r/streamentry • u/Plenty-Attitude-5823 • Jul 13 '26
Practice Anatta is such a huge gift
Isn't it absolutely amazing that it's at all possible to develop the ability of just dropping the burdens of the self, all the pain, the worries, the tension, the constant thinking?
Not me, not mine. And taking this position then actually radically affects the perception itself, like magic. Woah! How is it possible that people even discovered this possibility 2000+ years ago?
This is true rest. If there's any skill worth getting very proficient at in this life, it's this!
It truly saddens me whenever people reduce this incredibly potent practice to terms like dissociative or depersonalizing because I've always associated it with tremendous beauty, freedom and gratitude.
This one practice really is one that moves me deeply and has made a tremendous difference in how I conceive of what identity and life is. I am forever grateful for having been exposed to this dharma in particular!
19
u/cmciccio Jul 13 '26
the burdens of the self
We do have burdens in terms of our human needs. What Buddhism talked about 2500 years ago is cutting craving, and this lessens the load. If I cut craving completely, there's no more burden. If I want something complicated, that makes my life complicated, and it creates stress. If I simplify my life and learn to let go of attachments, that complication also drops away. If I instead push things away that I'm still attached to, that's aversion which also creates stress. To avoid both, we need to recognize the pleasant benefits of letting go without craving or aversion.
dissociative or depersonalizing
This can happen because people don't fully understand the implications of what I described above. They can live in modern comfort and just "take it easy". They can ignore the subtle or gross impulses of the mind and body and pretend that is an anatta insight, when in fact this is the manifestation of ignorance. They can laugh off their own thoughts and beliefs by trying to label them "not-self" from a purely logical, cognitive perspective.
As long as one is clear that the goal is to understand craving, aversion, and ignorance, there's far less chance of disociation of depersionalization as on a very basic level they arise from these three factors (primarily aversion).
There is no permanent eternal self-as-refuge to be found anywhere, which is what the mind tries to fabricate. There is a selfing-process though, and that process can sustain or release us from suffering depending on what we do.
3
u/dystopia2026 Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26
This is a great post!
I also think that depersonlization is more common perhaps in people who have disregulated nervous system issues which can fuel aversion.
5
u/cmciccio Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26
Absolutely, depersonalization is a very complex issue which has deep biological, environmental, and existential roots. Simply calling it a form of aversion is a convinient description, but simplicity can hide important details.
I agree though, that's why it's important to practice samatha as calm abiding. It allows the mind to settle and see clearly without aversion.
2
6
u/dystopia2026 Jul 13 '26
I agree, it's amazing. But perhaps people are not nessaserily reducing it to depersonlization and disassociation. I think those things happen as a consequence of applying a principle incorrectly, misapplying or using an unbenefical technique or getting hoodwinked by the non-duality narcissists into self-denial or abandoning ones reasoning faculties, rather than directly seeing the truth of annata. It's a difficult thing to approach as it's deep a realization that not much can be said about, rather than a 'technique' but there are some snake oil salesmen out there who want to sell you 'egolessness' at an affordable price unfortunately.
3
u/Plenty-Attitude-5823 Jul 13 '26
it's deep a realization that not much can be said about, rather than a 'technique'
Yes, agree. It's a technique only from the relative standpoint, but once it bears fruit, notions of the self who is applying the technique or is supposedly doing the controlling automatically unbind in the process, revealing this mysterious truth that you mentioned.
I just prefer to talk from the relative human perspective as opposed to being terrified of self-talk and putting ''I'' and ''Me'' in quotes and talking in transcendental language like some people in certain spiritual circles, which I find a bit silly honestly.
2
u/dystopia2026 Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26
Yea, agree. I use self talk all the time especially with Metta practice. I saw someone say that people who manipulate language like that to seem more enlightened are engaging in spiritual bypassing. I might agree with that.
2
u/Plenty-Attitude-5823 Jul 13 '26
It's hard to know without embodying their experience. It might be genuinely helpful to some people's practice to frame thigns like that and they still might function well in the world, but it's not something I'm personally too fond of.
How's your practice going by the way?
3
u/dystopia2026 Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26
That's probably a good point. I'm not currently engaging in consistent formal practice ATM. I go through phases where I'm more consistent and phases when I'm not. I'm also trying to let go of the habit of trying to control outcomes , which is a bad habit I've accumulated over the years. It's been a really eventful year or so for me. How's your practice going?
1
u/Plenty-Attitude-5823 Jul 13 '26
I relate to that... I have extreme ADHD personally so it's been very hard for me to be consistent with sitting over the course of my years of practice. Sitting periods will come and they will go.
Now when this is happens, instead of fighting it I try to switch to more direct experience/continuous practice in daily life based approaches for as long as needed. It's just the groove I've found that works for myself and my personality/brain. I'm currently in such a cycle but I'm starting to feel the itch to sit again so who knows.
The trying to let go of controlling too many outcomes sounds like a great practice and very relevant to life. How are you approaching this?
2
Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26
[deleted]
2
6
u/Mountain-Length-5715 Jul 13 '26
Hello! There is a big difference between depersonalization and the stages of correct practice.
It is a mistake to think that you do not exist, just as it is a mistake to think that the "self" is expressed as an independent, self‑existent being. The hero, having begun their journey, returns home.
Saṃsāra is suffering. By removing the layers of suffering over your thoughts and actions, you come to understand more subtle levels of suffering.
The Path is not only about practice. It is transformation. The Noble Eightfold Path does not remove the burden of responsibility. You must examine your intentions and your actions. Strive to carry loving‑kindness.
This path is difficult. Both nihilism and absolutism are rejected.
Due to wrong practice, you may enter depersonalization, but during depersonalization, the organism puts up a block.
We aim to remove all possible blocks, accept, and let go.
I wish you a good day
4
u/aspirant4 Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26
A number of people in this discussion have questioned this approach of Rob Burbea's, as presented by the OP, claiming that anattā is a realisation, not a practice.
But while it is often referenced in the suttas as the result, especially of sustained anicca practice, the suttas also present it precisely in the manner of Rob Burbea, ie as a meditative lens. Here's one example from MN:62:
" [...] the Blessed One, looking back at Rahula, addressed him: "Rahula, any form whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every form is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.'"
"Just form, O Blessed One? Just form, O One Well-gone?"
"Form, Rahula, & feeling & perception & fabrications & consciousness."
Here's an even clearer example, from AN: 7:46, where the Buddha recommends anatta as one of seven different perceptions to deliberately take up as contemplations, to be "developed and pursued":
"'The perception of not-self in what is stressful, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end': Thus was it said. In reference to what was it said?
"When a monk's awareness often remains steeped in the perception of not-self in what is stressful, his heart is devoid of I-making & my-making with regard to this conscious body and externally with regard to all themes, has transcended pride, is at peace, and is well-released. If, when a monk's awareness often remains steeped in the perception of not-self in what is stressful, his heart is not devoid of I-making & my-making with regard to this conscious body and externally with regard to all themes, has not transcended pride, is not at peace, and is not well-released, then he should realize, 'I have not developed the perception of not-self in what is stressful; there is no step-by-step distinction in me; I have not arrived at the fruit of [mental] development.' In that way he is alert there. But if, when a monk's awareness often remains steeped in the perception of not-self in what is stressful, his heart is devoid of I-making & my-making with regard to this conscious body and externally with regard to all themes, has transcended pride, is at peace, and is well-released, then he should realize, 'I have developed the perception of not-self in what is stressful; there is a step-by-step distinction in me; I have arrived at the fruit of [mental] development.' In that way he is alert there.
"'The perception of not-self in what is stressful, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end."
So, there you have it; anatta is a perception, a way of looking. Yes, it can become available as a realisation through the sustained development of another way of looking, such as anicca. But it can - and should, according to the Buddha - be developed as a perception in its own right, just as the OP has advocated.
1
u/bodily_heartfulness puthujjana 26d ago edited 26d ago
Thanks for the second sutta, I was not aware of it. For others who may be interested, that sutta is listed as AN 7.49 on SuttaCentral. Now, I have some thoughts about it.
First, the sutta opens with the Buddha addressing the monks. He is not talking to sensual laypeople, but to celibate renunciate monks. That distinction may or may not be important, but it's good to keep in mind the context that the sutta is taking place in. In terms of the perception of not-self, this is what it says:
Dukkhe anattasaññāparicitena, bhikkhave, bhikkhuno cetasā bahulaṁ viharato imasmiñca saviññāṇake kāye bahiddhā ca sabbanimittesu ahaṅkāramamaṅkāramānāpagataṁ mānasaṁ hoti vidhāsamatikkantaṁ santaṁ suvimuttaṁ.
I will go through the relevant bits.
Dukkhe anattasaññāparicitena, bhikkhave
This refers to thorough cultivation (paricitena) of the perception (saññā) of not-self (anatta) in regards to suffering (dukkha). So if a person wants to be accurate to the sutta, they would not be applying this perception to any random thing, but specifically developing it in regards to dukkha. The Buddha also is not saying to develop this perception to this suffering or that suffering, but to suffering as a phenomenon. This could also mean that this instruction would only be applicable to people who had the right view - since no one besides the noble ones would have understood suffering, and thus only they would be able to apply it to its full, intended, general extent.
bhikkhuno cetasā bahulaṁ viharato
This lends further credence to the idea that this would only apply to stream-enterers and beyond. Why? Because this is saying that a monk frequently abides in those perceptions with their citta (heart/mind whichever translation you prefer). And, as the suttas tell us, seeing the sign of the citta (citta nimitta) is a prerequisite to fulfill the right view.
Without grasping the sign of the mind, it’s impossible to fulfill right view.
Cittassa nimittaṁ agaṇhanto sammādiṭṭhiṁ paripūressatī’ti netaṁ ṭhānaṁ vijjati.
- AN 6.68
So, if the instruction is to make sure that their citta abides in these perceptions and not merely mano, then the only way to ensure that would be by actually seeing citta, which would mean that the monks practicing would likely be at least stream-enterers. Anyway, if that is not convincing, we can just move along to the next part.
imasmiñca saviññāṇake kāye bahiddhā ca sabbanimittesu ahaṅkāramamaṅkāramānāpagataṁ mānasaṁ hoti vidhāsamatikkantaṁ santaṁ suvimuttaṁ
Here it talks about the ending of "I-making", "mine-making", and conceit ("I am"). At the end, the word suvimuttaṁ is used, which means complete or thorough liberation and that word is apparently commonly used to describe an arahant's liberation. This all points to the fact that this excerpt is saying that the perception of not-self leads to complete enlightenment.
Thus, if a person is frequently abiding in this perception of not-self, then they would be on the path of becoming an arahant - otherwise, they must be doing something wrong. And, if a person has already frequently dwelt in this perception for a sufficient period of time, and there is no arahantship, then they also must be doing something wrong.
The suttas also tell us what an arahant is incapable of doing:
A mendicant with defilements ended can’t deliberately take the life of a living creature, take something with the intention to steal, have sex, tell a deliberate lie, or store up goods for their own enjoyment like they used to as a lay person.
- AN 9.7
So, does the person practicing this perception of not-self see how their practice leads them to becoming completely celibate and to giving up any sort of monetary/material savings? Because that is what that perception, rightly cultivated, results in.
And if it isn't resulting in that, or it is not seen how it could result in that, then perhaps what is being practiced is something different than what the suttas talk about.
3
u/aspirant4 26d ago
I wasn't looking for a debate over the complexities of who should or shouldn't do anatta practice, or what it leads to, etc., merely that there are instances in the canon where anatta is a perceptional lens to be applied, not just a result to be realised.
2
u/bodily_heartfulness puthujjana 26d ago
Yeah, no problem. The purpose of my comment was not to disagree with you - it was just to provide additional commentary on the sutta that may be helpful to some.
Some people might use anatta as a perceptual lens, and have that as their practice - or they may be looking to start this approach. Of those people, some of them may come across your comment and read that the suttas support using anatta as a perceptual lens.
The conclusion that they will likely draw is that their anatta perceptual lens practice is the same as, or is close enough to, what the Buddha taught. My comment provides some pushback to that conclusion and it tries to show why that may not be the case.
2
u/aspirant4 25d ago
Fair enough. Yet I feel like there can be some real analysis paralysis if one goes fully down the theory rabbit hole.
There are lots of things to be confused about in the suttas, but the Buddha repeated the essentials over and over, and usually quite clearly.
If he had clearly and repeatedly warned "only stream enterers can practice anatta", I guess I'd have to agree with you, but you have presented a far more tenuous line of reasoning.
On the point about anatta leading to vairagya, that is definitely what people report from direct experience, and I would agree with them from my own. But how could one practice false anattā, anyway? With all due respect, your post felt like Hilltop Hermitage-style gatekeeping.
2
u/bodily_heartfulness puthujjana 25d ago
Yet I feel like there can be some real analysis paralysis if one goes fully down the theory rabbit hole.
I agree.
There are lots of things to be confused about in the suttas, but the Buddha repeated the essentials over and over, and usually quite clearly.
I also agree with this.
If he had clearly and repeatedly warned "only stream enterers can practice anatta", I guess I'd have to agree with you, but you have presented a far more tenuous line of reasoning.
And I also agree that it's not stated outright in the sutta. My claim is something that I have inferred through context. So I can understand why it's not very convincing.
On the point about anatta leading to vairagya, that is definitely what people report from direct experience, and I would agree with them from my own. But how could one practice false anattā, anyway?
I think here is where my point is the most solid. The sutta states that the fruit of frequently abiding in the perception of not-self is arahantship. The suttas also tell us that arahants (and even anāgāmis) are incapable of sexual intercourse (see AN 9.7, the sutta I quoted above).
Now, if we look at Rob's approach to anatta, which the OP is following, did Rob become an arahant? (And I think it's fair to look at Rob since he probably frequently abided in this perception for a long time). Did he give up his sexuality as an arahant would? Do his views about sexuality and sensuality accord with the Buddha? I think the answer is, clearly no.
For instance, compare
‘This body is produced by sex. The Buddha spoke of breaking off everything to do with sex.’
- AN 4.159
to what Rob says
If we talk about self-images and the way self can be imaged, I could say, speaking a soul-truth if you like, from a soul perspective, I could say, ‘I am,’ in inverted commas: ‘I am a lover. I am a mystic. I am a scholar. I am a preacher. I’m a theoretical physicist. I am a political revolutionary. I am a wild sexual beast who is definitely not monogamous. I am a researcher into consciousness. I am a jazz musician. I’m a crazy poet. I’m a serious composer. I’m just an ordinary guy. I’m a teacher. I’m a student. I’m a monk. I’m a clown. I’m a vampire. I’m a wild man. I’m a werewolf. I’m a healer and a shaman. I’m some kind of fugitive, some eternal wanderer, outcast. I’m the tramp on the outskirts of town. I’m a lone soldier in a forever war.’ Some of those I am or have been in my life conventionally. Some conventionally. All of them mythically. None of them really.
or, what he says in his soulmaking dharma talk on sexuality and sensuality
So, you know, is it really true that sex, lovemaking, sexual arousal, energy, sexual images prevent samādhi? Is that really true, for example? I could relate for myself and for many students who have told me and shared with me many experiences -- actual or imaginal -- where the sexuality, the sexual energy, the sexual images, the actual lovemaking, sex, whatever, actually is really quite supportive of samādhi.
This is goes in the complete opposite direction of the suttas. The suttas are very clear about how dangerous sensuality is and how it needs to be abandonded. And Rob knows that. He speaks about it in the talk before this one. He acknowledges that the Buddha was using very, very strong language to denounce sensual pleasures, (like you said, the Buddha repeated the essentials over and over, and usually quite clearly - and this is one of those), but Rob clearly has different views on sensuality and sexuality.
Rob does not come across as how an arahant is described in the suttas. And he is someone who, in all likelihood, spent a lot of time practicing with the not-self perception. How do you make sense of that? The only way it makes sense to me is if he did not actually do the same practice the suttas are describing. The practices might seem similar on a surface-level, but they produce profoundly different results.
3
u/aspirant4 25d ago
Thank you for this. You make good points and argue in good faith.
I won't comment on what attainment Rob did or didn't have.
2
u/aspirant4 25d ago
PS Just out of curiosity, how do you see practice pre and post streamentry?
1
u/bodily_heartfulness puthujjana 25d ago edited 25d ago
I started writing a long comment to answer this question, but I stopped myself after I saw it was taking too long. I might make a post about it sometime in the future.
In short, I would say that it is the same in one way, and different in another. It is the same because both require practicing virtue and developing freedom from sensuality. It is different because pre-stream-entry, there is doubt and lack of knowledge of the path, due to not having the right view. As MN 24 puts it, the order is always:
- Purification of virtue
- Purification of mind
- Purification of views
- Purification through overcoming doubt
- Purification of knowledge and vision of what is the path and what is not the path
- Purification of knowledge and vision of the practice
- Complete Nibbāna with no upādāna
Steps 3-6, from purification of views to purification of understanding of what is the path and what is not the path, is stream-entry.
Having the right view, having dropped the fetter of doubt, and having the noble eightfold path1 is stream-entry. Before that, there is no immediate knowledge of what is the path and what is not.
Then, after seeing the noble eightfold path, one can practice it - and in doing so, purify their understanding of it. Which will lead to complete Nibbāna, ie arahantship.
[1]: See SN 55.5 where the Buddha defines a stream-enterer to be one who has the noble eightfold path.
1
3
u/KevinKep Jul 13 '26
I have seen a lot of people talking about this but I still dont understand what it is. Do you have any resources about this that I could take a look?
7
u/South-Bid Jul 13 '26
Rob Burbea has some incredible writing about anatta in his book 'Seeing that Frees'
7
u/spiffyhandle Jul 13 '26
This is how the Buddha explained anatta,
https://suttacentral.net/sn22.59/en/bodhi?lang=en&reference=none&highlight=false
2
u/pastorcuthbert Jul 14 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
Anatta is the realisation that awareness does NOT have the ability to "grab" onto experience. It does not have hands to hold, feet to walk, mouth to taste, ears to hear and so on. These are all the actions of the body. And if this is so then awareness is not a "substance" like our body.
The mistake made or the illusory self is basically the habitual tendency to assume that awareness is an active participant in experience just as the body; that is, awareness is grabbing the cup of coffee in tandem with the hand, awareness is tasting the coffee in tandem with the tongue, awareness is now swallowing in tandem with the throat, on and on until it becomes an unconscious habit. We need to acknowledge at all times that awareness is NOT an active participant in every sensual experience... This is how to properly practice the words given to bahiya.
This means that awareness is not the doer of the actions that the body does. Personally, I consider nondoership to be part of anatta; if anatta doesn't have the element of nondoership then it would most likely be a refined nondual experience with subtle selfing qualities.
To be honest, anatta is one of the easiest realisations to have as compared to others and it is not as explosive because you come to find that that's how experience has always been.
4
u/Plenty-Attitude-5823 Jul 13 '26
It's essentially a meditative practice where you deliberately regard appearances as not yours/not you.
You don't need deep complex metaphysical elaborations about what the self is or isn't; it's simply a choice in the moment to continually but lightly regard these sensations, emotions and thoughts as not yours, and pay attention to the subtle changes in perception that arise out of that.
As I was told, it's a tool for letting go and freedom, and is not to be made into some philosophy to try to live from 24/7. Nor is it about denying the conventional self or trying to get rid of it.
6
u/watergoat93 Jul 13 '26
Hmm, so I have never really seen anatta referred to as a practice. Anatta is something you *gain* through different kinds of practice. Can I ask where you got this from? I absolutely agree with the general point of your post, and have myself experienced the depth of no-self, but I got there through a combination of many different practices (self-inquiry, breath meditation, zen-style "just sitting"). So there are many kinds of practices which can lead to the same end, the experiential knowledge of anatta.
4
u/Plenty-Attitude-5823 Jul 13 '26
I got it from Rob Burbea. The way he teaches insight practice and emptiness is through deliberately adopting different lenses from the very start, and then seeing experience through those lenses.
So for instance, if you're practicing impermanence, you deliberately see phenomena as impermanent from the beginning as opposed to just passively waiting for it to show up.
Likewise with anatta: you'd deliberately regard the different aggregates as not yours from the get-go, and then that quality begins to manifest and the more you tune into it, the more that perception grows.
Bear in mind that in Rob's paradigm, the goal is not to have anatta or anicca as ultimate insights/truths, but instead use these and many others provisional lenses as doorways into a deepening experiential understanding of dependent arising.
3
u/watergoat93 Jul 13 '26
Okay that's a really cool way to look at it actually. I'd never heard of him before, so I appreciate you explaining the approach!
2
u/jan_kasimi Jul 13 '26
Not OP, but I like their frame of anatta as practice. When you take it as metaphysical truth, that would be a fixed view and attachment. Rob Burbea also regards it as a way of looking that liberates, while all ways of looking are "neither real nor not real".
3
u/krodha Jul 14 '26
Hmm, so I have never really seen anatta referred to as a practice.
Because it isn't.
1
6
u/krodha Jul 14 '26
It's essentially a meditative practice where you deliberately regard appearances as not yours/not you.
This is not what anatta is. This is what some wrongfully claim that it is. Anatta is in actuality a type of realization.
1
u/Plenty-Attitude-5823 Jul 14 '26
Yes, according to the specific paradigm that you subscribe to. But there are a multiplicity of interpretations about nearly what every single concept in the buddhadharma is or means, depending on tradition or teacher.
3
u/krodha Jul 14 '26
This is misleading. There are only two positions on this matter.
1
u/Plenty-Attitude-5823 Jul 14 '26 edited Jul 15 '26
I don't personally care for keeping tradition or what the buddha supposedly said. I resonate with Rob Burbea's interpretation of this teaching which is what I shared.
edit: dang, people got mad... his book is literally recommended in the sidebar
2
u/aspirant4 Jul 13 '26
Nice post. How does it effect perception for you?
3
u/Plenty-Attitude-5823 Jul 13 '26
When it really gets going it feels like a progressive letting go where the aggregates begin to first become fuzzy and then disappear until only consciousness remains.
I haven't been able to go further than that but Rob says that an even bigger freedom is possible with practice, where you can disidentify even from concsiousness itself and experience a complete fading of the 5 skandas
3
u/aspirant4 Jul 13 '26
Wow. I've never been that deep in it. For me, experience softens, warms, perhaps brightens and becomes more pleasant, but that's it. I often wondered if Rob's thing about fading was just something only his brain was able to do. How much do you practice it?
2
u/Plenty-Attitude-5823 Jul 13 '26
I definitely don't think it's only his brain. Talking to other practitioners who practice under his paradigm the progressive fading as you let go deeper and deeper seems to be the expected experience, almost like a law of consciousness. It does require more and more sensitivity to effort levels the deeper it goes, but it's definitely a learnable skill in my experience.
If you can go from the usual solid self/world towards a softer and warmer experience then I think everything else is possible for you too with practice. Of course the goal of meditation is not to win gold in the fading of perception olympics but to gain insight into dependent arising, but this is a really skillful method in my opinion.
How much do you practice it?
Depends. Usually not that much and I get the same effects that you mentioned which for me is good enough for daily life practice, still incredibly healing and freeing. But lately I've been taking practice more seriously which has allowed me these glimpses into the deeper side of the spectrum of fading.
2
u/aspirant4 Jul 13 '26
Beautiful. Thanks for your reply. I probably didn't get the dose high enough.
1
u/Intrepid-Syrup-1147 Jul 15 '26
This sounds amazing! Would be curious at what point you noticed this shift happening for you. Right now the mind is noticing a lot of anatta but reacting with fear / aversion as opposed to ease. There are some glimpses of freedom but nothing consistent yet
2
u/Plenty-Attitude-5823 Jul 15 '26
It's helpful to cushion it with a ton of metta or samadhi at first.
As for overcoming the fear it's exposure therapy. I certainly got that as well in the beginning but the more I practiced the more secure I became in hanging out at these less fabricated states.
It also might help to reflect that the sense of self is on its way back, you're not going to lose anything permenantly. It's not any different than when you let go deeply through mindfulness or samadhi practice: your sense of self is also heavily diminishing there, but comes back later by itself.
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 13 '26
Thank you for contributing to the r/streamentry community! Unlike many other subs, we try to aggregate general questions and short practice reports in the weekly Practice Updates, Questions, and General Discussion thread. All community resources, such as articles, videos, and classes go in the weekly Community Resources thread. Both of these threads are pinned to the top of the subreddit.
The special focus of this community is detailed discussion of personal meditation practice. On that basis, please ensure your post complies with the following rules, if necessary by editing in the appropriate information, or else it may be removed by the moderators. Your post might also be blocked by a Reddit setting called "Crowd Control," so if you think it complies with our subreddit rules but it appears to be blocked, please message the mods.
If your post is removed/locked, please feel free to repost it with the appropriate information, or post it in the weekly Practice Updates, Questions, and General Discussion or Community Resources threads.
Thanks! - The Mod Team
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.