Anatta the Adj.

[Several]

 

In the two Metta Suttas of the Aṅguttara Nikāya, the Buddha states that those who practice radiating the four immeasurables in this life and die "without losing it" are destined for rebirth in a heavenly realm in their next life. In addition, if such a person is a Buddhist disciple (Pāli: sāvaka) and thus realizes the three characteristics of the five aggregates, then after his heavenly life, this disciple will reach nibbāna. Even if one is not a disciple, one will still attain the heavenly life, after which, however depending on what his past deeds may have been, one may be reborn in a hell realm, or as an animal or hungry ghost.

 

The brahmavihāras (sublime attitudes, lit. "abodes of brahma") are a series of four Buddhist virtues and the meditation practices made to cultivate them. They are also known as the four immeasurables (Sanskrit: apramāṇa, Pāli: appamaññā).

According to the Metta Sutta, Shākyamuni Buddha held that cultivation of the four immeasurables has the power to cause the practitioner to be reborn into a Brahma realm (Pāli: Brahmaloka)^. The meditator is instructed to radiate out to all beings in all directions the mental states of:

• 1) loving-kindness or benevolence
• 2) compassion
• 3) empathetic joy
• 4) equanimity

Hang on. What kind of Rebirth are you quoting about here?

[lungmi]

You are your own guru. O.K. Do you have a Kalyāṇa-mittatā?

[Several]

The world is my guru, and my friend. Though sometimes it doesn't seem so.

[Several]

To clarify, I have nothing against gurus or Kalyāṇa-mittatā. They are beneficial for certain people. I am too critical to accept everything a guru says without question and I am too hard on companions so (out of compassion) I won't put anybody through that. I relocate frequently to avoid attachment and become Upekkha about uncertainty. Positive, caring emotions do nullify anger, but so does fearlessness. Compassion is sometimes a sword, not meaning it is wielded in anger. Certain temples suit certain psyches but can also foster complacency.

The only true stillness is within. Even if you sit in one place for a hundred years, the Earth spins on through the void at 1000 mph, the weather and the people change about you. Everything manifest is Anicca. The sky and the heart meander through their seasons.

A guru can only point the way. There is no power that can transfer realisation. A companion can only offer mutual encouragement, sometimes resulting in folie-a-deux. We are born alone, we die alone and everything in between is the same. There is one constant factor in realisation regardless of the devices employed, wether inner feelings or outer impetus. Only you can free yourself from suffering.

[rockyysdt]

To clarify, I have nothing against gurus or Kalyāṇa-mittatā. They are beneficial for certain people. I am too critical to accept everything a guru says without question and I am too hard on companions so (out of compassion) I won't put anybody through that. I relocate frequently to avoid attachment and become Upekkha about uncertainty. Positive, caring emotions do nullify anger, but so does fearlessness. Compassion is sometimes a sword, not meaning it is wielded in anger. Certain temples suit certain psyches but can also foster complacency.

The only true stillness is within. Even if you sit in one place for a hundred years, the Earth spins on through the void at 1000 mph, the weather and the people change about you. Everything manifest is Anicca. The sky and the heart meander through their seasons.

A guru can only point the way. There is no power that can transfer realisation. A companion can only offer mutual encouragement, sometimes resulting in folie-a-deux. We are born alone, we die alone and everything in between is the same. There is one constant factor in realisation regardless of the devices employed, wether inner feelings or outer impetus. Only you can free yourself from suffering.

It seems that by moving frequently to avoid attachment, you are running away from something, rather than facing it.

In my experience there are many things about us which only others can see.

[rockyysdt]

To clarify, I have nothing against gurus or Kalyāṇa-mittatā. They are beneficial for certain people. I am too critical to accept everything a guru says without question and I am too hard on companions so (out of compassion) I won't put anybody through that. I relocate frequently to avoid attachment and become Upekkha about uncertainty. Positive, caring emotions do nullify anger, but so does fearlessness. Compassion is sometimes a sword, not meaning it is wielded in anger. Certain temples suit certain psyches but can also foster complacency.

The only true stillness is within. Even if you sit in one place for a hundred years, the Earth spins on through the void at 1000 mph, the weather and the people change about you. Everything manifest is Anicca. The sky and the heart meander through their seasons.

A guru can only point the way. There is no power that can transfer realisation. A companion can only offer mutual encouragement, sometimes resulting in folie-a-deux. We are born alone, we die alone and everything in between is the same. There is one constant factor in realisation regardless of the devices employed, wether inner feelings or outer impetus. Only you can free yourself from suffering.

Let me re phrase post #215.

Is it possible that your need to move frequently to avoid attachment is an indication that you are running away from something, rather than facing it?

In my experience there are many things about individuals that quite often can only be seen by others.

Also in my experience many individuals are drawn to solutions which align with their beliefs, whether conscious or not.

[Several]

No offence, but thats a purely superficial observation. By staying still aren't you hiding from something? Same thing. In my experience there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in any philosophy. Do we stay home and find reasonable speculations on what may be, or go forth and find out for sure? To become a monk is to go forth into the homeless life. In all my days there was never one minute where I ran away. I walk towards.

[rockyysdt]

No offence, but thats a purely superficial observation. By staying still aren't you hiding from something? Same thing. In my experience there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in any philosophy. Do we stay home and find reasonable speculations on what may be, or go forth and find out for sure? To become a monk is to go forth into the homeless life. In all my days there was never one minute where I ran away. I walk towards.

Please know that my motivation had no malice intended.

There is nothing wrong with travel.

My observation was based on your posted need to avoid.

Edited November 24, 2013 by rockyysdt

[Several]

Avoid attachment. We're advised to. I'm not offended, we've never met. You couldn't possibly know what I'm like. Not a problem.

[rockyysdt]

Avoid attachment. We're advised to.

That's an interesting position and new to me.

My thoughts are that any stance one takes is a form of attachment.

There's possible attachment to those who one lives with.

Then there's attachment to the need to be without attachment.

I think just about anything we do involves attachment.

My path is at the very beginning.I have a very long way to go.

At the moment, in my process to grow mindfulness, my experience is of a kind of duality.

• Firstly there is me, I, self, ego, which has many attachments.
• Then there is that which is mindful of me, I, self, ego.

Whatever is mindful, has a fresh start at observing without attachment, whilst observing the attached me, I, self, ego.

Long periods of sitting meditation assists that which is mindful to have the speed and poise to be without attachment.

As time progresses, and as that which is mindful grows, it slowly begins to assume who I am.

The me, I, self, ego will theoretically diminish, along with its attachments &

The thing which is mindful will grow and assume who I am.

For this reason, there is no reason for me to avoid attachment.

I hope that makes sense.

Edited November 24, 2013 by rockyysdt

[Several]

It is different for different people. No one way is always correct. I relocate or stay put as environment dictates, Vassa for example means 3 months in one place. Mobility is, for me, another strategy. Some people can meditate their way beyond ego. I combine that with positioning to nullify its influence. The deeper resources of the mind often surface in adverse situations. For example today a monkey stole my glasses and I am now effectively blind. This situation means remaining calm and dealing with it. It is what it is. Quite funny actually. Situations like this test our equanimity. I am passing with flying colours. It may mean remaining here for a while, or it means moving on anyway and adapting to circumstance. Without attachment to either possibility I will act accordingly.

[rockyysdt]

It is different for different people. No one way is always correct. I relocate or stay put as environment dictates, Vassa for example means 3 months in one place. Mobility is, for me, another strategy. Some people can meditate their way beyond ego. I combine that with positioning to nullify its influence. The deeper resources of the mind often surface in adverse situations. For example today a monkey stole my glasses and I am now effectively blind. This situation means remaining calm and dealing with it. It is what it is. Quite funny actually. Situations like this test our equanimity. I am passing with flying colours. It may mean remaining here for a while, or it means moving on anyway and adapting to circumstance. Without attachment to either possibility I will act accordingly.

It's true that we are all very different and may require different emphasis on our practice.

Coincidentally my specs fell apart. I'm now using 100 baht cheapies.

All the same it might be worth being mindful of your mobility in case it grows out of hand.

[Several]

To me staying in one place is what gets out of hand. For the vast majority of human history we've been nomadic so its actually unnatural to remain in one place. Attachment to moving could be seen as one thing, but settling in produces many multiple attachments and dependencies (including other peoples attachment to us). This spreads out into regional and national pride which invariably produces distorted world views. Thinking one comes from "the best country in the world" is a prevalent delusion that lesser individuals will even fight and kill over.

[Several]

Just like to point out that the Thai Visa phone app is complete rubbish and fequently loses posts I make. And I'm getting bored with wasting my time on it.

[rockyysdt]

To me staying in one place is what gets out of hand. For the vast majority of human history we've been nomadic so its actually unnatural to remain in one place. Attachment to moving could be seen as one thing, but settling in produces many multiple attachments and dependencies (including other peoples attachment to us). This spreads out into regional and national pride which invariably produces distorted world views. Thinking one comes from "the best country in the world" is a prevalent delusion that lesser individuals will even fight and kill over.

It's true, but isn't attachment to a location/person only one of many attachments?

Isn't the journey, not to avoid attachment, but to observe it and learn to deal with it?

By avoiding attachment aren't we deferring insight and consequently the ability to live with others free of attachment?

An interesting perspective is that "wherever we go, we go with us".

[Several]

Nope. You can observe attachment til the cows come home. Its overcoming it, fostering detachment thats important. The only insight into attachment you'll ever need is that it is a hinderance.

[Several]

Mainly the attachment to the idea of self, which would seem totally against what I've been saying here, but isn't.

[rockyysdt]

Nope. You can observe attachment til the cows come home. Its overcoming it, fostering detachment thats important. The only insight into attachment you'll ever need is that it is a hinderance.

I understood that it wasn't detachment that we foster, but cessation of reaction/over reaction?

If so, one will never experience experiential insight, if one avoids situations!

[Several]

If you're detached you're hardly likely to react much. This has nothing to do with avoiding anything. Insight into Nama/Rupa is all that counts. They experience things constantly, even when sleeping. What you are describing sounds like analysis rather than insight.

[rockyysdt]

If you're detached you're hardly likely to react much. This has nothing to do with avoiding anything. Insight into Nama/Rupa is all that counts. They experience things constantly, even when sleeping. What you are describing sounds like analysis rather than insight.

Yes, but how can you experience insight if you avoid many situations?

[Several]

Because mind exists whether there are 'situations' or not. Why do people go to meditation retreats if not to reduce external stimulus and give the mind fewer places to hide?

[rockyysdt]

Because mind exists whether there are 'situations' or not. Why do people go to meditation retreats if not to reduce external stimulus and give the mind fewer places to hide?

I believed retreats are to develop/deepen ones level of concentration.

The Samadhi part of the 8 fold path includes.

• Right Effort.
• Right Mindfulness.
• Right Concentration.

The Right Concentration (Sitting practice) allows us to sharpen our Mindfulness.

Mindfulness of course is how we observe all things in our wakeful day (breath, mind, feelings, body, the external world).

With Sitting we develop our concentration, but with Mindfulness we eventually experience insight.

We experience insight at many levels, from the coarse, to ever increasing finer levels.

By withdrawing, we limit this experience.

Many board members on this site have indicated that Mindfulness (not Sitting) yields greater insights on the path.

My thoughts have been that isolating oneself may limit your insight.

One can spend decades in isolation only to have their poise disappear after one week in Bangkok.

Edited November 28, 2013 by rockyysdt

[Several]

Wellll, concentration is not a matter of posture. It is developed through use. There are four postures or attitudes, lying, sitting, standing and perambulation.

Right mindfulness applies to everything in the eightfold path, which is why it is key to insight.

Insight is limitless, think about what Blake said about eternity in a moment and a universe in a grain of sand (or something to that effect). You are measuring insight by appearances.

I move about without location precisely because "one night in Bangkok makes a hard man crumble" as it were.

Reducing the variables makes insight easier to come by, maintaining it in any circumstance is a matter of fearlessness or Upekkha.

[rockyysdt]

Wellll, concentration is not a matter of posture. It is developed through use. There are four postures or attitudes, lying, sitting, standing and perambulation.

Right mindfulness applies to everything in the eightfold path, which is why it is key to insight.

Insight is limitless, think about what Blake said about eternity in a moment and a universe in a grain of sand (or something to that effect). You are measuring insight by appearances.

I move about without location precisely because "one night in Bangkok makes a hard man crumble" as it were.

Reducing the variables makes insight easier to come by, maintaining it in any circumstance is a matter of fearlessness or Upekkha.

Yes, but if you can maintain mindfulness in any environment then haven't you deepened your skill/experience?

Edited November 28, 2013 by rockyysdt

[Several]

Yes. So I'm right.

[sabaijai]

The late Sayadaw U Silananda, who was one of my teachers over 25 years ago, offers a unique take on anatta, for which he offers a slightly alternative perspective, as 'no inner core'.

Regarding mental phenomena, we try to see that, for example, one phenomena is contact, another feeling, and another perception, although these may have been experienced very rapidly as only one mental event. Both mental and physical phenomena are composed of only elements and forces, and thus have the nature of being anatta (unsubstantial). That is why we must try to observe everything very slowly in meditation in order to see that phenomena are not held together with a core, an atta.

For example, all mental states and material properties have their own functions. Contact has one function, feeling another, and perception still another. If we see these mental phenomena as one connected whole, we fail to see them as parts with specific functions, and we fail to see them as void of a central core, atta.

These mental states actually have different ways of taking objects and responding to them. Lobha (attachment) has one kind of response; dosa (hatred) another. We must see the individual differences of these mental states. We need to analyse and observe deeply to see that mind and matter have individual functions and responses. On superficial observation and analysis, everything seems to be compact, whole, and substantial. All of us think that a book is very solid, but if we could look at this book under a microscope, it would appear full of holes, with empty spaces, like a sieve.

Vipassana is like using a microscope to see that all things are only elements and forces which are not unified by any kind of core, by any kind of atta. In the third section of the Sutta, Buddha states that: ‘Any kind of form, whether past, future, or presently arisen; whether in oneself or external; whether inferior or superior; whether far or near; must with right understanding be regarded thus.

Full text:

http://portal.in.th/i-dhamma/pages/9321/

[Several]

With all respect to the Sayadaw he seems to be mistaken, Citta is the central core of all mental phenomena. He is correct if one only views the effects, the mental states themselves, which are manifestations of mind.

[Several]

He's probably seeing Citta from an Abhidhammic perspective as Cittas or mind-moments.

[Several]

So, I have read it all now and I still find Sayadaws argument unconvincing. Like many people he confuses Nama with Citta. I have no doubt the Vipassana method works, I am also of the opinion that Buddha was avoiding the Hindu concept of Atman. But the evidence seems to be that comentators on the Suttas have expanded the Anatta principle beyond its original intent. They just avoid being nihilists by citing rebirth. I do not feel that a single good refutation of Plotinus Veritas position has been offered so far.

[rockyysdt]

So, I have read it all now and I still find Sayadaws argument unconvincing. Like many people he confuses Nama with Citta. I have no doubt the Vipassana method works, I am also of the opinion that Buddha was avoiding the Hindu concept of Atman. But the evidence seems to be that comentators on the Suttas have expanded the Anatta principle beyond its original intent. They just avoid being nihilists by citing rebirth. I do not feel that a single good refutation of Plotinus Veritas position has been offered so far.

How would you then summarize where we are at on this subject with optimal practice as a result of this knowledge?

The specific teaching, with

Expression in concise form to reduce mis comprehension, &

Action/practice summary to take advantage.

Edited December 6, 2013 by rockyysdt