What is real, spun from other thread

[auto]

Its new thread to discuss about things

..

ok, what you said is sound between what you stated at first and later albeit i think its questionable.

When a mendicant has heard thatEvañcetaṃ, bhikkhu, bhikkhuno sutaṃ hoti:
nothing is worth clinging on to,‘sabbe dhammā nālaṃ abhinivesāyā’ti.
they directly know all things. Directly knowing all things, they completely understand all things. Completely understanding all things, they see all signs as other.
So sabbaṃ dhammaṃ abhijānāti, sabbaṃ dhammaṃ abhiññāya sabbaṃ dhammaṃ parijānāti, sabbaṃ dhammaṃ pariññāya sabbanimittāni aññato passati,
They see cakkhuṃ aññato passati
the eye, sights,..as other

seeing everything as other(aññato). It is opposite to seeing 'sabbe dhamma' as yours.

“Sir, they speak of this thing called a ‘sentient being’.“‘satto, satto’ti, bhante, vuccati.How is a sentient being defined?”Kittāvatā nu kho, bhante, sattoti vuccatī”ti?

“Rādha, when you cling, strongly cling, to desire, greed, relishing, and craving for form, then a being is spoken of.“Rūpe kho, rādha, yo chando yo rāgo yā nandī yā taṇhā, tatra satto, tatra visatto, tasmā sattoti vuccati.

There are plenty of claims here to be made:
sabbe dhamma = khandhas
aññato= anatta

Sentient being is spoken of when there is strong clinging to form, feeling etc:
the "scent of a flower" is a sentient being.

Therefore scent of the flower is not simply a concept. But if the clinging stops the smell disappears too, nothing feeds it anymore that there could arise scent of a flower.

[SteRo]

Therefore scent of the flower is not simply a concept.

If that would be an expression experienced as genuine in this sphere of experience then that would be an expression of greed, wanting "scent of the flower" to be more than "scent of the flower", appropriating "scent of the flower" as self or belonging to self, apprehending "scent of the flower".
But your experience is fine in the context of following the theravada doctrine which I don't follow because after decisive and subsequent insight that is utterly impossible in this sphere of experience. Nevertheless I find the theravada doctrine to be a source of inspiration which I make use of without believing anything.
Now that "without believing anything" may again be misunderstood as skepticism but while skepticism is based on apprehension non-apprehension simply makes belief impossible. So that "without believing anything" is empty of doubt which might be unintelligible for some.

Returning to the theme of this forum section on a conceptual level there is a connection between the theravada and this non-path of non-apprehension because I have made the conceptual connection 'greed - appropriation (self-identification) - apprehension' using inspiring theravada concepts.

[auto]

..

so you don't believe in what is written about in the Sutta?
i didn't want to split the quote, so bear the three poem-likes ,

Full of desire for desirable things,Sārattā rajanīyesu,
enjoying things that seem pleasant,Piyarūpābhinandino;
beings shrouded by ignorance,Mohena āvutā sattā,
only tighten their bonds.Baddhā vaḍḍhenti bandhanaṃ.

Born of greed, born of hate,Rāgajaṃ dosajañcāpi,
born of delusion: the ignorantmohajaṃ cāpaviddasū;
make bad karmaKarontākusalaṃ kammaṃ,
that afflicts and produces pain.savighātaṃ dukhudrayaṃ.

If you act out of these qualities, that’s what you become.Avijjānivutā posā,
But men hindered by ignorance,andhabhūtā acakkhukā;
are blind, with no eyes to see,Yathā dhammā tathā santā,
and they never imagine that this could be so.”na tassevanti maññare”ti.

Anger, madness bla bla are born of greed.., so if you act out on these, that you become. A madman doesn't know that he is madman. Mendicant at first doesn't see 'what has come to be'(sn12.31) there is no sīla possible to do because of ignorance one doesn't see, is blind.
Right view needs to be had. So are the view you have right view?
The view you hold is that you don't believe in anything(in brackets), so you actually believe but there isn't anything to believe.
Right view is about there is kamma, you have to do discipline and have faith that you will actually start to see. It nullifies the non-apprehension, you can't do it to something you have no idea yet.
You saying it is not possible to return to the way what is spoken of in the Suttas because you have decisive insight. It is impossible that the decisive insight nullifies the results of making bad kamma and therefore becoming bad being. You just don't see it - you must have been completed the path what Suttas are describing? that now you have something what makes you immune to kamma?

--
You may be cultivating that type of mindfulness you described earlier on your posts but that is not samadhi, concentration. You seem lacking the wisdom of what is written in these poems to have the required concentration. With the kindness of the heart you should not talk about what is later without foundation, so even if you got it, the non-apprehension, everything is concept is right, then you have no heart.

[Ceisiwr]

Its new thread to discuss about things...

Can you link to the original topic? Thank you

[auto]

Its new thread to discuss about things...

Can you link to the original topic? Thank you

Its thread about Frank Yang full enlightenment claim, it was going off-topic for a while.
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=38937

[SteRo]

..

so you don't believe in what is written about in the Sutta?

Belief is rooted in greed as it is based on apprehension, is based on making self or making 'belong to self'. When there arises a citta this has experience of sutta as object and madhyamaka mindfulness as subject and is empty of 'I, me, mine'. Thus this citta dissolves without apprehension of sutta, without apprehension of anything.

Right view needs to be had. So are the view you have right view?

There being no apprehension, no view is held.

The view you hold is that you don't believe in anything(in brackets), so you actually believe but there isn't anything to believe.

Again: When there arises a citta this has experience of concept as object and madhyamaka mindfulness as subject and is empty of 'I, me, mine'. Thus this citta dissolves without apprehension of concept, without apprehension of anything. There being no apprehension, there is no belief.

Right view is about there is kamma, you have to do discipline and have faith that you will actually start to see. It nullifies the non-apprehension, you can't do it to something you have no idea yet.
You saying it is not possible to return to the way what is spoken of in the Suttas because you have decisive insight. It is impossible that the decisive insight nullifies the results of making bad kamma and therefore becoming bad being. You just don't see it - you must have been completed the path what Suttas are describing? that now you have something what makes you immune to kamma?

When mind is settling down on doctrinal concept, reviewing doctrinal concept, taking doctrinal concept as basis, standing in doctrinal concept, seizing doctrinal concept through signs then because there is apprehension of signs.

You may be cultivating that type of mindfulness you described earlier on your posts but that is not samadhi, concentration. You seem lacking the wisdom of what is written in these poems to have the required concentration. With the kindness of the heart you should not talk about what is later without foundation, so even if you got it, the non-apprehension, everything is concept is right, then you have no heart.

You-making follows from I-making. You-conceit is no different from I-conceit. Citta lacking madhyamaka mindfulness as subject but subject being 'I, me, mine'. There being madhyamaka mindfulness as subject there are no words or concepts that might reach 'me' because no 'me' is apprehended. When no 'me' is apprehended debate about 'me' doing this or that or 'me' not doing this or 'me' having to do this or that or 'me' not having to do this or that ... all such kinds of debates are impossible. There is nothing to explain about 'me' doing or not doing this or that. There is nothing to defend or assert about 'me' doing or not doing this or that. Why? Because no 'me' is apprehended. What applies to 'me' applies to 'you' as well because "You-making follows from I-making. You-conceit is no different from I-conceit."

[auto]

Belief is rooted in greed as it is based on apprehension, is based on making self or making 'belong to self'. When there arises a citta this has experience of sutta as object and madhyamaka mindfulness as subject and is empty of 'I, me, mine'. Thus this citta dissolves without apprehension of sutta, without apprehension of anything.
..

Belief in what is written in the Suttas in a gist like believing in at some point body starts falling downward after jumping up, it doesn't continue going upwards forever.
You might want to revise your comments, since you have wrong view about what i wrote.

tho i could
check your grammar and give some points on writing well.

[auto]

There being madhyamaka mindfulness as subject there are no words or concepts that might reach 'me' because no 'me' is apprehended. When no 'me' is apprehended debate about 'me' doing this or that or 'me' not doing this or 'me' having to do this or that or 'me' not having to do this or that ... all such kinds of debates are impossible.

You are talking about 'being aware'/mindfulness. How i can know? because one of the qualities is that there is no interpretation happening. So you should talk about the qualities you can relate to with much less mumbojumbo** in between.

You can find information about it on very view sources. One thing you may found is if you rely only this its like trying to grow flowers in winter.

**like there is no views, everything is concepts, its all inferred from that mindfulness. Just get to the point and don't beat around the bush.
--
its said cultivation doesn't go beyond/above the heart. That mindfulness is straight up mind, it is above the heart in head, there is no cultivation. So its reasonable that you talk the cultivation is fabrication, its up to you how you reach cultivation what is not fabricated, but there def is cultivation.

[SteRo]

Belief is rooted in greed as it is based on apprehension, is based on making self or making 'belong to self'. When there arises a citta this has experience of sutta as object and madhyamaka mindfulness as subject and is empty of 'I, me, mine'. Thus this citta dissolves without apprehension of sutta, without apprehension of anything.
..

Belief in what is written in the Suttas in a gist like believing in at some point body starts falling downward after jumping up, it doesn't continue going upwards forever.
You might want to revise your comments, since you have wrong view about what i wrote.

tho i could
check your grammar and give some points on writing well.

There being madhyamaka mindfulness as subject there are no words or concepts that might reach 'me' because no 'me' is apprehended. When no 'me' is apprehended debate about 'me' doing this or that or 'me' not doing this or 'me' having to do this or that or 'me' not having to do this or that ... all such kinds of debates are impossible.

You are talking about 'being aware'/mindfulness. How i can know? because one of the qualities is that there is no interpretation happening. So you should talk about the qualities you can relate to with much less mumbojumbo** in between.

You can find information about it on very view sources. One thing you may found is if you rely only this its like trying to grow flowers in winter.

**like there is no views, everything is concepts, its all inferred from that mindfulness. Just get to the point and don't beat around the bush.
--
its said cultivation doesn't go beyond/above the heart. That mindfulness is straight up mind, it is above the heart in head, there is no cultivation. So its reasonable that you talk the cultivation is fabrication, its up to you how you reach cultivation what is not fabricated, but there def is cultivation.

Sorry but your words don't cause consistent meanings ... Let's leave it at that

[auto]

Q: What do you mean by 'leading the fire'

The Tan Ching says:

Let all thought come and go; awareness
Of them without clinging is true training.
All attachments are wrong whereas
Inertness to false voidness leads.

When the heart and breathing are in unison, this is called 'locking up the monkey heart'
and 'tying up the running horse of intellect'.

Mindfulness should give way to mindlessness so that the heart(the seat of nature) is empty(of all stirrings),
becomes incorporeal and spiritual and beyond birth and death.
If you want to get rid of wrong thoughts you should hold on to correct awareness and they will cease of themselves
so that your heart will be like the bright moon in space, immaculate and containing no foreign matter.
As the heart gets used to this condition it will be free from all illusions culminating in the death of the heart
and resurrection of the spirit. For if spirit is not settled the light of (essential) nature does not manifest and
if intellect is not frozen passions cannot be cut off. In this state of serenity when the inmost vibrates of itself you should immediately
take advantage of its vibration to gather the microcosmic alchemical agent. This is called 'leading the fire' (to gather the agent).

[auto]

..


Sorry but your words don't cause consistent meanings ... Let's leave it at that

Practice, then you will.

[SteRo]

..


Sorry but your words don't cause consistent meanings ... Let's leave it at that

Practice, then you will.

Maybe you're confusing non-path with theravada path?

[auto]

Q what you mean by stopping the fire

A By 'stopping the fire' is meant discontinuing all alchemical breathing11
11 Although the practiser continues breathing as usual he should not use in and out breaths to arouse the inner fire which will then cease of itself.

Q why is the alchemical breathing discontinued?

When the lower abdomen is full of generative force the inner fire is stopped by discontinuing all(alchemical) breathing through the nose.
The patriarch Cheng Yang said: 'When the alchemical agent ripens the use of fire should be stopped for continual fire will spoil it.'
The immortal Ch'ung Hsu said: 'Only when the time to stop the fire comes can the macrocosmic alchemical agent be gathered for the breakthrough.'

[auto]

..


Sorry but your words don't cause consistent meanings ... Let's leave it at that

Practice, then you will.

Maybe you're confusing non-path with theravada path?

Usually i get the noselfers but this time it is nopather. Also pls stop this nonsense answering, you are happy with the nonpath so stick with it, i just wanted to make sure if you really are zero as sometimes i doubt you are and then check again.

[auto]

They understand: ‘Rebirth is ended, the spiritual journey has been completed, what had to be done has been done, there is no return to any state of existence.’‘Khīṇā jāti, vusitaṃ brahmacariyaṃ, kataṃ karaṇīyaṃ, nāparaṃ itthattāyā’ti pajānāti.

This is called a mendicant who neither gets rid of things nor accumulates them, but remains after getting rid of them. They neither give things up nor grasp them, but remain after giving them up. They neither discard things nor amass them, but remain after discarding them. They neither dissipate things nor get clouded by them, but remain after dissipating them.
Ayaṃ vuccati, bhikkhave, bhikkhu nevācināti na apacināti, apacinitvā ṭhito; neva pajahati na upādiyati, pajahitvā ṭhito; neva visineti na ussineti, visinetvā ṭhito; neva vidhūpeti na sandhūpeti vidhūpetvā ṭhito

compare

Q: What do you mean by 'leading the fire'

The Tan Ching says:

Let all thought come and go; awareness
Of them without clinging is true training.
All attachments are wrong whereas
Inertness to false voidness leads.

compare

But I have also explained the progressive cessation of conditions.Atha kho pana, bhikkhu, mayā anupubbasaṅkhārānaṃ nirodho akkhāto.

For someone who has attained the first absorption, speech has ceased.Paṭhamaṃ jhānaṃ samāpannassa vācā niruddhā hoti.
For someone who has attained the second absorption, the placing of the mind and keeping it connected have ceased.Dutiyaṃ jhānaṃ samāpannassa vitakkavicārā niruddhā honti.
For someone who has attained the third absorption, rapture has ceased.Tatiyaṃ jhānaṃ samāpannassa pīti niruddhā hoti.
For someone who has attained the fourth absorption, breathing has ceased.Catutthaṃ jhānaṃ samāpannassa assāsapassāsā niruddhā honti.

and

Q what you mean by stopping the fire

A By 'stopping the fire' is meant discontinuing all alchemical breathing11
11 Although the practiser continues breathing as usual he should not use in and out breaths to arouse the inner fire which will then cease of itself.

Q why is the alchemical breathing discontinued?

When the lower abdomen is full of generative force the inner fire is stopped by discontinuing all(alchemical) breathing through the nose.
The patriarch Cheng Yang said: 'When the alchemical agent ripens the use of fire should be stopped for continual fire will spoil it.'
The immortal Ch'ung Hsu said: 'Only when the time to stop the fire comes can the macrocosmic alchemical agent be gathered for the breakthrough.'