

The two types of persons destined towards stream entry is 1) a faith follower, and 2) a dhamma-follower. (Khanda Sutta)

What is a faith follower? A faith follower is someone who accepts by faith and conviction, that all conditioned dharmas/phenomena - that is, the five aggregates, are inconstant, changeable, alterable, arising and passing, and also are unsatisfactory and ungraspable, and that all dharmas (conditioned and unconditioned) are empty of a self. If you have such a view, even by faith, the Buddha assures that you will never be capable of performing non-virtuous deeds that are so serious as to land you in the three lower realms (hell, animal, hungry ghost), and furthermore you are assured to attain stream-entry before you die in this life.

So even if you are not yet awakened but you want some kind of assurance for your liberation, and you have some faith in the Buddha's teachings, get right view (which is the forerunner of the noble eightfold path). That alone is enough for an assurance for your Nirvana. And it isn't really difficult - after all, you don't even need to be an expert in the Madhyamika or the Abhidharma, you just need to understand it and accept it by faith, even that alone serves as an assurance. When you have the right view, your entire life will naturally be directed or led towards realizing this truth, there is no turning back.

And what is a Dharma follower? A Dharma follower is someone who goes a step further than the faith follower, a dharma follower is someone who after "pondering with a modicum of discernment" (that is, after intellectually analyzing and concluding that all phenomena are such, for example, by following the Madhyamika or Abhidharma analysis, or just reading the suttas or sutras) and perhaps with a little experience with vipassana meditation (not to the point of direct realization) has accepted that all the conditioned dharmas are impermanent, (as mentioned above), unsatisfactory, and all dharmas are empty of self. Again, such a person is said to be (as similar to the above) someone who has 'entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill'. He is incapable of doing misdeeds (as mentioned above) that can land him in the three lower realms, he is incapable of dying before he realizes the fruit of stream entry.

Now, those two types of people I have just mentioned above, those are people who only had an intellectual view, one is accepted by faith in the Buddha's dharma, and one is concluded through intellectual analysis. Even these people have the assurance that they will attain awakening (at least the first stage of awakening) before they die. But those are still not awakened people. Awakening starts at stream entry (sotapanna), where you become an aryan, which is then followed by three more stages of awakening: once returner (sakadagami), non returner (anagami) and arahant - which connotes the conqueror, the saint, etc.

A stream entrant, having *direct*, *experientially*, realized that all conditioned phenomena are impermanent and unsatisfactory, and are empty of a self. Having directly discerned the nature of phenomena and gaining the dharma eye that sees the arising and cessation of aggregates, realizing anatta, the stream entrant has permanently eliminated the view of a self. What this means is really such a person can no longer conceive, believe in, or hold the notion of, a real, changeless, independent self, agent, observer, doer, controller, of one's life or experiences or the aggregates. One stops conceiving of any soul, self, or even an ultimate Self (such as identifying a true self that is 'Brahman' or 'Pure Consciousness'). A stream entrant can no longer hold the view that there is such a self/Self. A stream entrant sees, realizes, there is only ever the stream of aggregates with no self behind (or within) the aggregates. And he realizes this directly, through insight meditation.

A stream entrant (sotapanna) is assured to never again be reborn in the three lower realms, to be only reborn in either the human realms or the deva realm (heaven), and furthermore is assured to attain complete Nirvana (cessation) of afflictions as an Arahant in no more than 7 more lifetimes. Now a stream entrant may attain arahantship in that very life if he puts some effort in his practice, but even if he didn't, he can no more exceed 7 more lifetimes in samsara. A stream entrant has eliminated the first three fetters:

1. identity view (as explained above)
2. doubt (there can be no more doubt about the Buddhadharma because you have directly realized it in your own experience)
3. ritual attachment (the belief that reliance on rituals and rules can somehow save you from samsara or end your suffering, as by now you would have realized that only by following the noble eightfold path which is summarized as the path of insight and tranquility, can suffering truly be ended, there can be no end of suffering besides through wisdom)

So once you have directly realized the dharma, and gained the Dharma Eye, you are a stream entrant that has permanently ended the above three fetters and is on an irreversible conveyer belt to Nirvana - the end of samsaric births and deaths, the end of all afflictions (passion, aggression and delusion), the end of all I and mine-making. What is the 'stream' that the stream enterer enters? The Buddha explained that the stream is the noble eightfold path, so basically such a person, having attained realization of the right view - which is the forerunner of the noble eightfold path, has entered the path which invariably leads to Nirvana.

A once returner (sakadagami) is one step further, having attenuated (lessened, weakened significantly) two more fetters: the fetter of sensual desire and the fetter of ill will. Well the fetter of sensual desire is very easy to understand: craving for good sensual enjoyment, sex, music, or even good food and chocolates, etc. Anything that has to do with desiring nice experience of the senses, that comes under sensual desire.

The fetter of ill will, well, it just means hostility, hatred, violence, thoughts of harming others, etc. All these are ill will. A once returner has significantly attenuated, though not necessarily removed completely, these two fetters. And a once returner is assured to only be reborn in either the human or the deva realm for one more life at most before attaining complete nirvana.

The non returner is a further step, having completely eliminated the fetter of sensual desire and fetter of ill will, instead of merely 'attenuating' them. Such a being, an anagami, cannot have thoughts of anger, cannot have sexual lust, and do not engage in sex. Yeah - that is what the Buddha taught, it is not what I invented (refer to Mahavacchagota Sutta - it clearly states that stream entrants and sakadagami partakes in sensual pleasures but not anagami and arahants). So if someone continues to crave sex, and engage in sexual activities, and claims to be anagami, I have good reason to doubt that, because it simply does not tally with the Buddha's definition of what anagami is. It may be that others have different ideas of what anagami means from the Buddha, but after all the four stages are defined by Buddha so we should follow his definitions when discussing it in the context of dharma as taught by him. Otherwise we simply won't understand what he is saying, what he had in mind.

Then again some may say, oh, actually I am an anagami, I so transcend these earthly desires but for some reason I am still having an active sex life. Again, I seriously would doubt such claims, because as the Buddha states, "“Bhikkhus, that one can engage in sensual pleasures without sensual desires, without perceptions of sensual desire, without thoughts of sensual desire—that is impossible." (Alagaddūpama Sutta) So in my mind, in accordance with the scriptures, all anagamis and arahants are celibates, and furthermore have no interest in pursuing the pleasures of the senses (not only sex). This is what the Buddha suggested in the suttas, and is also the position of the commentaries.

Because an anagami has completely put an end to the fetter of sensual desire and ill will, there is no more cause for becoming (rebirth) in the sensual planes - which is all the planes of samsara up to the 6 sensual devalokas (deva means celestial being, loka means world, i.e. heavens). Why? Because if you understand the four noble truths you know, becoming (that is, rebirth) and the mass of suffering is driven by craving. Craving is the cause of suffering and rebirth.

If you have craving for sensuality, and the karmas pertaining to sensuality ripens - you get reborn in the sensual planes of existence. If you have craving and attachments to the form dhyanas/jhanas (these are states of meditative absorptions), then (provided that you have the wholesome karma and meditative practice to support that desire) you get reborn in the form devalokas as a Brahma. In the form realm you still have a material body but no sensual desires, whereas in formless realms you do not have a material body. If you have craving or attachments to the formless dhyanas such as infinite space, infinite consciousness, etc, then you get reborn in those samsaric planes. Then, you experience living in those realms for kalpas, for millions of years, until eventually your karmas get exhausted (especially if you are reborn in the formless realms it is easy to get into lower realms since there is no opportunity to make merits), and then you become reborn again in the lower realms and work your way up again. So, rebirth in these devalokas without wisdom is totally insecure, they are not to be sought by Buddhists seeking for freedom. (It's another thing if you are reborn there as a stream entrant, etc, cos eventually you get back to dharma and the path and you don't stray into samsara for long)

So going back to topic, an anagami does not get reborn anymore in the sensual planes, then where does he/she get reborn to? They are reborn in the five Pure Abodes (suddhavasa) of the 4th jhana planes, of which the akanistha is the highest of them. This is the only realm where Buddha has not been reborn in before (as he stated: having recalled many aeons of past lives, he has been reborn in all samsaric realms, except the five pure abodes), because once you get reborn in it, you can never come back - that realm is literally made up of ONLY anagamis and arahants: once an anagami is born there, one will never return from that realm into another samsaric rebirth, so basically you just become an arahant there and enter into nirvana. (Mahāsīhanāda Sutta: "it is not easy to find a realm in the round that I have not already [82] passed through in this long journey, except for the gods of the Pure Abodes; and had I passed through the round as a god in the Pure Abodes, I would never have returned to this world.")

Anagamis are assured of only rebirth in such a high devaloka simply because an anagami has cut off craving from sensuality, yet, there is still the fetter of craving for form and formless jhanas (will be explained later), and this supports becoming/rebirth in a jhanic plane.

Then we have an arahant. An arahant fully removes 5 more fetters and no longer takes birth in samsara after his/her parinirvana:

lust for material existence, lust for material rebirth (rūparāgo)[12]
lust for immaterial existence, lust for rebirth in a formless realm (arūparāgo)[13]
conceit (māna)[14][15]
restlessness (uddhacca)[16]
ignorance (avijjā)[17]

Material existence and immaterial existence here refers to the jhanic planes. So how can you have craving for jhanic planes? As I mentioned before, the meditative absorptions of jhanas are incredibly blissful and sublime. They are much more blissful than any sensual pleasures you have ever experienced. As Ajahn Brahmavamso said, jhanas are more blissful than sex. And it is on an entirely different level too.. the mental peace, intense joy and bliss, and equanimity, and mindfulness, these are very good, very wholesome mental factors. So it is nothing like the coarse sensual pleasures we get from drugs, intoxication, sex, etc etc which only leads to heedlessness and delusion. This is why jhanas is part of the noble eightfold path, the practice of right concentration. Jhanas are to be developed. They support the development of wisdom, they support the complete liberation from defilements, so it is important.

However these states are like any other conditioned phenomena marked by transciency, unsatisfactoriness, and are not-self, not-mine. By not perceiving the nature of all states, they can become object of attachment and craving. That is why some people who have no wisdom at all (that is, they are not even stream entrants) may get stuck on practicing jhanas the wrong way - that is, instead of using it as a support to develop wisdom they completely get attached to those states and become what is called "jhana junkies". If you have proper guidance I don't think you will fall into such a category of people. These jhana junkies only know how to sit all day, get into meditative bliss, and then when they die the cycle of rebirth continues, they get reborn in the higher devalokas for a long time but that is about it, eventually they return back to lower realms (like all sentient beings do eventually, if they did not encounter dharma).

So anyway as I was saying, these material existence and immaterial existence are so sublime and blissful and peaceful, so it is only at the very last stage of the path to personal liberation - that is, arahantship, that all attachments to the jhanic factors are completely removed, and with it, the causes for rebirth in these jhanic planes too are removed. Although stream entrant onwards have perceived directly the impermanence/dukkha/anatta of all phenomena, nonetheless subtle remnants or residue of ignorance persists that could lead to craving.

Regarding conceit, well, I've already spoken a little about it recently so I'll just cut and paste it here:

Many people translate the fetter of conceit as 'pride', however, the fetter of conceit is not just in the sense of being 'proud'. I mean, pride etc is definitely a fetter. But also some people can be very humble, yet it does not mean they have overcome their 'I Am conceit'.

The 'I Am conceit' is more specifically described as a kind of trace, like a stench left over in a jug when the contents of the jug has been poured away. That trace of self remains after realization of anatta and then one has to liberate even that trace itself. That liberation of trace is Arahantship. This is clearly described in the Khemaka Sutta.

So what is the difference between the 'view of self' and the 'trace of self'?

As Thusness wrote to me in 2011:

Session Start: 29 March 2011

Thusness: yeah of course
AEN: Ic
Thusness: if u do not feel the 'body construct' and 'mind construct', just the play of dharma, how does the sense of self arise?
AEN: It doesnt
Thusness: yeah...
Thusness: for me, it is just this dependent originated activity...
Thusness: primordially pure and luminous
Thusness: sense of self does not arise
Thusness: i do not see 'body' or 'mind'
Thusness: for there is no agent
Thusness: for u by now u should be clear on this
Thusness: experientially
Thusness: otherwise, u will not feel the 'process'
AEN: Ic..
Thusness: u told me about the mini maha experience
Thusness: so u should not feel the sense of self
AEN: Yea
Thusness: logically when the agent is gone, the primary cause for these sense of self should also be gone
Thusness: however due to the deeper dispositions, it continues to linger
Thusness: when u engage in this modern world, it re-enfore the identity
AEN: Oic
Thusness: so by seeing there is no-self in anatta, the sense of self should also dwindle
AEN: Ic
Thusness: when u practice and there is mind body drop
Thusness: due to de-construction of body and mind
Thusness: there is only purity of sensations
Thusness: it is just a lingering trace
Thusness: how does the sense of self arise?
Thusness: and that means it is simply a dispositions
Thusness: and during daily activity, there is re-enforcing of this trace
Thusness: when there is no agent, this trace will be seen as it is
Thusness: in non-dual and one mind, this is not just a trace
Thusness: u may have trace of identity
Thusness: but 'Self' (comments: self-view) is not a trace
Thusness: it is as if it is truly 'there' and all there is
Thusness: but anatta is different
Thusness: for everything is like a trace
Thusness: and self is not any more special that an arising sound
Thusness: no diff
Thusness: can u understand the difference?

Now the 9th fetter which an arahant has eliminated:

restlessness (uddhacca)[16]

Restlessness is defined in "the excitement of mind which is disturbance, agitation of the heart, turmoil of mind." (Dhammasangani 429).

And this is a fetter that is only removed completely by an arahant. So it's very normal that you have a restless mind, a monkey mind, a distracted mind. We all experience that (well unless you're an arahant!). First we have a thought of X, and then from that thought X it drifts off into Y and Z and an endless chain of thinking, worries, pondering, etc. An analogy I gave is like it's reading the news feed on facebook. You scroll from one to another mindlessly, grasping to another post before leaving the previous post. We get distracted from time to time. In fact if you think you never get distracted, try sitting down in meditation, just watch your mind. Soon you'll realize how distracted you are but only you didn't notice it before. But at the same time if you sit a little longer, everything starts to tranquilize, mind and body tranquilizes and bliss happens.

Anyway. So, an arahant is someone who does not have restlessness. What this means, in my understanding, is that arahant does not have discursive thinking at all. They don't have a wandering mind. They don't daydream. They don't get distracted. They never get agitated. The only thoughts they have are wholesome, beneficial, necessary thoughts. They don't get excited and from thought X jump into Y, Z, etc, an endless chain of agitated thinking. And they aren't just in a state of equanimity in meditation - that is easy, but they are in equanimity in every moment in their life, through its ups and downs. They are not happy when they gained something nice, they are not unhappy when they lost something, in fact, sense of ownership never comes up in their mind at all.

The Buddha says that arahants are completely fearless. Arahants are free from hope and fear, they are free from craving for life and fear of death, they are free from any kinds of craving or fear at all. In the Dhammapada, a newly attained arahant climbs down from a very high pole to meet the Buddha without the slightest fear, he does not fear falling to his death. They have no worries at all. And they have no sorrow even at the death of their closed ones. Their minds are not affected at all in life, they do not experience agitation, their minds are like a calm, serene lake. So that's arahant's mind - complete peace, non-disturbed, equanimity... arahants are the "cooled ones" according to Buddha.

Honestly, restlessness (discursive thoughts) is the strongest fetter I have. I don't have much sensual craving or ill will or anger or any of those fetters mentioned, but my mind wanders, gets distracted, I believe like all or most of us here. Sometimes it settles down in meditation but in daily life there are so many things to think about... until mindfulness returns, and then there is complete intimacy with the appearance at hand and at the same time everything self-releases, thoughts gets released.

Lastly it is the fetter of ignorance (avijjā) that the arahant overcomes -- the Buddha defines ignorance as ignorance of the four noble truths, but the four noble truths is linked all the truths that we discover - impermanence, unsatisfactoriness/suffering, not-self, dependent origination, etc. So if you truly, fully, comprehend the four noble truths, you also overcome the perception of permanence, satisfactoriness, self, independence, inherency, and so forth.

If you see the four noble truths, you clearly see dependent origination in action. You clearly perceive that suffering - the eight kinds of suffering - is rooted in craving, in grasping, in delusion, and you clearly perceive that there is path which leads to the end of that craving, that grasping, that delusion.

So you see dependent origination Directly, not just as an inference, but you see ignorance in action - what does ignorance means? What does karmic propensities mean? Many of us think of karmic propensities and ignorance as being some kind of ghostly, hidden, almost mystical force hiding somewhere and affecting our lives from a hidden 'subconscious' component of consciousness stored away from sight. That is having an inherent view, a self-view of ignorance and karmic propensities. We need to directly See that cause of suffering and that suffering as the total exertion of our experience in seamless dependencies.

As Thusness say, having the view of afflicted dependent origination is having the enlightened view. The enlightened view does not conceive of a sufferer, suffering does not come from a self. How does it arise? Based on conditions - delusion, grasping, craving.

The totality of our experience is being shaped moment by moment by our delusions (either that, or by wisdom), by our sense of self, and with it all kinds of grasping and craving and afflictions. Taste it, see it for yourself, what is it like? See that grasping in action, see that becoming in action, see the birth of suffering. Only when you see suffering and the cause of suffering, only then can you realize the path and the end of that suffering. (Otherwise you become some neo-advaitins that say the path is not necessary)

And the moment you perceive the nature of that - that every phenomena is dependently arising, is empty of a self, is empty of inherent existence, at that moment, by realizing the four noble truths you realize dependent origination and you realize emptiness. And with that, you attain liberation. That is how overcoming the ignorance of the four noble truths is so crucial. From a view that a Subject interacts with an Object, to a view of seamless process of dependencies without self/Self, and furthermore clarity into the workings of delusion, grasping, craving I-making and suffering.

Bio-Hawk SG

Good writing.Some questions:

An Eternal Now SG

Made a mistake: akanistha is the highest of the five pure abodes which are five subplanes of the fourth jhana realm. An anagami can be born in either of the five pure abodes.

Reference: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sagga/loka.html

An Eternal Now SG

1. No brahmas are eternal. No gods are eternal. They experience the suffering of death and then they cycle in the six realms again based on their karmas. That is why wisdom and liberation is needed to escape the cycle of samsara - and then one is free from birth not only in sensual realm but also the form and formless brahma realms.

2. Yes, anagamis are born in one of the five pure abodes, one of which is akanistha. They all attain Nirvana there.

3. No, there is no 'true self that is nothingness' - though at a certain stage of experience it may seem that way: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html , however the I AM realization and 'nothingness' experience are not considered Buddhist enlightenment.

At a higher stage when one realizes anatta, one realizes there is absolutely no self/Self apart from the aggregates (form, feelings, perceptions, volition and consciousness). Those aggregates are empty of a self/Self. The so called 'nothingness' is just a subtler form of consciousness that is ultimately empty of Self. If one identifies with that, and attaches to that, then one is likely to become reborn in the formless realm of infinite space or nothingness where one stays there for many aeons until one's wholesome karma is exhausted, then one falls into the lower realms including hells, and one has to work up from there again.

Nirvana just means the cessation of passion, aggression and delusion, including all sense of self or Self.

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com.au/2008/01/ajahn-amaro-on-non-duality-and.html

In the seen, there is only the seen,
in the heard, there is only the heard,
in the sensed, there is only the sensed,
in the cognized, there is only the cognized.
Thus you should see that
indeed there is no thing here;
this, Bahiya, is how you should train yourself.
Since, Bahiya, there is for you
in the seen, only the seen,
in the heard, only the heard,
in the sensed, only the sensed,
in the cognized, only the cognized,
and you see that there is no thing here,
you will therefore see that
indeed there is no thing there.
As you see that there is no thing there,
you will see that
you are therefore located neither in the world of this,
nor in the world of that,
nor in any place
betwixt the two.
This alone is the end of suffering.” (ud. 1.10)

An Eternal Now SG

Regarding 'True Self', I wrote this last year:

...the original teachings of the Buddha leads to the complete relinquishment of all self/Self. In my experience this is the case. For me, the sense of a Soul or transcendental identity/Self has been terminated for good and no longer arise at all for years. I have been through the stage where there is identification with the transpersonal Self/I AM, and then such identification is put to an end with further insights into anatta.

This is why Buddhadharma is radical.

As Loppon Namdrol/Malcolm Smith wrote before:

"What you are suggesting is already found in Samkhya system. I.e. the twenty four tattvas are not the self aka purusha. Since this system was well known to the Buddha, if that's all his insight was, then his insight is pretty trivial. But Buddha's teachings were novel. Why where they novel? They were novel in the fifth century BCE because of his teaching of dependent origination and emptiness. The refutation of an ultimate self is just collateral damage."

And as Thusness wrote to me in 2005 way before we knew anything about AF's Richard Parker (late 2009):

The Pristine awareness is often mistaken as the 'Self'. It is especially
difficult for one that has intuitively experience the 'Self' to accept
'No-Self'. As I have told you many times that there will come a time when u
will intuitively perceive the 'I' -- the pure sense of Existence but you
must be strong enough to go beyond this experience until the true meaning of
Emptiness becomes clear and thorough. The Pristine Awareness is the
so-called True-Self' but why we do not call it a 'Self' and why Buddhism has
placed so much emphasis on the Emptiness nature? This then is the true
essence of Buddhism. It is needless to stress anything about 'Self' in
Buddhism; there are enough of 'Logies' of the 'I" in Indian Philosophies.
If one wants to know about the experience of 'I AM', go for the Vedas and
Bhagavat Gita. We will not know what Buddha truly taught 2500 years ago if
we buried ourselves in words. Have no doubt that The Dharma Seal is
authentic and not to be confused.

When you have experienced the 'Self' and know that its nature is empty, you
will know why to include this idea of a 'Self' into Buddha-Nature is truly
unnecessary and meaningless. True Buddhism is not about eliminating the
'small Self' but cleansing this so called 'True Self' (Atman) with the
wisdom of Emptiness.

And it is not just I or Thusness or Malcolm who is saying so - Buddha himself is saying so.

Taken from accesstoinsight:

"Cula-sihanada Sutta (MN 11) -- The Shorter Discourse on the Lion's Roar {M i 63} [Ñanamoli Thera and Bhikkhu Bodhi, trans.] - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.011.ntbb.html , the Buddha declares that only through practicing in accord with the Dhamma can Awakening be realized. His teaching is distinguished from those of other religions and philosophies through its unique rejection of all doctrines of self. [BB]"

...Hi [name redacted],

Buddha did not reject only one view of self/Self but 84 kinds of views about Self - including the view that Self is the unchanging Consciousness or soul that survives after death in the Brahmajāla Sutta. Also in the Mulapariyaya Sutta/MN 1, the Buddha was speaking to a group of ex-Samkhya followers who became converted and became his monks. Even though they have converted, they still held the belief in the Purusha (pure consciousness/awareness) as changeless Self or Soul, and they believed in a "root" or Source: an abstract principle out of which all things emanated and which was immanent in all things.

Because the Buddha knew the monks still held onto this belief/view/position, he began the discourse with "I will teach you the sequence of the root of all phenomena". He described a whole range of phenomena that can be experienced, including subtle states accessible in meditation like the "infinite consciousness", "infinite space", "nothingness" and so on. In each of these experiences, he declared that they are not to be established as Self, not to be viewed as a Source out of which things emerges from. Even Nirvana/unbiding (the termination of all passions, aggression and delusion), he declared, is not to be established in terms of a Self or to be viewed as a Source.

Interestingly, this is the ONLY teaching the Buddha taught that at the end of the discourse, the monks were unhappy and dissatisfied. ("Displeased, the monks did not delight in the Blessed One's words.") As obviously the monks wanted the Buddha to affirm their belief/view/position/experience instead of rejecting or refuting it.

Fortunately, by paying heed to the Buddha's teachings, the monks practiced and eventually overcome all false views and conceits of "I Am" and attained complete Nirvana.

By "cleansing True Self", Thusness means one's experience of consciousness is cleansed of ALL traces of self/Self including any form of identifying with a "True Self". As Thusness stated back in February 2006, "The different between hinduism and buddhism is they return to the "I AM" and clings to it. But in buddhism it is being replaced by "emptiness nature", (the sense that) there is a purest, an entity, a stage to be gained or achieved is an illusion. There is none. No self to be found. No identity to assumed. Nothing attained. So for a teaching that is so thorough and complete, why must it resort back to a "True Self"? For one that has experienced in full emptiness nature, does he/she need to create an extra "True Self"?"

"In light of emptiness nature, "True Self" is not necessary. The so called "purest" is already understood, there is no clinging. There is hearing, no hearer...etc (This) is already beyond "True Self". Yet it exactly knows the stage of "True Self". If there is no hearing...then something is wrong. There is hearing but no hearer. Put your time into practice and understanding of no-self and emptiness. "

The wisdom of "no-self" or "emptiness" is the realization that there is no actual self/Self/soul/any kind of substantiality. This realization releases all delusions and bondage. Otherwise, one can have PCEs but the delusion of identity can persist. This is why I posted the "No mind and anatta" thread.

Sensate experience is immediately direct gapless without identity or reifications, in the direct actualization there is naturally no concepts, no emotions, no separation, stillness, without a sense of vantage point/center to measure movement, etc.

Bio-Hawk SG

Sir below are my understandings as of now,please correct me if I am wrong.

I used to think that we have a soul and the ultimate purpose in life is to make this soul free of it"s coverings, karma and it's attributes. Then it will dissolve in the universe/ brahman and everything is finished.

In Buddhism as I learned even this soul is an aggregate. Like a flame which is created by combination of spark and a combustible material. Something lighted a flame and when the self understands it's not real,but an aggregate of various things giving the illusion of self, then it's Nirvana. That is by the example fire is extinguished and it becomes nothing.

An Eternal Now SG

What you said is closer yet still not correct.

This is because it is not that 'soul is an aggregate'. It is that no soul could be pinned down within or apart from the aggregates at all - 'soul' cannot be pinned down as a reality. All there is, conventionally, is just the five aggregates which is empty of any soul or self-ness.

We can think of it like weather. We may think that weather is a 'thing', an 'entity', but where is it? Is there even an 'it'? Is there truly a soul of weather or weather-ness of weather? Or is weather just a label for the everchanging sensation of breeze, the everchanging colours and shapes that we call cloud, the sound of rain drizzling... the direct sensations and sights etc which we label 'weather'?

Likewise 'self' is really just a conventional 'label' imputed on the our sensory and mental experiences, in reality empty of any inherent changeless self. And there is in seeing really just visual-consciousness - the vivid brilliant scenery, but no seer. In hearing only just vivid self-luminous (self-aware) sound, no hearer. A soul, center, agent, behind experience cannot be found. There is just experiencing which is the experience, no experiencer.

When the flames of passion, aggression and delusion has ceased, it is not that a soul has ceased - never was there a 'soul' to begin with that could cease, only the delusion that there is one is ceased. And that cessation of the three poisons is nirvana. But we must never misunderstand that there is a soul and that soul ceases in nirvana - this is the wrong view of annihilationism.

Therefore the Buddha said -

37. "So teaching, so proclaiming, O monks, I have been baselessly, vainly, falsely and wrongly accused by some ascetics and brahmans: 'A nihilist[38] is the ascetic Gotama; He teaches the annihilation, the destruction, the non-being of an existing individual.'[39]

"As I am not as I do not teach, so have I been baselessly, vainly, falsely and wrongly accused by some ascetics and brahmans thus: 'A nihilist is the ascetic Gotama; He teaches the annihilation, the destruction, the non-being of an existing individual.'

"What I teach now as before, O monks, is suffering and the cessation of suffering.

We must understand that anatta is a dharma seal, always already so.

Insight that 'anatta' is a seal and not a stage must arise to further progress into the 'effortless' mode. That is, anatta is the ground of all experiences and has always been so, no I. In seeing, always only seen, in hearing always only sound and in thinking, always only thoughts. No effort required and never was there an 'I'.

Bio-Hawk SG

Therefore the Buddha said -

Thanks for the clarification.

So the soul as we think of is th combination/covering of the flames of passion, aggression and delusion.Once this is removed,then there is nothing.Is that what is refered to as Nirvana?And what happens after,do you know?

Why in Hindusim they speak of soul so much?And freeing it from the coverings of hate,passion etc is the purpose of human life as they call it?

Buddhism goes to say soul doesn"t exist,but it is an illusion?

An Eternal Now SG

No, you still don't seem to get it. It is not that soul is the three poisons. It is that there is no soul to begin with.

This means when anger arise, there is no self behind or within anger, there is only anger. When passion arise, there is no self behind or within anger, there is only anger. When there is delusion, there is no self behind or within delusion, there is only delusion. There is in seeing always only sight/scenery/colours that is vividly seen, but no seer. In hearing just sound, no hearer.

Venerable Buddhaghosa states quite clearly:

"Mere suffering is, not any sufferer is found

The deeds exist, but no performer of the deeds:

Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it,

The path is, but no wanderer is to be seen."

Nirvana is the cessation of the three poisons, Nirvana is the cessation of afflictions, of suffering, Nirvana is the cessation of the delusional sense of self, but Nirvana is *not* the cessation of a soul. Why? There simply isn't any actual 'soul' to begin with, it is as fictitious as santa claus or rabbits with horns. It is merely a delusional imputation. This delusional imputation is the cause of rebirth and suffering.

So, there is the delusional sense of self, but that is merely a thought-constructed apparent reality, which is fundamentally a fiction. But there never was any actual self to begin with.

Actually to say 'the soul doesn't exist' wouldn't be accurate - because non-existence would require a predicate, an entity, an existent in the first place which could then be asserted to become non-existent. As the Buddha pointed out, if a 'Tathagata' or 'Soul' or 'Self' cannot be pinned down as a reality, an entity, either within nor apart from the five aggregates to begin with, how can you speak of its existence, or non-existence, or both existence and non-existence, or neither existence nor non-existence? These four extremes (a.k.a tetralemma) are automatically refuted when one realizes no-self or emptiness. Also it cannot be that 'self' ceases to exist or becomes non-existent if it cannot be established to begin with.

To get a better sense of this you may also want to read this article I wrote before: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/eternalism-nihilism-and-middle-way.html

The reason why the Hindus speak of the Atman-Brahman so much is because they directly realized what the Buddha calls the luminous mind (phabhassara citta). The luminous aspect of mind is simply pure cognizance, pure presence, pure awareness, however this aspect of mind is almost always mistaken to be a true eternal Self without insight into anatta and emptiness.

For example, Stage 1 to 4 of are different gradations of the Atman-Brahman realization (Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment). Only at Stage 5 is anatta being realized, and not only is the sense of individual self released (this happens even before stage 5) but also the delusion of an ultimate, inherently existing Self (with capital S) or pure subjectivity or metaphysical Essence.

Other than me and Thusness, many others have gone through the same phases of insights.

For example, Zen teacher/priest Alex Weith wrote:

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com.au/2011/10/zen-exploration-of-bahiya-sutta.html

This also means that the first step is to disembed from impermanent phenomena until the only thing that feels real is this all pervading uncreated all pervading awareness that feels like the source and substance of phenomena. Holding on to it after this realization can hower become a subtle form of grasping diguised as letting go.

The second step is therefore to realize that this brightness, awakeness or luminosity is there very nature of phenomena and then only does the duality between the True Self and the appearences arising and passing within the Self dissolve, revealing the suchness of what is.

The next step that I found very practical is to push the process of deconstruction a step further, realizing that all that is experienced is one of the six consciousness. In other words, there is neither a super Awareness beyond phenomena, not solid material objects, but only six streams of sensory experiences. The seen, the heard, the sensed, the tasted, the smelled and the cognized (including thoughts, emotions, and subtle thougths like absorbtion states, jhanas).

At this point it is not difficult to see how relevent the Bahiya Sutta can become.

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

Just for the sake of clarification, I would like to make it clear that I never said that "these luminous self-perceiving phenomena which are craving-free and nondual are the Ultimate", if there could still be any ambiguity about that.

On the contrary, I said that what I used to take for an eternal, empty, uncreated, nondual, primordial awareness, source and substance of all things, turned out to be nothing more than the luminous nature of phenomena, themselves empty and ungraspable, somehow crystallized in a very subtle witnessing position. The whole topic of this thread is the deconstruction of this Primordial Awareness, One Mind, Cognizing Emptiness, Self, Atman, Luminous Mind, Tathagatgabha, or whatever we may call it,

As shocking as it may seem, the Buddha was very clear to say that this pure impersonal objectless nondual awareness (that Vedantists called Atma in Sanskrit, Atta in Pali) is still the aggregate of consciousness and that consciousness, as pure and luminous as it can be, does not stand beyond the aggregates.

"Any kind of consciousness whatever, whether past, future or presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near must, with right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self.'" (Anatta-lakkhana Sutta).

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

What I realized also is that authoritative self-realized students of direct students of both Ramana Maharishi and Nisargadatta Maharaj called me a 'Jnani', inviting me to give satsangs and write books, while I had not yet understood the simplest core principles of Buddhism. I realized also that the vast majority of Buddhist teachers, East and West, never went beyond the same initial insights (that Adhyashanti calls "an abiding awakening"), confusing the Atma with the ego, assuming that transcending the ego or self-center (ahamkara in Sanskrit) was identical to what the Buddha had called Anatta (Non-Atma).

It would seem therefore that the Buddha had realized the Self at a certain stage of his acetic years (it is not that difficult after all) and was not yet satisfied. As paradoxical as it may seem, his "divide and conquer strategy" aimed at a systematic deconstruction of the Self (Atma, Atta), reduced to -and divided into- what he then called the five aggregates of clinging and the six sense-spheres, does lead to further and deeper insights into the nature of reality. As far as I can tell, this makes me a Buddhist, not because I find Buddhism cool and trendy, but because I am unable to find other teachings and traditions that provide a complete set of tools and strategies aimed at unlocking these ultimate mysteries, even if mystics from various traditions did stumble on the same stages and insights often unknowingly.

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

Also Joel Agee wrote:

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com.au/2013/09/joel-agee-appearances-are-self.html

Joel Agee I will try to describe what it is that rings true for me in Thusness’s words. I don’t have a theoretical preference for the early Buddhist teachings over the later ones, including Dzogchen. In fact I know very little about the Pali Canon. My approach isn’t conceptual or theoretical at all. I look directly into the nature of my own consciousness in silent, objectless sitting meditation – shikantaza if you will. Whatever doesn’t meet the test of direct experience holds no lasting interest for me.

Until fairly recently, the metaphor of the mirror and its reflections seemed a fitting image of my contemplative experience: that there is an unchanging, ever-present, imperturbable awareness that is the absolute ground and the very substance of phenomena, and that while this motionless, contentless awareness-presence is inseparable from the ceaseless coming and going of appearances, it also transcends everything that shows up, remaining untouched, unstained, absolute and indestructible.

A couple of years ago I discovered Soh Wei Yu’s blog, Awakening to Reality, and in it Wei Yu’s account of his exploration of the Bahiya Sutta and the Zen Priest Alex Weith’s report on his realization of Anatta through practical application of the Bahiya Sutta. I saw then that Anatta was not fully realized in my experience. The illusory nature of a separate unchanging personal self had been seen through, but an unconscious identification with “Awareness” or “rigpa” had taken its place.

Since then, an unstoppable deconstruction of that impersonal background identity has been happening in my contemplation and in my daily life. There is still a noticeable attachment to the memory of that subtle Home Base. It shows up as a tendency to "lean back" from the unpredictable brilliance and dynamism of the moment into a static, subtly blissful background presence. But there is no longer a belief in an Awareness that is anything other than, or greater than, or deeper than, THIS sound, THIS smile or stirring of emotion, THIS glance of light. There is no Mirror that is not the reflections.

So the shift in my experience and practice is not a preference for one teaching over another. It’s an ongoing realization that direct contact with the grain and texture of moment-by-moment experience is what Dogen meant by “being awakened by the ten thousand things.”
January 2 at 3:20am · Unlike · 6

Bio-Hawk SG

Thanks for the detailed info.WIll definitely take some time to really understand this.

In Hinduism so they reached 'an abiding awakening' as you mentioned and then they believed this was the final stage,dissolution in Brahman?. Buddha too achieved this but went forward to 'systematic desconstruction of self' and found soul too isn't real. I had read the blog with 7 stages and I understood HIndusim doesn't go that far.I am not an expert in that religion as well,unfortunately.

As I understood the Hindu final goal or merger with Brahman,I was thinking why should this be the end?Why should Brahman make souls which must transmigrate and come back to it finally?Is there soemthing beyond,but I couldn't find anything beyond this till I Came across Buddhism.

Is there something beyond this 7th stage?What is meant by mind-stream in Budhism? Why is all this drama/Play for beings to understand this is not real and understand their true nature or emptiness?

An Eternal Now SG

Beyond 7th stage one simply practices to remove all remaining afflictive/emotional obscurations and knowledge obscurations that prevent full awakening or Buddhahood. Traditionally if you realized anatta that can be considered to be at least stream entry, after which completely overcoming afflictive obscurations one becomes an arahant, and if you realized twofold emptiness that means you are a 1st bhumi bodhisattva, after which completely overcoming the two obscurations you attain omniscience as a Buddha (there are altogether 10, or 13, or 16 bhumis depending on which Mahayana/Tibetan tradition you ask).

Even recently for example, Thusness had made major breakthroughs in terms of overcoming afflictive obscurations, not mentioned in the blog.

Mindstream is a series of mental activities happening in a fashion that is serially connected. Means, for example, mind moment 1 leads to mind moment 2 to 3, 4, 5. There is no changeless mind, but there is a serially connected, momentary mind-stream. This mind-stream continues from moment to moment - impermanent, but manifest through dependent origination. In this way, our karmic activities manifest future lifes - that is, rebirth happens through the ripening of our mental karmic activities, and our mindstream 'continues' through lifetimes.

Your mindstream is not the same as my mindstream, conventionally speaking. Your karma does not ripen in my mindstream, your karma only ripens in your mindstream.

An Eternal Now SG

Why is all this drama/Play for beings to understand this is not real and understand their true nature or emptiness?

Because of the cyclic nature of the 12 links of dependent origination - from ignorance sets forth a chain of dependent arising manifesting as samsara.

However, it is not strictly linear. For example when asked where does ignorance - the first link, arise from? The Buddha taught that it arises from taints, from defilements. And from where does defilements arise from? It arises from ignorance. Therefore dependent origination is of a cyclic nature - it is like a wheel rolling down a hill, as it roll, it keeps picking up momentum so it never stops.

And there is no beginning to samsara at all. There is no beginning to rebirth, to ignorance, to taints, to afflictions and suffering, they feed each other.

However it does not mean it can never be stopped. We can stop it. How? By practicing the Buddadharma we can put an end to samsara, I and mine making that is driving samsara.

Heathhackbarth SG

[irrelevant post removed]

Bio-Hawk SG

I can easily understand when a soul which takes different body has karma to finish from past lives.In Buddhsim there is no soul and mind stream is something which changes every time,so what is this Karma clinging to every life which is not the same every re-birth?

Secondly having understood this intellectually doesn't help much. How to really reach state of Buddhahood?via Meditation?As in Mind is the key to liberation?

Once state of libreation is achieved, the past Karma has to be worked out/experienced or they are gone?

An Eternal Now SG

Karma means actions. Mental, verbal, bodily actions. These actions will ripen in results in present and future lifetimes. Wholesome actions result in fortunate births, unwholesome actions result in unfortunate births, while practicing noble eightfold path leads to the end of rebirth in samsara - which is nirvana.

We can also think about karma as traces and imprints. When you watch a movie, or play a video game, you may notice that images have a tendency to manifest in your mind for some time. Our ignorance, tendency to grasp at self and things, karmic imprints, are deep conditionings that continue from moment to moment, but there is absolutely no such thing as a 'soul' that 'contains' them. It is just a momentary stream of afflictions/delusions/conditioning that manifest moment by moment.

The key to liberation is to practice the noble eightfold path. Are you familiar with the noble eightfold path? If not, please read all these carefully: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html

As Thusness said before: "If we were to practice mindfulness from start and learn to experience things in bare. We develop this intuitive mode of directly experiencing things as they are. Together with firm understanding of the basic teaching of Buddha, we will be able to break this habitual energy of seeing things in a dualistic mode. Buddha never taught about ‘who’ instead he made Anatta a Dharma Seal; nothing about inherent existence, instead impermanence and oneness. Never about first cause but about Dependent Origination that will eventually lead us into seeing things as unborn, no coming and going. He taught mindfulness as the preferred way of meditation and said that it will lead us into enlightenment. All these can be experienced right here and now. We should take it seriously. It will eliminate a lot of unnecessary sufferings. ""

Once liberated, past karma will still manifest in that lifetime, but no longer manifests after death because one is freed from samsaric rebirth - i.e. there is no more fuel or conditions for further birth, as birth arise only when there is grasping and becoming - the 'I am' conceit is there. You do not have to 'work out the past karmas' - those karmic causes just do not have the conditions to manifest anymore. Think of it like a seed, a seed needs water and nutrients to grow into a fruit, but it does not grow if there is no more conditions for it to grow.

p.s. I did not start with practicing Buddhadharma, I started with self-inquiry and Awareness practice then gradually when there is direct realization of Awareness, I looked into non-dual, anatta and emptiness. It depends on which path you would like to take. My path is explained in my e-journal: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com.au/2010/12/my-e-booke-journal.html

An Eternal Now SG

Arahants overcome afflictive obscurations thus putting an end to the samsaric cycle of rebirth, Buddhas overcome two obscurations (afflictive and cognitive) thereby obtaining omniscience.

In addition to the overcoming of afflictive obscurations, one must also overcome the knowledge obscurations. This means complete actualization of one's realization of twofold emptiness*. Furthermore to attain Buddhahood one has to have perfected all the six/ten paramitas/perfections (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C4%81ramit%C4%81).

*Buddhist glossary:

Two emptinesses (二空) include (1) emptiness of self, the ātman, the soul, in a person composed of the five aggregates, constantly changing with causes and conditions; and (2) emptiness of selves in all dharmas—each of the five aggregates, each of the twelve fields, and each of the eighteen spheres, as well as everything else with no independent existence. No-self in any dharma implies no-self in a person, but the latter is separated out in the first category. Realization of the emptiness of self in a person will lead to attainment of Arhatship or Pratyekabuddhahood. Bodhisattvas who have realized both emptinesses ascend to the First Ground on their Way to Buddhahood.

An Eternal Now SG

And yes meditation is important. Do read these books:

http://www.amazon.com/Mindfulness-Plain-English-Anniversary-Edition/dp/0861719069

http://www.amazon.com/Buddhism-Plain-Simple-Arkana-Steve-ebook/dp/B002RI9IMY/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1402381628&sr=1-1&keywords=steve+hagen+buddhism+plain+and+simple

Aik TC SG

I do not think a person who has attained Buddhahood will necessarily possess the quality of omniscience. The historical Buddha pointed to the fact that his knowledge is vast, Sutta SN56.31, and that he possesses the three knowledge, Sutta MN71, but certainly do no claim that he is omniscience. See Sutta MN71, MN90. Here, if one strictly takes the meaning of omniscience as possessing infinite knowledge or understanding. There are also suttas such as MN67 that shows he is not omniscience.

An Eternal Now SG

When he is being addressed as omniscient and all knowing, he did not reject it. What he rejected was 'omnipotence' - that there could be a kind of knowing of everything in the universe simultaneously. Now, both Theravada and Mahayana do not accept that anyone including Buddha has omnipotence, because the Buddha has categorically rejected them. However, the traditions maintain that the Buddha is able to know whatever he intends to know, and to that end, all states, realm, phenomena are knowable to the Buddha who is omniscient.