Another issue I have with is the 16 nanas... which are not
actually from the suttas, but have their origins from Visuddhimagga
which is a latter commentary.
While I know this is a valid path that many has walked... I do
not agree that this is the only path.
There are two completely different paths. There is the gradual
path, such as via noting, in which a practitioner observes
impermanence and the three characteristics and gradually ascends
the nanas, culminates in a fruition, and then cycles through again
many times... more fruitions, more cycles, as he gradually ascends
the paths (maggas), from sotapanna to arhatship.
In short, the gradual path is one of increase perceptual clarity
(of dharmas, of the three seals) and transversing of nanas until
realization occurs. The direct path is one of directly aiming at
realization, yet without (initially) the gradual stability
(strength of mindfulness and samadhi) that has been accumulated
over the years of practice.
It should be noted... from those who have gone through this
path, that what I define as the realization of anatta (not merely
an increase perceptual clarity or experience of impersonality, or
even non-duality, or even a temporary state of no-self - whatever
experiences that are state-like or stage-like can clearly be ruled
out as the realization of anatta as I call it is without entry and
exiting)... have reported that the realization of anatta (defined
by me as, 'in the seeing just the seen', in the hearing just the
heard') hasn't occurred until much later. Means, under the
technical (16 nanas model), even a supposed sotapanna hasn't
realized Anatta (defined as realizing 'in seeing just the seen',
etc) even though they have experienced the nanas and the resulting
fruition/cessation! But the technical model (originated from
Visudhimagga) is different from the fetter model (originated from
Buddha). It should be noted that those who experienced so called
sotapanna in the technical model still report that their daily
experiences are mostly in a dualistic mode of perception, they
still see themselves as a perceiving subject viewing the objective
universe, even though they now have better intuition of the three
characteristics. That is why Daniel M. Ingram and many
practitioners ended up defining the realization of Anatta as
Arhatship as it only occurred much later, traversing the 16 nanas
countless times. I, for example, was labelled an Arhat by one of
their moderators (from Dharma Overground)... however they did said
that the definition of Arhat was one that was challenged after
2009, when they became more inclined to think of the 10 fetter
model as being more accurate to the Buddha's original teachings,
and after they have started to experience emotions being
permanently stopped as being a distinct possibility. (so there are
now different models of the stages) Daniel now states that what he
calls 4th path* is actually Buddha's Sotapanna by the fetter model
definition. I for example clearly do not think I am an Arhat under
the 10 fetter model definition of things even though I am
experiencing gradual emotional transformation since the initial
realization of Anatta.
So much for the gradual path. There is another path which I said
earlier is entirely different... which does not require traversing
the 16 nanas at all. It is the path that Buddha taught Bahiya -
simply contemplating 'in seeing just the seen' until realization
into Anatta arises. The realization is permanent, without entry,
without exiting.
As I wrote before,
First I do not see Anatta as merely a freeing from
personality sort of experience as you mentioned; I see it as that a
self/agent, a doer, a thinker, a watcher, etc, cannot be found
apart from the moment to moment flow of manifestation or as its
commonly expressed as ‘the observer is the observed’; there is no
self apart from arising and passing. A very important point here is
that Anatta/No-Self is a Dharma Seal, it is the nature of Reality
all the time -- and not merely as a state free from personality,
ego or the ‘small self’ or a stage to attain. This means that it
does not depend on the level of achievement of a practitioner to
experience anatta but Reality has always been
Anatta and what is important here is the intuitive insight
into it as the nature, characteristic, of phenomenon (dharma
seal).
To put further emphasis on the importance of this point, I would
like to borrow from the Bahiya Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.10.irel.html)
that ‘in the seeing, there is just the seen, no seer’, ‘in the
hearing, there is just the heard, no hearer’ as an illustration.
When a person says that I have gone beyond the experiences from ‘I
hear sound’ to a stage of ‘becoming sound’, he is mistaken. When it
is taken to be a stage, it is illusory. For in actual case, there
is and always is only sound when hearing; never was there a hearer
to begin with. Nothing attained for it is always so. This is the
seal of no-self. Therefore to a non dualist, the practice is in
understanding the illusionary views of the sense of self and the
split. Before the awakening of prajna wisdom, there will always be
an unknowing attempt to maintain a purest state of 'presence'. This
purest presence is the 'how' of a dualistic mind -- its dualistic
attempt to provide a solution due to its lack of clarity of the
spontaneous nature of the unconditioned. It is critical to note
here that both the doubts/confusions/searches and the solutions
that are created for these doubts/confusions/searches actually
derive from the same cause -- our karmic propensities of ever
seeing things dualistically
Another important issue is that those of the gradual approach
dissolves the sense of self gradually through observing
impermanence... yet the intensity of luminosity is not being
directly realized and experienced until much later.
*Daniel's definition of 4th path: