RE: About Third Jhana

From a non-arahat

Ian And — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 17:58:24 GMT

Disclaimer: I don't cotton to titles, and I make no claims whatsoever. I know what I know. Period. And someone would have to know me and spend some physical time with me in order to be able to determine whether or not what I know has any validity or value to themselves.

Man-made religions throw around terms and titles as though they were the Vatican handing out dispensations. If you want to put your mind in the hands of a man-made religion, then that is your choice. As for myself, I prefer not!

Daniel M. Ingram:

Mike Knapp:

Do you still meditate? If so, why?

I personally still meditate: I think it is good for the brain and body to do so and it just seems a natural, skillful thing to do, as well as it also being basically unavoidable past a certain point.

It never ceases to amaze me that people, even experienced practitioners (present company excluded), still do not get the significance of the teaching on anicca. Sabbe sankhara anicca. Somewhere along the line they yet seem to persist in thinking that permanency can still be established in some arena or other. The mind is a dynamic instrument. This is a fact that cannot be disputed. Can its basic foundation be changed for the better (in wholesome ways) or the worse (in unwholesome ways)? Of course it can, and this includes even after one has reached the pinnacle of one's endeavors beyond which he views no possibility of improvement.

As long as there remains a physical body of some sort or other (be it in gross matter or fine material matter), there will be the requisite of maintaining that body (and therefore the mind) in the optimum condition that one has striven to achieve. Hence the importance of sati (mindfulness) at ALL TIMES.

If you are seeking an opinion, I would think that Daniel's stance (indicated in his reply) is more wide spread and enduring than may be speculated about by people who do not yet understand. If you read the discourses there is little there to suggest that even Gotama gave up the practice of meditation/contemplation after his awakening. (And people called him "a Buddha"! He called himself "tathagata" – which means "one who has thus gone." The implication being that the tathagata is beyond all coming and going – beyond all transitory phenomena. But that doesn't mean that he can relax his mind – or mindfulness – for even one second. If you doubt me, try it yourself and see how far you get before you recognize you have fallen off the path.)

On a personal level, I find those times spent in contemplation to be the most valuable time spent during the day. I would even venture to say that Gotama, were he alive, would agree. (But that is only a speculation, based upon my reading of the discourses and endeavoring to discover the actual man Gotama – based upon my direct knowledge of human nature and behavior – within those readings.)

If you like the technical dogma: arahatship is not quite full awakening: Buddhahood is. Even the Theravada is very clear on this.

That is, if one accepts that the man-made religion of "Theravada" has any authority to make claims about what Gotama taught (which I do not) without backing it up with reference to anything that has been recorded which can be verified as being free of corruption. And even then, there could be differences in interpretation based on points of view about intended meaning. Which is another way of saying that "context is everything" when attempting to interpret meaning.

RE: Involuntary Eye Activity in Jhana Practice?

Ian And — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:43:18 GMT

Mind over easy:

Coming from someone who has consistent access to jhana, and someone who has tried hundreds of experiments in hypnosis, along with looking into the work that has been done in hypnosis, I don't think that they are the same thing. Jhana is very clear, lucid, present, and awake, whereas hypnosis is vague, numbing, releasing, and in my experience, more similar to falling asleep, pushing the border of staying conscious while the body and mind fall asleep. I think people experience hypnosis and mistake it for meditative states like jhana, and vice versa, but there are plenty of people here that consistently hit jhanas that could read accounts of hypnosis to know that they are not the same. I'm sure that there is even some overlap, most likely access concentration (just my opinion), but past that, the effects don't add up.

You won't find any argument here with those comments or descriptions.

CCC has always had his own peculiar outlook on things, likely based on moments of pain that his mind hasn't fully processed yet.

Mind over easy:

-Hypnosis = Bordering on sleep, whereas jhana = immense wakeful clarity, sleepiness not present whatsoever
-Hypnosis = Generally just releasing awareness and conscious control, whereas jhana= carefully tuning awareness, through conscious control, in order to expand perception and sensory clarity

Check out some of these accounts of hypnosis, and compare them to the descriptions of jhana, especially factors such as joy, rapture, formless descriptions and the typical arising of jhanas in order. I've never experienced or read about hypnosis resembling these jhanic states.

Anyways, I'm not trying to say, "It's jhana, not hypnosis! Hypnosis doesn't exist", or vice versa. I'm saying I've experienced both and found them to be completely different ways of manipulating consciousness.

While the dhyana experience can be perceived and described in many different ways, those who have described it as you have above tend to be more experienced in attaining to the state and knowing how to retrieve it time and again.

What can make it a problematic state to aim for achieving is that once one figures out what it feels like to be in dhyana, and therefore gains an idea about how to achieve it the next time, one realizes that there is a measure of "letting go" that needs to happen just before the mind jumps from normal consciousness into the dhyana state. The problem with that "letting go" comes when one resists resuming control over the experience through the implementation of sati (mindfulness), allowing the mind to remain dull, overly relaxed, and in a suggestive state (which is a classic hypnotic state, just as Mind over easy has described). This might be described as the "bliss factor" where one overly (to his own detriment) enjoys the experience of the bliss (the dull, drugged-out feeling) over anything else, and resists resuming control over the mind using sati. When a practitioner insists on becoming mindful while in the state, the state takes on a vastly different hue, which includes the faculties of clarity, wakefulness, pliancy, hyper-awareness, workability, having established the mind in imperturbability.

The longer one works with the dhyana experience, the more one learns about one's ability to direct the mind to any state (like appana samadhi) and be able to maintain it there effortlessly in order to perform contemplation.

RE: Involuntary Eye Activity in Jhana Practice?

Ian And — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 18:07:23 GMT

Harry F B:

On the other hand, I was just listening to a talk by Leigh B here:

http://dharmaseed.org/teacher/108/?search=Jhana

... where he says that the diminishing of senses (he refers specifically to hearing) in entering jhanas will happen in proportion to the level of the practitioner's concentration; so that a person with very developed concentration will experience them more quietly (this is discussed in the talk 'Focus and Freedom: Introduction to the Jhanas' @ 40 mins). He doesn't seem to think that such highly developed concentration levels are a prerequisite to entering jhanas however, which is different to the impression I get from other seemingly more exclusive sources, including Ajahn Brahm.

I'm in complete agreement with what Leigh mentions in the quotation you provided above.

As I mentioned above, the purpose of dhyana meditation it to allow the mind to become clear, unblemished, imperturbable, bright, established, and workable in order to be able to direct it toward "knowing and seeing things as they are." That is the essence of self-realization.

You are, of course, free to do as you see fit. Leigh (and myself) are just trying to save you some time on your journey. In the end, you will end up proving the truth from your own experience of it.

Harry F B:

...and I have to say the idea of concentrating oneself senseless is not an attractive proposal to me...

Nor should it be for anyone who is seeking self-realization. It's good to hear that at least you realize that!

RE: Involuntary Eye Activity in Jhana Practice?

Ian And — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 16:34:14 GMT

Harry F B:

Yes, it felt like I was more concentrated at the time, but I was still aware of sounds in my environment, so I'm also not sure if calling the state a trance is accurate as that term suggests to me that I would have been unaware of my surroundings etc...

Your understanding of the trance experience is somewhat faulty. I took a couple of courses in self-hypnosis when I was younger, so I'm speaking from experience.

A person in trance can be aware of their surroundings. Consciousness is not lost to one in trance. One of the distinguishing characteristics about trance states is the person's vulnerability to suggestion. This is how stage hypnotists work, by changing mental thought or perception through suggestion. Also, one in trance will recall (after the experience; although they can be aware of this during the experience, too, if they are paying attention) the nature of the mind as having been dull and overly relaxed, without the gatekeeper of sati on duty to filter any incoming content for its veracity. In other words, the mind becomes susceptible to accepting as true any suggestion that is made to it. Even nonsensical, irrational suggestions (even though not every subject of hypnosis accepts such suggestions).

Harry F B:

but yet some of the descriptions I've read do seem to suggest that this does happen when a person has entered certain jhana states, that they become completely unaware of their senses and surroundings etc (which could be described as trance-like)...?

The problem with reading about subtle states like dhyana is that unless the reader knows and has confidence in the source of the information, they may be accepting faulty information as being true. By faulty information, I mean, it may be partially untrue or totally untrue; either way, the person accepting such falsehoods has been compromised in their understanding of the truth, and therefore are more likely to be mislead by what they have accepted as being true.

It sounds like you may have been reading information coming from someone who espouses similar ideas about dhyana as does Ajahn Brahmavamso, the Englishman Peter Betts who traveled to Thailand in the 1970s and became a student/disciple of the famous Thai Forest meditation master Ajahn Chah. Ajahn Brahm puts out the idea that true "jhana" is only attained with the diminishing and cessation of the senses. But this can be a misleading and ultimately harmful idea to accept. Also, it is not what his teacher Ajahn Chah espoused!

While it is true that one can attain to a state in dhyana that is without any sense awareness, such states are not the only indicator of achieving dhyana. Dhyana can be achieved with full awareness of hearing, seeing, smell, taste, and touch. It is the strength and level of one's sati that maintains one's awareness of these qualities, rather than becoming totally absorbed by the dhyana experience. In addition, insight could not take place if the mind were totally shut down, hence self-realization would be impossible while in such a state.

Ideally, dhyana is used to help the meditator to reach states of samadhi (what some term as appana samadhi or states of "fixed concentration"). From this platform of "fixed concentration" the mind is totally at ease, bright, malleable, established, cleansed of impurities, workable, and having gained to imperturbability. It is therefore in the perfect condition to perform insight meditation on the Dhamma in order to realize the truths that Gotama taught. Seeing and recognizing these truths from the perspective of one's own direct experience (having gained confidence and assurance in what one is discerning) is what the process of self-realization is all about. Nothing more, nor nothing less.

RE: "No steps" - Nissagardatta

Ian And — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 05:04:24 GMT

C C C:

Thanks Ian,

Are you saying Mahasi recognized stages that others such as Nisa, Ramana and Adya missed, or didn't care to mention?

No. I'm saying that Mahasi based his methodology on the methodology that the Buddha taught. Nisa, Ramana, and Adya did not. They seem to be looking for the "short cut."

What I'm saying is that Gotama had a reason for teaching things the way he taught them. That becomes apparent to anyone who reads, contemplates, and follows the discourses. I doubt he would have approved of what Nisa, Ramana, and Adya teach. But I suppose you'll just have to find that out for yourself in your own way. Be careful.

Read Daniel's reply once again, starting from the third paragraph on down. He is spot on with his analysis!

(Parenthetically: Andrew Cohen – the founder of What is Enlightenment? magazine, the last time I paid any attention to him and his activities there (which was several years ago, so I don't know if he has changed since then) – is (or was at the time I was observing his activities as corroborated by his employees) suffering under a form of ego maniacism. I know this because I used to train under one; so I know what I'm talking about. This is not something that anyone should ever want to undergo; yet, having undergone such abuse, it becomes very easy for one to spot another such person. The lessons don't fade that quickly.)

RE: Involuntary Eye Activity in Jhana Practice?

Ian And — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 04:38:10 GMT

You can read some of the hypnosis literature for this. Jhana = trance = hypnosis.

This equation is faulty. Jhana, practiced correctly, does not equal hypnotic trance.

However, if practiced without sati (mindfulness) it can devolve into a trance-like state (dull mindedness) which would be very unfortunate for the practitioner, causing him to be liable for making mistakes in discernment.

The eyes looking up toward the middle brow is nothing to be concerned about. It's something that many yogis experience. It can be a sign of increasing concentration. Looking upwards, the meditator is not as likely to fall asleep, is another reason that is taught for this behavior. It's what I was taught, and it has worked for me for over 32 years. And I don't fall into trance states when I practice dhyana.

RE: "No steps" - Nissagardatta

Ian And — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 04:07:09 GMT

C C C:

Daniel, by "no steps" I mean no phases or stages to pass through, not "no work" as such (Eternal has pointed out also). Nisagardatta, Ramana and Adya all teach meditation techniques to work at. But none of these guys mentions stages such as Reobervation. [And neither did the Buddha!] Why is that?

Because they weren't working with instruction under a Mahasi Sayadaw inspired methodology. The stages talked about in the Mahasi method of training are meant to assist the practitioner to be able to recognize their own progress on the path they have chosen to tread. It's like seeing a signpost which tells the practitioner that he's on the right path, that he hasn't wandered off the road, so to speak. The stages are like landmarks which help direct the yogi along the way.

C C C:

Also, why do those other systems have such varying descriptions and number of stages? Hard questions I guess. I tend to think that when everyone disagrees on a topic, there's an essential element of understanding missing. Could it be they are creating these stages with their minds? That's my gut feel.

Well your gut is partially right and partially wrong. You have to realize the context in which Mahasi created his method of practice in order to appreciate why he recommended what he recommended and to whom he recommended it.

What he was working with was endeavoring to teach laymen (and women) a method they could use to gain insight without having to go through the hours of intense practice to master dhyana meditation. It can be very difficult to live a householder's life and still find the time necessary to become an expert at dhyana meditation, much less watching the movements of the mind in real time! His "dry insight" method of training was his answer to this need that he saw in the people he was working with. That doesn't necessarily mean that there was an essential element of understanding missing.

C C C:

Regarding the "no work" approaches, I don't really believe there is no work involved. Even when someone says "you're already enlightened!" I think that kind of phrase is supposed to be taken as an object of contemplation, similar to the "I am". I think that's what the intention is with such statements - working on them like koans, attempting to find the deeper, experiential meaning.

Good for you. That is a very wise approach. Never take anything for granted. Make it prove its merits under your watchful eye.

C C C:

Having done a lot of things the hard, longhand way in my life, I am now on the look out for short cuts and newer, faster, neater, more truthful approaches.

That is all fine and good as far as it goes. However, you would be wise to be very careful with what you accept as being "newer, faster, neater, more truthful approaches" as you could very well set yourself up for a delusive trip big time! Exercise caution if you have any doubts, is all I'm saying.

It is a fallacy to look for "short cuts and . . ." I used to think the same way. And almost fell into a trap that would have kept me deluded into thinking I had achieved the goal. It's a good thing I kept working and looking until I discovered the fallacy in my view, and found the confirmation I was looking for in what Gotama taught.

RE: Some Sort of Jhana Experience, or Just Imagination?

Ian And — Sun, 21 Apr 2013 19:34:55 GMT

Hello Harry,

Since no one else has chimed in on your question, I will endeavor to analyze what you have presented us with, and to give you some clues as to what it might have been that you experienced. However, it will be up to you to decide what it was that happened according to your own ability of discernment.

Harry F B:

I'm following Leigh Brasington's core instructions for entering Jhana (because I'm stupid and they're simple!)

That's good and interesting, as it was Leigh's instruction (albeit less detailed then than it is now) that I followed over 12 years ago when I first began practicing to reach dhyana. Intuitively, Leigh's instruction seemed to match up with a passage I had read in MN 36 of the Buddha's first experience with dhyana as a child while sitting under a rose apple tree watching his father at a ceremonial ploughing during a traditional festival. I say intuitively because the description matched up with experiences I had had as a child, which helped me to relate to the description in the discourse (as well as to Leigh's descriptions).

The lesson here being: if you can stick with (and follow) your intuition, it can oftentimes take you to where you want to go. None of this stuff is rocket science (as some teachers of "jhana" might have it); it is all dependent on being able to follow your direct experience, being relaxed, secluded, and mindfully attentive to what is occurring in the moment. Once you gain an idea of what to look for (of what the experience "feels like"), it can help you to more easily attain to those states again and again in the future.

Harry F B:

This is what happened in this morning's 40 min sit:

1. I reached a stable focus on the breath very quickly (attention was light and stable, thoughts where 'wispy' and unobtrusive etc), so I decided to turn my attention to a pleasant feeling. I placed my attention in the warm, heavy, tingly weight of my hands (I sit cross legged on a zafu with the standard hand mudra).

2. The nice feeling spread up my arms and throughout my body. It was just nice, not overwhelming or wildly ecstatic like some accounts I've read.

So far so good. This is a classic description (using this kind of instruction) for entering into dhyana meditation.

Harry F B:

3. After a time of this I decided to try and focus on the emotional joy/happiness accompanying the physical sensations as per LB's instructions whereupon...

4. Suddenly, and quite surprisingly, I was pulled into a different awareness more in the region of the eye/head than the body. There were 'clouds' of phosphorescent light blooming and fading in front of my eyes. I decided to follow Ajahn Brahm et al's advice and give myself over to it. This made it seem like I was traveling through the light clouds until there was a 'white out' of the shimmery light and it filled my vision. Things then became very quiet and still for the rest of the sitting in this light.

A question: Were you predisposed to seeing "clouds of phosphorescent light blooming and fading in front of" your eyes? By "predisposed," I mean, was there some instruction you read which mentioned this visual phenomenon, or did occur out of nowhere? It doesn't really matter what your answer is; what matters is what you did with the experience and where you took it. In other words, what ideas you associated it with and where you went (what followed experientially) afterward.

When I set out to practice by Leigh's description, I had also been reading about the concept of "access concentration" and that a visual in the form of a cottonball or circle of light might appear heralding entry to upacara samadhi or "access concentration." When this occurred (likely because of pre-suggestion) during one sitting, it gave me the initial confidence that I was performing the meditation correctly. As I became more adept at being able to enter the first dhyana, I let go of the concept of "access concentration" and went directly to the first dhyana. In other words, I recognized that it was my own mind that had led me on the pathway (fabricated the experience that I experienced that first time) to the first dhyana, and that I could control the processes that occur simply by inclining the mind toward what I wanted to occur (in essence, making it happen).

Harry F B:

Things then became very quiet and still for the rest of the sitting in this light.

During this time I felt very focused with a few thoughts popping in and just falling away by themselves. I was always aware of some bodily sensations, particularly the nice sensation of the hands, and I could hear sounds in my environment throughout most or all of this.

This, too, is a classic description of what might be either third or fourth dhyana.

In order to gain a better perspective, read the contemplate the following four suttas from the Samyutta Nikaya at SN 40.1-4. It may help to bring a better understanding of what it is that you are endeavoring to accomplish. I wasn't able to find a comparable translation on the Internet, so I copied this translation from my edition of The Connected Discourses of the Buddha as translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi. Pay particular attention to the importance of the refrain by the Buddha that is repeated in italic in each of these four stages of dhyana development. Steadying the mind in these states first will be to your benefit once you are able to recognize them with ease. Do not be too concerned if you are not able to recognize the transition between these levels at first. It can take some time to really be sure what it is that you are experiencing, as the mind can play tricks on you while it is still not fully within your control. As your discernment becomes sharper, it will become easier to recognize these transitions.

And, of course, Leigh has some thoughtful things to say with regard to the four factors in the first jhana that are well worth attending to.

SN40.1-4:

SN 40.1 The First Dhyana
Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi

On one occasion the Venerable Mahamoggallana was dwelling at Savatthi in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's Park. There the Venerable Mahamoggallana addressed the bhikkhus thus: "Friends, bhikkhus!"

"Friend!" those bhikkhus replied. The Venerable Mahamoggallana said this:

"Here, friends, while I was alone in seclusion, a reflection arose in my mind thus: 'It is said, "the first jhana, the first jhana." What now is the first jhana?'

"Then, friends, it occurred to me: 'Here, secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, a bhikkhu enters and dwells in the first jhana, which is accompanied by thought and examination, with rapture and happiness born of seclusion. This is called the first jhana.'

"Then, friends, secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, I entered and dwelt in the first jhana.... While I dwelt therein perception and attention accompanied by sensuality assailed me.[277]

"Then, friends, the Blessed One came to me by means of spiritual power and said this: 'Moggallana, Moggallana, do not be negligent, brahmin, regarding the first jhana. Steady your mind in the first jhana, unify your mind in the first jhana, concentrate your mind in the first jhana.' Then, friends, on a later occasion, secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, I entered and dwelt in the first jhana, which is accompanied by thought and examination, with rapture and happiness born of seclusion.

"If, friends, one speaking rightly could say of anyone: 'He is a disciple who attained to greatness of direct knowledge with the assistance of the Teacher,' it is of me that one could rightly say this."

Footnote:
277. Kamasahagata sanna manasikara samudacaranti. Spk glosses: accompanied by the five hindrances.

SN 40.2 The Second Dhyana
Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi

..."Here, friends, while I was alone in seclusion, a reflection arose in my mind thus: 'It is said, "the second jhana, the second jhana." What now is the second jhana?"

"Then, friends, it occurred to me: 'Here, with the subsiding of thought and examination, a bhikkhu enters and dwells in the second jhana, which has internal confidence and unification of mind, is without thought and examination, and has rapture and happiness born of concentration. This is called the second jhana.'

"Then, friends, with the subsiding of thought and examination, I entered and dwelt in the second jhana....While I dwelt therein perception and attention accompanied by thought and examination assailed me.

"Then, friends, the Blessed One came to me by means of spiritual power, and said this: 'Moggallana, Moggallana, do not be negligent, brahmin, regarding the second jhana. Steady your mind in the second jhana, unify your mind in the second jhana, concentrate your mind in the second jhana.' Then, on a later occasion, with the subsiding of thought and examination, I entered and dwelt in the second jhana, which has internal confidence and rapture and happiness born of concentration.

"If, friends, one speaking rightly could say of anyone: 'He is a disciple who attained to greatness of direct knowledge with the assistance of the Teacher,' it is of me that one could rightly say this."

SN 40.3 The Third Dhyana
Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi

..."Here, friends, while I was alone in seclusion, a reflection arose in my mind thus: 'It is said, "the third jhana, the third jhana." What now is the third jhana?"

"Then, friends, it occurred to me: 'Here, with the fading away as well of rapture, a bhikkhu dwells equanimous and, mindful and clearly comprehending, he experiences happiness with the body; he enters and dwells in the third jhana of which the noble ones declare: "He is equanimous, mindful, one who dwells happily." This is called the third jhana.'

"Then, friends, with the fading away as well of rapture ... I entered and dwelt in the third jhana.... While I dwelt therein perception and attention accompanied by rapture assailed me.

"Then, friends, the Blessed One came to me by means of spiritual power, and said this: 'Moggallana, Moggallana, do not be negligent, brahmin, regarding the third jhana. Steady your mind in the third jhana, unify your mind in the third jhana, concentrate your mind in the third jhana.' Then, on a later occasion, with the fading away as well of rapture, I dwelt equanimous and, mindful and clearly comprehending, I experienced happiness with the body; I entered and dwelt in the third jhana of which the noble ones declare: 'He is equanimous, mindful, one who dwells happily.'

"If, friends, one speaking rightly could say of anyone: 'He is a disciple who attained to greatness of direct knowledge with the assistance of the Teacher,' it is of me that one could rightly say this."

SN 40.4 The Fourth Dhyana
Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi

..."Here, friends, while I was alone in seclusion, a reflection arose in my mind thus: 'It is said, "the fourth jhana, the fourth jhana." What now is the fourth jhana?"

"Then, friends, it occurred to me: 'Here, with the abandoning of pleasure and pain, and with the previous passing away of joy and displeasure, a bhikkhu enters and dwells in the fourth jhana, which is neither painful nor pleasant and includes the purification of mindfulness by equanimity. This is called the fourth jhana.'

"Then, friends, with the abandoning of pleasure and pain ... I entered and dwelt in the fourth jhana.... While I dwelt therein perception and attention accompanied by happiness assailed me.

"Then, friends, the Blessed One came to me by means of spiritual power, and said this: 'Moggallana, Moggallana, do not be negligent, brahmin, regarding the fourth jhana. Steady your mind in the fourth jhana, unify your mind in the fourth jhana, concentrate your mind in the fourth jhana.' Then, on a later occasion, with the abandoning of pleasure and pain, and with the previous passing away of joy and displeasure, I entered and dwelt in the fourth jhana, which is neither painful nor pleasant and includes the purification of mindfulness by equanimity.

"If, friends, one speaking rightly could say of anyone: 'He is a disciple who attained to greatness of direct knowledge with the assistance of the Teacher,' it is of me that one could rightly say this."

In peace,
Ian

RE: Skipping the instruction after a while?

Ian And — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 16:55:53 GMT

Viktor Valentin Norlander Högman:

Thank you very much for three good answers. The last two weeks I have kind of stopped the noting.

I'm unsure how this has influenced the awareness, but I suspect that my thoughts have profited on that... I think I've started to get lost in thoughts again. So it might be a good idea to begin noting all the time again, I guess.

That all depends on what the thoughts are about. If you're examining the five aggregates, for instance, and the thoughts that you are having relate to that subject matter, then they are worth pursuing for their value as insight! This is what insight contemplation is all about!

Just because your meditation seems to become sidetracked by arising thought doesn't automatically mean that those thoughts are to be ignored. Insight contemplation is about seeing deeper into the subject matter being examined and evaluated. Without the arising of additional information in the form of thought about these subject matters, you may be throwing out the baby with the bathwater to ignore them.

Think about this. Seriously.

Also, consider, for beginners who have not yet managed to gain control of their mind enough to consciously direct it toward the subject matter that they wish to examine, they may still be plagued with "monkey mind" wherein the mind directs itself, subconsciously, outside the parameters of the owner's wishes. In that case, it may profit one to ignore the the arising thoughts and to discipline the mind by returning to the meditation object (such as the breath and noting practice, for example).

This latter is an example of the process involved in the re-training of the mind to follow one's intended directions. However, if you are fairly certain that you have been able to compete this process of re-training, and have gained control of your mind to the extent of its obeying your commands, then you may want to consider just where the mind is going before you ignore the pathway that it is taking you down.

Meditation and contemplation are a dynamic process. If you are unfamiliar with the practice and cultivation of reconditioning the mind using these tools, then without proper guidance (in the form of a dedicated meditation guide or teacher), you could be setting yourself up for years of just spinning your wheels without going anywhere! And that truly would be sad, indeed.

RE: Skipping the instruction after a while?

Ian And — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 15:25:27 GMT

Viktor Valentin Norlander Högman:

So, is it a natural thing to skip the noting, the body-scanning or the self-inquiry after a while and just silently observe the thoughts and the sensations in the body.

Yes, it is. The important thing to achieve is "mindfulness and clear comprehension" (sati-sampajanna) of what is occurring in the present moment. This can be turned into investigation (contemplation) as you observe the object or subject matter that has captured your attention and observation in order to gain insight about that object or subject matter.

Viktor Valentin Norlander Högman:

Or is there any advantages of keeping up the body-scanning, mahasi-noting or the self-inquiry. In other words sticking to the instruction even if you get it intuitively?

From my perspective (which obviously isn't the perspective of the majority here) if you "get it intuitively" then that's what's important.

Some people find it advantageous to do noting in order to increase their concentration and mindfulness without the assistance of absorption meditation, and for those reasons, it can be an appropriate way to practice.

Jigme's comment is spot on: "From a Mahasi perspective, dropping three separate techniques and just sticking to one which lets you observe mental and physical sensations, which is what you're saying that you're doing, is actually closest to the technique. Noting is just scaffolding for noticing. If you don't need the noting, and don't go off into thoughts that don't get noted, feel free to drop the noting when you don't need it."

Others, however, who have benefited from the practice of absorption meditation, find the noting practice to be a distraction from their contemplation, and therefore drop it (if they ever attempted it in the first place).

RE: Improvement of awareness and concentration skills with fasting,

Ian And — Thu, 11 Apr 2013 00:50:26 GMT

Thanks for posting about your experiences with fasting. Very interesting.

I'm interested in the health benefits. Anyone over 55 will know what I'm talking about, all the little aches and pains that come with the aging process. So, I'll have to give a go on this 61 year old body.

Anyone wanting to learn more might find this website of interest:

http://www.allaboutfasting.com/benefits-of-fasting.html

Water fasting offers the quickest detox and strongest therapeutic effect. It is also the most challenging fast to perform in the first few days. Careful preparation in the days before a water fast can make all the difference in your level of comfort, but the emotional challenge will still be great. Getting professional supervision is an option and is recommended for a water fast longer than 3 days. See the Who Can Fast page to make sure you meet the criteria necessary for fasting. . . .

The speed at which old conditions can right themselves during a water fast is incredible. It's amazing the little health "issues" that just go away – the mole that just drops off, the shoulder that's been achy for years suddenly feels well again, that little patch of "weird" skin you've grown accustomed to vanishes without a trace...and those are just the little things. Fasting can even alleviate some "big" things, but if you have major health conditions, you may benefit from having professional supervision.

RE: Thanissaro-like people/places

Ian And — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 05:32:54 GMT

I was going to suggest Abhayagiri Buddhist Monastery in California.

It is in the Thai Forest tradition of Ajahn Chah. Ajahn Amaro and Ajahn Sumedo are both associated with this monastery and both are on the opposite side of Ajahn Brahm's teaching methodology. and therefore closer to Tan Geoff's brand of teaching.

Unfortunately, they are not set up to take retreatants. Although this looks promising (click on "Overnight stays") and you may want to check into it:

First-time visits are limited to a one week stay (or ten days if visiting from out-of-state or two weeks if visiting from outside the U.S.). We ask that all new guests stay for at least three nights. After the first visit, a guest may request to stay for a longer period of time when returning for a second visit. Accommodations are limited, so please contact the guest monk (preferably by email) well ahead of time, to check the availability of space. We do not make reservations for guests more than two months in advance of the requested date of stay.

RE: The Law, The Money and Your Choice

Ian And — Sat, 30 Mar 2013 05:54:26 GMT

fivebells .:

Could you cite some cases which have been won using this legal theory, please? Links to the court decisions would be handy, too, as I don't have easy access to Lexis-Nexis.

Your use of the term "legal theory" tells me that you haven't quite grasped the importance of the difference between the words "legal" and "lawful" and what that can mean in a real world confrontation with the "system" here in America (and elsewhere, for that matter).

Have you taken the time to read the Consent PDF? And the Presumption PDF? Those two pieces will provide you with a foundation for study as well as providing case cites with regard to what you ignorantly call "theory." Theories are often viewed as generally being unproven facts or principles of some kind or another. Lawful process (using the common law), on the other hand, has a long and glorious history in humankind, and is well worth looking into.

As for court decisions, in most instances, the kind of challenge to the legal system that these so-call "theories" present them with usually end up in their cases being dismissed without further harassment, therefore there are few cases, beyond mere personal anecdotal examples, to be cited. They simply are not recorded except by the individual victorious suitor. Once one understands why this is, it becomes less mysterious.

If you're looking for evidence of success, you can find many instances in this sub-forum where Success Stories are posted. As a matter of fact, this forum (and it's previous iterations: suijuris.net and suijurisclub.net, both of which are now defunct) is a good place to learn about the practical application of these "ideas" from people more knowledgeable than myself. (However, the proof in the pudding happens to be how well one understands these principles of law enough to successfully apply them, and in that endeavor, I have had my share of victories.)

Otherwise, the purpose of this thread is for self-education and knowledge in the law and lawful process as it can be asserted in present-day America. Obviously, the people who are interested in pursuing these alternative remedies to the statutory jurisdiction will be interested to learn about their effectiveness. That part of my presentation comes later in the process of this thread. I am extremely busy at the moment, and as I have time, I will add to this thread. It takes time to properly compose and prepare a posting.

RE: Richard's insight practice

Ian And — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:05:08 GMT

Richard Zen:

One question. When you put consciousness leading to volitional formations, what you mean is that you can't have volitional formations without consciousness?

Yes. That is only common sense, when you stop to think of it, yes? Do you see that?

Richard Zen:

This is to mean that craving and clinging affect volitional formations but you're trying to point out what leans on what?

Okay. Let's go through this progression the way I came to see it. I goofed up last night (tired and sleepy) in going through this in my mind. I switched around vedana and sankhara in the example below to correct my mistake.

Ian And:
What I was mainly referring to with regard to the reference to dependent co-arising was following the middle eight factors in one's experience of the twelve factored paticca samuppada in regard to any experience you may have. That means: consciousness makes > contact with one of the > six sense bases > and recognizes name and form > conditioning feeling > from which volitional formations arise > giving rise to craving > and clinging. Seeing the last four factors in this series provides one with the opportunity to develop dispassion toward them.

Let's look at a practical example from reality, okay. You are walking along and suddenly you come upon an orange tree. Consciousness (in the form of grabbing an object, which is vinnana, and recognizing the object, which is sanna) makes contact with the orange through the sense base of vision (eye-consciousness). It recognizes namarupa (name and form of the object) which conditions vedana (feeling) about the object which conditions sankhara (volitional formations) with regard to the object, giving rise to tanha (craving) and upadana (clinging). Is this making any more sense?

Now, notice how sankhara (a volitional idea – "I must have this orange right away") is conditioned by vedana (a pleasant affectation, lets say, with regard to the orange in the present example). Having noticed this sequence up to this point in the process, the owner of the mind now has a decision to take: either grab the orange and eat it, or not grab to eat it. In Pavlovian conditioned response scenarios, the conditioned mind will do whatever it has been conditioned in the past to do, which if the owner is an untrained child, let's say, he might grab the orange and eat it to satisfy a sudden urge or craving. See?

Let's further say that the social situation in which this particular mind finds itself in is one where grabbing the orange would be seen as self-serving and a social faux pas. He then circumvents his own conditioning by becoming dispassionate about the orange, and does not grab it, understanding the social consequences of not doing so.

Don't over-read things into this. It is just a simple example from a practical, hypothetical life situation that serves to illustrate the points I'm endeavoring to get across.

Richard Zen:

BTW that's cool you could let go of vedana in that way . . .

but I can understand how you may not want to get into that state because from what I read in Boisvert's book is that it's death like and not awakening.

But I didn't do anything (let go of anything). The mind went there all on its own. I may have put forth a resolution (to enter the cessation of perception and feeling), but that is all. All I did was set up the condition for it to occur. Having been there once, I've never had the desire to return, for the very reason that Boisvert states, "it is not awakening."

In other words, when a person experiences awakening, they still have the remainder of their life to live out (unless they are considering committing suicide – heaven forbid)! So sanna-vedayita nirodha is a useless achievement as it has no practical use in living one's life (other than as a state, for example, that one might enter as an anesthesia during a medical procedure or operation).

Yet, even so, it is still comforting to realize that the mind can be shut down, that it is possible to shut down perception and feeling so that no sankhara can be executed (or rather, be suppressed via dispassion toward formations). But, please, don't conflate (or mistake) from this statement that shutting down perception and feeling is equal to dispassion toward formations. That's not the point I intend to make. Dispassion is something to be DEVELOPED and CULTIVATED consciously, not unconsciously. It's just plain common sense.

RE: Richard's insight practice

Ian And — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 06:32:54 GMT

Hi Richard,

Richard Zen:

It has occurred to be me but I think I may need more concentration. The great discourses of causation says that you need all 8 jhanas. Daniel Ingram's mind map has fruition after the 8th jhana.

Even KFD points this out:

Meditating with a Kasina

You may be right (for the approach you have in mind). Only you really know for sure. No one else can take that decision for you. (That is, if you gather what I mean by implication.)

Yet, who knows if the Mahanidana Sutta was an accurate portrayal of Gotama's instruction, or whether the compilers took some liberty and inserted the standard formula for jhana thinking, "Well, this is probably what the Buddha meant to say." Or whether it was inserted for ease of memorization's sake. (For clarification here, I'm just speculating about that comment, so don't take it too seriously.)

What I do know from my own direct experience is that even though I had attained the eight and then the ninth level of dhyana, that that wasn't necessarily the basis for the realization moments I experienced outside of meditation practice. Yes, I had accomplished all that, but it was during my reading and contemplation of Katukurunde Nanananda's book Concept and Reality that I experience some really useful breakthroughs. Realizations that helped me personally to see things that I had not seen before about how the mind works. In the end, that is really all a person can ask for of the teaching, in whatever manner it manifests itself.

What I was mainly referring to with regard to the reference to dependent co-arising was following the middle eight factors in one's experience of the twelve factored paticca samuppada in regard to any experience you may have. That means: consciousness makes > contact with one of the > six sense bases > and recognizes name and form > conditioning volitional formations > from which feeling arises > giving rise to craving > and clinging. Seeing the last four factors in this series provides one with the opportunity to develop dispassion toward them. Does that make any sense to you?

Richard Zen:

I can access 4 jhanas but have never attained the immaterial jhanas. I'm a householder and have too many responsibilities to have long retreats so I do the next best which is meditating at home and daily mindfulness.

In your opinion should I cultivate all 8 jhanas and develop dispassion for them or is that not really necessary? I just need to cultivate dispassion for all five aggregates? Yet consciousness to be seen impermanent from understanding it's leaning on objects may need strong concentration to fade the senses enough so consciousness stops briefly (stream-entry?)?

My opinion (which may change; but as it stands right now...) is that what is very helpful, if not outright necessary, is at least the first four dhyanas and a good insight practice, whether or not that insight happens during meditation or outside of meditation (as in my case). On the other hand, what I gained from having experienced sanna-vedayita nirodha (or the cessation of perception and feeling) was the direct realization that the processes of mind really can be shut completely down. It was kind of a corroboration all its own. Although it was not a state that I wanted to enter very often. In other words, I didn't develop any clinging to it.

I somewhat agree with Ajahn Chah in the following quotation, which obviously is saying that developing the 8 dhyanas is not necessary for awakening. And to that extent, he may be correct. However, after awakening occurs, there is the problem of maintaining it through mindfulness, which dhyana attainment can help assist and condition the mind in cultivating an ongoing state of mindfulness.

"The renowned meditation master, Achaan Chah, was asked during a Questions and Answers Session: 'Is it necessary to be able to enter Absorption in our practice?'

"The Master replied: 'No, Absorption is not necessary. You must establish a modicum of tranquillity and one pointedness of mind. Then use this to examine yourself. Nothing special is needed. If Absorption comes in your practice this is OK. Just don't hold onto it. Some people get hung up with Absorption. It can be great fun to play with. You must know proper limits. If you are wise then you will know the uses and limitations of Absorption, just as you know the limitations of children versus grown men."

RE: Richard's insight practice

Ian And — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 05:41:35 GMT

Richard Zen:

Okay back to work. I paid attention to vedana throughout the evening and can see this is an area that noting with labels is not helping. . . .

The other senses seem to affect thought more and that goes back to sanna again which I've already looked at. When I started doing this I could see so many embryonic thoughts arise and pass away quickly because the recognition is so tied to the feeling tone.

Richard,

Has it not yet occurred to you to connect vedana and sanna up with paticca samuppada? To see how the impression of self arises in connection with feeling and perception according to various sense base consciousnesses? To be mindful of this process throughout the day in order to preempt any false views of self? Has the import of this not yet occurred to you? And how you can use this mindfulness to capture the beginnings of dukkha arising so that it can be stopped in its tracks before it has opportunity to bloom and blossom?

As in being aware (mindful) of the arising of body phenomena, feeling phenomena, mind state phenomena, and mind object phenomena in order to see these as they actually are?

In peace,
Ian

RE: The Law, The Money and Your Choice

Ian And — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 05:16:11 GMT

Jason B:

In considering how to approach an unfamiliar subject that is abstract, contentious, technical, and potentially time-consuming, context can help a bunch in sorting the wheat from the chaff. To that end, I found this quote from Mr. Brobst:

"By the end of the Obama administration, President Obama will have signed so many executive orders as to eliminate Congress on important issues. Those executive orders will become precedent that cannot be overturned by a future president, because Obama was elected as a foreign citizen president; as such, he is not bound by the separation of powers doctrine of the U.S. Constitution.... Change to a dictatorship is exactly what obama had in mind when he ran for president. After all, his background training in whatever form you want to call it, whether Communism, Fascism and the likes thereof, had him well prepared for that position as the start of a dictatorship. All executive orders must be published in the Federal Register, then, they become law."

And that is the clearest statement I've come across in relation to this thread. Anyone think this sounds like a credible person?

Yeah, I checked that guy's website too. Along with poor proofreading, a lack of credentials, and some other red flags, he removed himself as a being a source on anything when he stated he was Birther. "Obama was elected as foreign citizen president."

That's too bad. The arguments might be worth a look. But not from a Constitutional Purist frothing at the mouth.

I'm afraid you've both missed the point of this thread, fellas. If it's not your cup of tea and you don't want to spend the time in research and study of the principles involved in understanding the intricacies of how law works in America, then no one is forcing you to read or pay any attention to this thread at all. Be well and on your way to other diversions.

It might have been compelling if either of you could have addressed anything substantive about the research that Mr. Brobst has done and proven him mistaken in any of his conclusions or explanations. Yet, lacking anything of substance to challenge him on, throwing mud at the wall of his character and seeing how much of it might stick through ad hominem attacks just seem childish and something I would have expected of the people at another Buddhist forum.

At any rate, be well in your illusions about what has taken place in this country. Apparently, the mainstream media is doing its job only too well.

The Law, The Money and Your Choice

Ian And — Mon, 25 Mar 2013 04:55:57 GMT

If you have been monitoring the political situation taking place in America today and wondering how the Congress can get away with what seems to be the erosion of our personal liberties and you haven't figured it out yet from Lee Brobst's PDF USA the Republic Is The House That No One Lives In, you may find this next PDF an enlightening education. This is one area (the erosion of personal rights and/or privileges based on the debasement of the monetary system) that I have been observing for over 38 years. For much of that time, I could see no justification (that I was aware of, at least) explaining how this was allowed to be occurring. Where was it that the country got off the track and started heading toward a ditch? And why aren't intelligent people of integrity and who support a republican form of government standing up against what is occurring?

As happens so often in public life, when all else fails, follow the money. But also understand that the political system envisioned by the Constitution allowed for there to be two venues of law set up. And that it is up to us as individuals to make that choice one way or the other. Otherwise, in today's political environment, given the history of what has taken place (the passage of the 14th Amendment and the confusion surrounding the original 13th Amendment, which is still in effect if you have the documentation to prove it!), that choice will be made for us by the existing de facto government.

In his piece "The Law, The Money and Your Choice or The Constitutionally Legal Internal Revenue System and How You Volunteered," Lee Brobst once again traces the origin of the legal and lawful dilemma in which we find ourselves embroiled. As the editor states in his opening remarks:

". . . here revealed is the actual substantive cause that moved the American citizen away from literal constitutional common law guarantees into the relative constitutional franchises and privileges established by Congress’ “spirit” and “true meaning” interpretation of the constitution. This document addresses what the real substance of the law is and how its loss and conversion into many forms has effectively created an unincorporated interstate banking association. This association, which the American people have unknowingly volunteered for, has changed the absolute substantive constitutional rights under the common law into relative privileges and forms. These privileges and forms, called civil rights and procedures of codes and statutes reflect only the legislatures’ interpretation as to the true meaning and spirit of the constitution."

Since this PDF is secured, I wasn't able to enable the comment mechanism in order to update (through commentary and clarification) some of the issues that Lee covers. Therefore I've also provided a Rich Text format file for download which has my commentary in red text between black brackets. I think it is important for readers to see this material in its original form as a PDF (with all the footnotes in place so as to make the reading easier and more seamless) which is why I'm including the original PDF. I've highlighted different important passages in the Rich Text version to provide a bit more focus to the reading process. Red = means very important; rust = next most important; and green = is used as a distintive difference to highlight important ideas within important passages; green is used within either a red or rust section to further highlight an idea that I want to call the reader's attention to.

The following are excerpts taken from Brobst's essay. If they seem thought provoking and compelling enough out of context, you need to read them within the context of the passages from which they have been pulled and excerpted here in order to fully understand the implications.

Despite HJR 192, Congress cannot override the state governments incorporated powers under Article I Section 10 of the Constitution. Despite current public policy, Congress cannot override an American’s right to maintain a private policy under the common law principles as they are expressed in the first ten amendments to the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. However, because the gold is the “Standard” substance of the law, and law follows the “Standard” substance of money, when Congress, acting under public policy, suspended the “Standard” gold substance in “Payment” of debt, a shift away from the common law transpired by what is called “operation of law.”[16] The shift occurred because everyone was given a quasi corporate privilege under HJR 192 of NOT paying their debts even though it is demanded under the common law of each state in the Union according to Article I Section 10 of the Constitution.

In other words, Congress cannot compel you to participate in a federal interstate unincorporated banking association under Article IV Section 3 clause 2 and HJR 192 for the NON payment of debts. The choice of law is up to each person still.

Corporations are artificial creations of the state or federal government under physical charter (franchise) issued via state or federal civil law for commercial regulation under Article I Section 8 clauses 1 & 3. They are not under the literal common law because of the charter (franchise). Any legal action against the corporation is legally called an “in rem” action, because it is against the thing or property (also called res) of the corporation under charter. The courts have automatic subject matter jurisdiction, because the physical charter is the subject matter.

On the other hand, under HJR 192,[20] there is no physical charter issued by the government out of a state or federal secretaries’ of state office that defines the federated association’s duties, responsibilities, its officers etc. This results in a federated association that is a quasi[21] in rem unincorporated debtor’s society. The law treats this association as an outlaw entity, to the letter of the common law for the Payment of Debt. The courts then proceed, to uphold contract law under diversity [of jurisdiction], to establish the association’s guide lines by invoking their equity powers based on the “spirit” of the constitution. They will form [i.e. legally construct] a charitable trust to commercially regulate the association, because it is presumed that is what the group intended as there is no charter of incorporation. Under the letter of the constitutional law there is no commercial regulation, but HJR 192 along with 15 USC brought in a third party[22] for commercial regulation for the social security public policy. Remember, “equity compels performance.” The law views unincorporated associations as a danger to the substance of the common law, because of their debt / credit system. This is because there is no counter balance to the demands the association puts on the substance of the earth, thus the reason for all the federal and state regulatory agencies.

In other words, there is a presumption by implication in the civil law that a charter (a metaphysical / abstract / unreal type) exists, because persons are availing themselves (volunteering) of the privileges pertaining to HJR 192. Therefore, these persons come under a ‘quasi in rem’[24] jurisdiction of the civil law in order to regulate, control (including compel) those that are outside the literal common law principles. Yes, as long as the individual remains silent, it is presumed that they have volunteered for the non payment of debt privilege under HJR 192, 12 U.S.C. Section 95a and 15 U.S.C. Chapter 41 Section 1602(c)(d)(e).

Those who have volunteered for the privileges and immunities of the federal social debt security of the unincorporated interstate banking associations for the non payment of debt, have no access to protection of the strict letter of the Constitution under the first ten amendments to the Bill of Rights, especially the 10th Amendment.

Before HJR 192 existed, the Federal Government could not have any implied contact with Americans. They could only have an actual contact through a two party (bilateral) contract. Americans were presumed to be under Article IV Section 3 clause 1[28] as primary state citizens. After HJR 192, the voluntary unincorporated federal social debt security association, known as federalism, was formed under Article IV Section 3 clause 2[29] supported by 15 U.S.C. Chapter 41 Section 1602 (c)(d)(e) and 12 U.S.C. Section 95a becoming the new “public policy.” That is, implied contracts[30] (see also quasi contract at footnote 19) under federalism have become business as usual — i.e., public policy.

Going along with HJR 192 means, you do not have the literal letter of the Constitution with the Bill of Rights working in your behalf. Because you have volunteered into the social debt security unincorporated association of federalism, the courts,[31] under conflict of law (diversity) principles, look at your “life, liberty, and property” as relative, not actual. Your “life, liberty, and property” are converted to “privileges or immunities” and “civil rights.”

Yes, under HJR 192 the Americans have volunteered to give up their land, because they have forfeited the “Substance” of the land for the convenience of a federal commercial social debt security system, via the jurisdiction of “a territorial” (“inchoate” or incomplete) state (other property) or governmental subdivision promoting an unincorporated interstate banking association to defer payment of debt. This is what the milestone decision of Erie R.R. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938)[34] is all about.

In 1916, the Brushaber Court determined that Brushaber’s income was derived, not from the substance of the land of the Common Law, but from the profit and gain from stocks and bonds through the use of commercial paper issued by Union Pacific, a private corporation. That commercial paper, in the form of stocks and bonds, was NOT “Standard” Lawful money or legal tender of the United States in “payment” of a debt, but only a “discharge” of an obligation via a privilege under the civil law. Therefore, the income from this commercial “discharge” privilege was subject to an indirect or excise tax, which was proper under the Constitution (the same with income from stocks and bonds today).

Moreover, whether you have volunteered unwittingly or by conscious choice, there are steps you can begin to take for remedy.

There is much in this essay that presumes the reader's cognizance of the law and how the law works and looks at things in relation to the actions at law being brought before a court. While I have made an effort to explain some of these fine points of law in my commentary in the Rich Text file, it was not an aim to be fully exhaustive in terms of an explanation of these fine points in that commentary.

Hopefully, these excerpts have provided readers with a compelling reason to read the full essay, and to read it slowly and thoughtfully so as to understand (or at least get the gist) of the significance of what is being discussed. Understanding these concepts and putting into practice the remedies available are crucial to reestablishing one's standing as a sovereign individual and to regaining personal liberty.

RE: Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth

Ian And — Sat, 23 Mar 2013 04:50:41 GMT

Daniel M. Ingram:

the age old story

somebody practices hard and realizes something useful

that gets codified into meditation techniques and a movement for positive change and reform

and then that gets codified into some belief structure

and that becomes some dogmatic religion

which is used for political and economic control

and to exploit vulnerable populations

and justify immoral acts, usually murder, rape and theft

and were the original innovator there to see it they would likely vomit

give reality 100 years: there will probably be Glorious Pragmatic Dharma Drone Strikes in the name of Liberation

Right on, Daniel. Two thumbs up!

I would only add, next to spiritual liberty, seek also political liberty.

RE: Diagnosing Stream Entry

Ian And — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:15:39 GMT

Mike Knapp:

So, thoughts on the criteria for diagnosing Stream Entry?

The only criteria useful for any individual in attempting to place himself within the ranks of the ariya are those which he, after due diligence and introspection, personally accepts. By this I mean to say: making a choice between what may be the differing definitions and characterizations of such levels as stream entry.

Modern innovations (technical applications) of stream entry may not necessarily provide the best guidance. This is not to say that they are necessarily wrong or not based on the best intention of the spirit of the Dhamma; only to say that they may be misleading at certain points in a person's journey.

You may wish to consider the following, in addition to whatever replies you receive in this thread: Into the Stream.

Of particular relevance may be the following: Stream entry and its results: Introduction. Read through the brief two paragraph Introduction section and see whether or not you agree with its characterization. If you do agree, you may wish to read on for further clarification. If you do not agree, you may wish to pursue some other characterization.

My point being: you are the creator of (and therefore the one responsible for) your own mind with regard to its training. Nothing happens without your explicit consent. Take care and use proper diligence with the sources you are using for information and guidance. That's all.

RE: Christopher titmuss and the dark night

Ian And — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 16:27:55 GMT

Robin Woods:

My working assumption then is that Ian didn't suffer as much as he took a more concentration heavy approach?

That assumption, then, would be faulty, by which is meant that there is no basis (no substantive, known evidence that has been disclosed) upon which one may arrive at such an assumption. In other words, it is speculative, and thereby faulty. My only point is that I resist using labels such as "dark night" (or any shortcut conceptual modern novation of a label at all) as it can encourage people to experience such and to label it as such ("Oh, woe is me, I'm in the dark night.") Now, you've just created (conceptualized) a problem (dukkha) for yourself! Boy, that was smart, wasn't it.

Robin Woods:

Is it possible to try and focus on jhanas post SE without further activating the process of insight?

Can you be more specific about what you are asking? What is it that you mean by "without further activating the process of insight"? Do you not understand that insight is an ongoing process as soon as you gain consciousness in this world?

RE: a reply to T DC

Ian And — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 06:25:22 GMT

Change A.:

The canon depicts the Buddha as saying that he taught only two topics: suffering and the end of suffering.

That's only if one inclines to translate the word dukkha as "suffering," and not, as Fitter Stoke once suggested in a thread, as the wider more inclusive idea of "dissatisfaction" in whatever form it is to be found.

Better to leave the word untranslated in that quotation so as not to imply a narrowing of meaning down into one aspect or another of what has been translated as either "suffering" or "stress" in modern translations.

On the other hand, I find the idea expressed that "you do not come to the full elimination of suffering [dukkha], but only an increasingly refined understanding," to be closer to reality in that while there are things going on that are productive of the implication of dukkha in one's experience, it is in the "not minding" aspect of one's approach to such that the effect of dukkha is attenuated, if not eliminated.

To clarify that last, I recently read a quotation by someone who described his reaction to a dukkha-like situation as: "The trick is in not minding it as it is happening." With the implication being that one does not personalize the event ("Oh, I am suffering so much!"), but rather observes it as though outside it.

I find in my own experience when out running in the winter desert, the cold (which I'm not used to, having been raised in this temperate climate) is an unsatisfactory condition to have to endure for the duration of my run (1 mile). And yet in recent years I have found that "not minding" the cold produces less dissatisfaction during my run than it previously used to. I allow the body to "become one with" the cold, so to speak (yeah, I know it sounds Kung-fu-ish to say) so as not to trouble the mind while running. That doesn't mean that after the run that I still don't relish the warmth of indoors. It just means that for the duration of the run, I don't let it bother me and endeavor to meld into it (to accept it) "as it is."

RE: Diagnosing Stream Entry (aka "SE" and "First Path&a

Ian And — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 00:45:15 GMT

Mike Knapp:

Some years ago I had an event that could have been either the A&P Event or Stream Entry. At the time I was living at a Zen temple, and the teacher there, although I told him about the event, didn't explain what it was to me (I've come to learn this is pretty typical of Zen). He just said "Good. Keep doing what you're doing." Which is fair enough, as far as it goes. But I would like to know if it was Stream Entry . . . which, given the passage of time involved, and the dearth of information available on the subject, has proven difficult to determine - as Daniel Ingram notes here "[t]he criteria for [diagnosing] stream entry are complex: this should be its own thread." But there isn't a Stream Entry thread on the DhO (at least, not that I could find), so lets make one here.

With that, I invite contributions as to how to diagnose Stream Entry.

A question or two.

Stream entry according to whom? Theravada, Mahayana, Zen, Vajrayana? You realize you're playing with fire when you play with religious organizations, don't you.

Or did you have a particular personality in mind? Mahasi Sayadaw, U Pandita, Daniel Ingram, Kenneth Folk. . . or someone else?

I'm not sure there is agreement as to the operating premise.

On second thought, I'm sorry. I'm probably out of line here. Just disregard my contribution and carry on as though nothing occurred.

RE: Christopher titmuss and the dark night

Ian And — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 00:08:52 GMT

Robin Woods:

Ian And:

"I can't help but wonder at the moment if this thing hasn't got overblown on here/mixed up with people's psychological problems?"

Way to think out of the box, Robin. Keep it up.

Remember, the power of suggestion!

Sorry, I'm too dense to get this I'm afraid!

Do you mean that people like him want to avoid 'scripting' people's experience?

On the contrary, I was praising your intuition.

Not necessarily him, per se. But anyone who suggests that someone must go through this or that is already "scripting" people's experience.

Why anyone would want to follow such "advice" is beyond me. You won't find anything like this coming out of Gotama's mouth in the discourses. (Now I've gone and done it. Someone very near is ripe to label me. To hell with them. And to hell with their label. That's a not so polite way of saying, "If you want to assert it, then you OWN it. It has nothing to do with me.")

RE: Christopher titmuss and the dark night

Ian And — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 19:00:23 GMT

Way to think out of the box, Robin. Keep it up.

Remember, the power of suggestion!

RE: Insight while asleep

Ian And — Tue, 19 Mar 2013 06:34:57 GMT

Dee Miller:

Recently I noticed I am able to remain conscious if I fall asleep while performing choiceless awareness. I usually continue to meditate, and it seems to be productive. However, I lose consciousness after half an hour or so.

Is there any way to lengthen the time I'm able to remain conscious?

Well, what you're talking about in terms of consciousness during sleep borders on lucid dreaming. I've experienced lucid dreaming, and compared to the former its main quality seems more vibrant and alive (brightness of colors and qualia in general) than remaining conscious during sleep. Similarly to conscious sleep, it is susceptible to one's own will as far as dream content is concerned rather than being at the mercy of the subconscious mind to direct. In other words, few, if any, nightmare situations. Any ill or threat in the dream state can be easily corrected in lucid dreaming through being consciously aware of the direction of the content and consciously changing that direction.

I have also experienced what might be termed "consciousness during sleep." It might also be termed "mindfulness during sleep." And I say that last because I usually provide the mind with a resolution before I go to sleep that I will rest peacefully and wake up refreshed, alert, focused, and mindful. Often when I do this, I seem to be conscious throughout the night (especially if I am well rested from the previous sleep cycle, as opposed to not being so) even if there are dreams occurring. I even catch myself working on problems I've been thinking about during the day, and sometimes arrive as some good solutions.

So, you might try making a conscious resolution before nodding off to sleep to "remain mindful throughout the night" and see what results you achieve.

RE: Noting gives me a distracted feeling

Ian And — Fri, 15 Mar 2013 05:21:09 GMT

Boy, this is getting really funny.

For example, while doing noting practice crossing the street earlier today, I had a somewhat close call with a car that I don't think would have happened if I was not noting. I've decided not to engage in this practice while crossing streets!

[. . .]

I noticed the same thing when I first brought noting practice to my every day activities. For instance, I left the house without my keys, because I was more focused on noting sensations than paying attention to the macro-level activities I was doing.

I can imagine that would be a problem. Doesn't sound anything like sati, now does it. The practice of sati in waking life is what the Buddha emphasized over and over. And here somebody comes along in the modern age and shows people how to become distracted from their mindfulness. Or at least that's the way some people are understanding the practice. What a laugh! I can only imagine Gotama rolling over in his grave (if he had one).

Fitter Stoke:

But I got over that quickly. Start with less demanding things like washing dishes or showering, and then move on to things that require more concentration. You'll find that noting eventually makes you more connected with what's going on in the sense of really paying attention to things.

Now that is actually sound advice. Whether one is practicing noting during waking life, or attempting to build up their sati.

Better yet, if you're going to practice noting during waking life, just note by silent recognition of events without the mental verbalization activity. You know what that is? It's mindfulness practice. Pure and simple. Without the mental distraction of verbal noting. Noting in this way is akin to the instruction in the Mahasatipatthana Sutta: "Mindfully he breaths in [noting the in breath], mindfully he breaths out [noting the out breath]. Breathing in a long breath, he knows [notes] that he breathes in a long breath, and breathing out a long breath, he knows [notes] that he breathes out a long breath."

Mindfulness is the practice. Being mindfully present in each discrete event. It doesn't mean you have to verbalize that presence. Just BE THERE! Period! In each moment of your life. Be aware.

RE: Early difficulties with Mahasi noting method

Ian And — Wed, 13 Mar 2013 05:42:39 GMT

Hi Lee,

Lee K:

Ian And:

Well, yes, sort of. The example you gave ("because I'm overtired") is rather simplistic and not very deep in terms of discernment

Okay, I see what you mean here. I was just contrasting the more "normal" cause and effect with something along the lines of "this is due to some fundamental truth that is to be uncovered". I had never thought about (in the context of noting practice) looking at causes like that. I understood it more as a general observation, and whatever draws the attention is noted and focused on. Though I may of course be misunderstanding you and not comparing like for like (particularly if your comment was not advice on doing that practice).

What I was suggesting, as you deduced, doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the noting practice that the Mahasi tradition teaches. I looked at those instructions, tried them a time or two, and ended up dumping them because they didn't seem to suit what I wanted to accomplish, which was a quiet mind. They are good, however, for assisting in taming and disciplining the mind from its incessant wandering. And there are people here who swear by them. The practice just never did interest me much.

Once I was able to absolutely still the mind (meaning no interior monologue ongoing, which came out of the blue one day; it was so surprising you could have knocked me down with a feather; it had been so long since I had experience anything like that, that I'd forgotten it was possible!), I focused on gaining insight into phenomena and the Dhamma.

Lee K:

Ian And:

If all you were doing was calm/concentration practice, and not following up with insight, then it is no wonder that you became "burned out" about it. You weren't being taught what to do with this new found concentration!

I've been very curious about that experience and what it was due to. Basically, doing the focussed concentration practice led to a state of feeling like you are really charged up with static electricity. In the end, each time it would get too much and I'd have to dump all that energy through maybe getting drunk or something similarly cathartic. So, without wishing to put words in your mouth, you're saying that perhaps if I had dumped that energy into trying to gain insight I may have got somewhere?

I'm endeavoring to recall whether I had any experience like that when I was younger and beginning to meditate (at age 28). At the moment, I don't seem to recall anything like that stemming from meditation practice. The closest thing I can recall was building up too much piti (rapture or elation) one time. And once I figured out what caused it, I stopped allowing it to occur and reigned it in, so to speak.

(Except for some odd experiences when I was a young boy when I would get these, for lack of a clearer description, moments when my mind would become crystal clear and I could see the truth of things immediately without having to think too much about it, but would also experience what seemed to be a heighten sense of excess excitement (or "pent up energy," but I hate to use that word because it seems too imprecise for what occurred) that wouldn't wear off for about an hour or more. These episodes would occur once or twice a year and lasted between the ages of about 8 to 13 or so before tapering off as I progressed through my latter teens. It felt like I had access to all the knowledge in the universe! But I was too young to know what to do with these experiences. These were quite extraordinary occurrences, to say the least.)

As far as "dumping that energy into trying to gain insight" that would depend on my having a clearer understanding about what it was you were describing as "energy" and "charged up with static electricity." That is, what kind of physiological changes were being experienced. If it was as you say, a physical increase in the energy level such that it became like excess "nervous energy" that needed to be discharged, I can understand why you would look for ways to discharge it. When I was a child (as I described in the experiences above) I would look for things (physical and mental) that I had been putting off and tear into them and get them done to discharge and use up the energy build-up.

As far as what that might have been that you experienced, I don't know. I'd have to talk with you more about it (preferably directly) in order to gain a clearer conception about it.

Lee K:

Ian And:

When taught properly, once the person develops enough concentration and calm to be able to stay with an object of observation (like the breath) for extended periods of time without an unnoticed break in concentration, they should begin practicing a satipatthana type of meditation.

I will do some reading on Satipatthana practices. Right now it feels right to use the ones I've learned at whatever intensity I can muster for at least a while to see where they lead to.

Yes, that's fine. Don't rush into anything until you feel ready. I was just providing you with information about something to consider, if and when you feel ready to approach it, which will lead directly to awakening.

Ian

RE: Richard's insight practice

Ian And — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 00:15:16 GMT

Richard Zen:

I just notice stress and start looking at what perception caused it. It's like diffusing a bomb before it goes off. Very cool.

Very cool, indeed! Way to go, Richard.

Richard Zen:

Because I'm looking at perception/recognition I'm seeing stress start up and I'm able to let go of it before it gets full blown.

Are you able to see how your affective response (vedana) plays a part in helping you to recognize the stress? Especially if it is unpleasant vedana. If so, then you're seeing more and more of the mental process (dependent co-arising).

RE: Early difficulties with Mahasi noting method

Ian And — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 04:51:41 GMT

Hi Lee,

Lee K:

When you say, "...discover insight about what is causing the negativity in your session" are you suggesting finding the concrete causes of particular negative sensations, e.g "I feel tense because I'm overtired"?

Well, yes, sort of. The example you gave ("because I'm overtired") is rather simplistic and not very deep in terms of discernment; and yet, depending on the circumstance, may very well be the origin of the unpleasant feeling. However, it also may be something that you are not able to yet consciously identify with any precision or depth of observation with regard to its arising. It all depends on what's going on that is affecting your response. If the way you described it in your first post is actually an accurate description of what you are undergoing:

"It's not a thought it's a general feeling - physical sensation and I guess an emotional state of sort of "yuck, I don't want my attention going there"/revulsion? - this creates an unpleasant tension that is a bit overwhelming and hard to note - can't seem to find a way into it..."

Then, yes, look directly at what is causing the vedana to arise as "unpleasantness." It may not pop out at you the first or second time you endeavor to examine this. But eventually, the origin of the "feeling" will make itself known to the mind that keeps seeking and examining its own experience to find the cause of the affective response.

Lee K:

I will look up what you are referring to regarding "aggregate of vedana" to get a better idea of what you mean.

Vedana is the second aggregate in the five aggregates that Gotama talked about as being his description of what makes up personality view. The five aggregates (khandha which means "a heap" of something or "aggregate" for short; pancakkhandhas or five heaps or aggregates that make up the personality view of the individual) are rupa (form or matter, i.e. like the physical body), vedana (the affective response to an experience often referred to as "feeling"), sanna (or perception), sankhara (volitional formations in the mind), and vinnana (conscious awareness of an object of observation).

Traditionally, vedana is translated in English by the word "feeling," but in actuality is defined as the "affective response to phenomena" as either a "pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral" feeling about that phenomenon. Sometimes these words are best left untranslated while at the same time providing a definition of what is meant by the word. In this case, if you can transfer this special definition to the English word "feeling" then you will know what others are speaking about when they use it to refer to vedana.

Having a accurate idea or conception about what vedana refers to is crucial to understanding (through insight) how to identify the origin of vedana when it arises into one's awareness.

At the end of this message, I have provided you with a couple of downloadable files which are essays that I wrote for myself to help me navigate my way through these processes of mind, so that I might become ever mindful of them.

Lee K:

Your suggestion for do[ing] some concentration practice for a bit may be helpful - the first practice I was taught and did regularly was mindfulness of breathing - in doing that a lot though I got very very focused (compared to my "base" state prior that) and sort of burned out. There is a balance somewhere there!

Yes, there is a balance. And that balance is in the use of insight (vipassana) in conjunction with the concentration/calm/tranquility (samatha) practice you were doing. Someone neglected to inform you properly about how to practice this type of meditation. If all you were doing was calm/concentration practice, and not following up with insight, then it is no wonder that you became "burned out" about it. You weren't being taught what to do with this new found concentration!

When taught properly, once the person develops enough concentration and calm to be able to stay with an object of observation (like the breath) for extended periods of time without an unnoticed break in concentration, they should begin practicing a satipatthana type of meditation. Satipatthana is what the Buddha described as "the direct path" to self-realization and awakening, and refers to the four establishments of mindfulness. Satipatthana involves becoming mindful (in an insightful way) about the arising of rupa (or the body), vedana (one's affective responses), mano or citta (the mind and mind states), and dhammas (or phenomena, such as mundane thoughts, or when pursuing knowledge of the Dhamma the five aggregates, the five hindrances etc.). To quote Ven. Analayo from his classic book Satipatthana, The Direct Path to Realization:

"According to the discourses, not seeing the arising and passing away of phenomena is simply ignorance, while to regard all phenomena as impermanent leads to knowledge and understanding. Insight into the impermanence of the five aggregates or of the six sense-spheres is "right view," and therefore leads directly to realization. Thus the direct experience of impermanence represents indeed the 'power' aspect of meditative wisdom."

This has also been corroborated by my direct experience of this process.

Lee K:

Going back to negativity in practice - when I reflect I can see that whatever state I have experienced in meditation (or otherwise) has never lasted - the other night was a feeling of intense fear, then a few hours later a very open, pleasant state...taking this perspective makes it easier to keep going.

Good. That is a wise observation! Keep observing your experience in that way and you will gradually release all the dukkha what is within you.

Lee K:

What are the main practices that you do and how do you find balance between samatha/vipassana?

Since I'm able to remain mindful throughout the day, finding balance between calm and insight is quite easy for me these days. I enter samadhi and spend the majority of my time contemplating insight about things I'm interested in examining. I meditate an hour in the mornings and a half hour in the evenings.

Learning to cultivate mindfulness, though, was not easy. It took several months of practicing dhyana (sometimes spelled "jhana") meditation in conjunction with satipattana practice (often outside of formal meditation) to recondition the mind in order to promote continuing mindfulness. That was just my experience based on the circumstances I had to deal with; others may vary and accomplish this more rapidly or more slowly depending on their particular circumstance.

In peace,
Ian

RE: Early difficulties with Mahasi noting method

Ian And — Sat, 09 Mar 2013 21:41:15 GMT

Hi Lee,

Although it can be difficult to evaluate from only two posts, what I can see of the problem you are having seems to involve a lack of interplay between calm and insight (samatha and vipassana). Meaning using calm to gain insight and insight to gain (or re-gain) calm. As Gotama taught it, these two go together in meditation practice and are intermittently being replaced, one with the other, throughout any given session.

The practice of "noting" as it is taught in the Mahasi style approach to meditation practice was never taught by Gotama. That doesn't mean that it is anathema to what Gotama taught, only, rather, that this is an observation. Perhaps it might profit you, on occasion, to put aside "noting" (rather than persevering in its practice) in order to discover insight about what is causing the negativity in your session.

In your two main posts, you mention "unpleasant feeling" (vedana), which is an "affective response" to a phenomenon or an experience, no less than seven times! And yet, rather than explore (through insight) the source of that "unpleasant feeling," you run from it (by aversion).

Some Guy was correct when he suggested "ultimately you want to get into the yuck and break it down." In this way, you discover the origin of the unpleasantness, break it down by "seeing it for what it is" (as impermanent, unsatisfactory, and not-self), and then can continue with your meditation.

If you have developed enough concentration to be able to "note" during meditation on a fairly regular basis without an unnoticed break, then you have enough concentration to be able to incline the mind toward absorption meditation in order to be able to develop the ability to arrive at a solid foundation for the experience of samadhi, wherein the practice of contemplative insight really has an opportunity to blossom and flower.

Awakening occurs as we, one by one, eliminate the effect of those phenomena which cause dukkha. One way to do this is by realizing how important being fully cognizant of the aggregate of vedana and its causes is to our sense of well being and wholesomeness.

Just something to think about. You might find this a more pleasant and beneficial experience in the long run. And actually look forward to meditation rather than dreading it through aversion.

In peace,
Ian

RE: Hi and help, please!

Ian And — Fri, 08 Mar 2013 21:38:55 GMT

Hi K.,

K Jones:

Well, I figured that Ian’s first post was giving me a jump start on ridding myself of that pesky ego!

That wasn't really my intention, but if you wish to take it that way, that's fine by me. From my perspective, what I was saying was straight forward and telling it exactly like I saw it. Nothing personal meant at all. (So go figure!)

Someone comes here and makes the kind of first post that you made and we here don't know you from Adam, what are we to think? I wanted to see where you were coming from and what you were made of. I wanted to see if you were serious about what you were proposing (looking into learning more about the Dhamma — although you used the term "Buddhism"). Like I said, we don't know you from Adam, for christsakes.

K Jones:

I really want you all to know that I appreciate you taking time out of your day to provide such thoughtful and thought-provoking responses. Ian, thanks for your last post with the quote and reading links. It is useful to have a place to start, and a path of not being told what to think is something that I could actually follow!!

Good! Now we're on the same page. Now that didn't hurt a bit, did it.

What I'm endeavoring to do is to save you all the wasted time and redoubling of effort that others (myself included) went through to learn the things we learned. You seem to have a good head on your shoulders. So, I'll give you another hint about looking into the Dhamma and its study/practice. It took me a long time to learn this (I started out reading books by D.T. Suzuki who wrote about Zen and when I could find them books like the Dhammapada; at the time — late 1960s early 1970s — there wasn't available to me credible translations of the Pali canon, so I had to take what was out there) but you are better off, when beginning a study like this, to go back to its founder and, if at all possible, reading what he actually said (or in this case the best idea we have about what he actually said). And all that is contained in the Pali canon.

It's okay to read books about Buddhism, but only after you first find out what the Buddha actually taught, and not just what someone else's opinion is about what he taught. That way, you have a basis to disagree with someone else's opinion about what the Buddha taught and you'll be able to defend that position. Also, and more importantly, you won't be drawn in by false impressions that others may have about what was taught. Because you will have studied it from about as close as one can get to learning it from the source himself.

Make sense?

If you would like to read an excellent classic take by someone who knew how to break down the teaching into digestible bite sized bits, pick up Walpola Rahula's work What the Buddha Taught. It is a brief yet insightful overview of the main teachings along with selected excerpts from the Pali canon of discourses.

That's enough to keep you busy for a while. And I think, if you look into them, you will get a lot out of these recommendations.

In peace,
Ian

RE: Hi and help, please!

Ian And — Fri, 08 Mar 2013 16:44:34 GMT

voice #1:

He's sternly reminding you to speak of phenomena as what really happened, so as not to obfuscate with flowery language and poetic license.

voice #2:

Also, I wouldn't take the contents of a dream very seriously - as awesome as your experience sounds - at least as far as degree or extent of awakening goes.

You may find the effect of your dream more important than its ultimate cause (which you can never know). If it gets you interested in a serious investigation and practice of dhamma, good. If not, well, you're bound to have other cool dreams in your life, so I wouldn't worry.

Interesting the perceptions of others. Everyone has an opinion. Some are better thought out than others. The one I liked the most was the following:

K Jones:

Thanks to each of you for taking the time to respond to my post and lend me your insight. It was very helpful. My curiosity about meditation and Buddhism definitely has been piqued!

That's exactly what should have occurred (presuming the OP had any real interest in the subject matter at all).

Perhaps the following will help to start your journey. It is from a famous sutta (literally it means a "thread" or line that holds things together and is derived from the verbal root siv-, meaning "to sew" in the same sense as the English word "suture"), a discourse given by Gotama to an audience of confused and questioning people called the Kalamas. Notice how Gotama addresses them, and what he asks of them. He doesn't tell them what to think, but rather asks their opinion based upon their ability to provide one from their own experience. It should provide you with some insight into the man's integrity.

AN 3.65
Kalama Sutta — To the Kalamas
Trans. from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera

Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was wandering on tour together with a large Sangha of monks when he arrived at a town of the Kalamas named Kesaputta. Now the Kalamas of Kesaputta heard: "It is said that the ascetic Gotama, the Sakyan son who went forth from the Sakyan family, has arrived at Kesaputta. Now a good report about that master Gotama has been circulating thus: 'That Blessed One is an arahant, fully enlightened, accomplished in true knowledge and conduct, sublime, knower of the world, unsurpassed leader of persons to be tamed, teacher of devas and humans, the Enlightened One, the Blessed One. He makes known this world with its devas, with Mara, with Brahma, this generation with its ascetics and brahmins, with its devas and brahmins, having realized it through his own direct knowledge. He teaches a Dhamma that is good in the beginning, good in the middle and good in the end, with the right meaning and expression; he reveals a holy life that is perfectly complete and purified.' Now it is good to see arahants such as this."

Then the Kalamas of Kesaputta approached the Blessed One. Some paid homage to him and sat down to one side; some exchanged greetings with him and, after their greetings and cordial talk, sat down to one side; some saluted him reverentially and sat down to one side; some remained silent and sat down to one side. Then the Kalamas said to the Blessed One:

"There are, Lord, some ascetics and brahmins who come to Kesaputta. They explain and elucidate their own doctrines, but disparage, debunk, revile and vilify the doctrines of others. But then some other asectics and brahmins come to Kesaputta and they too explain and elucidate their own doctrines, but disparage, debunk, revile and vilify the doctrines of the others. For us, Lord, there is perplexity and doubt as to which of these good ascetics speak truth and which speak falsehood."

"It is fitting for you to be perplexed, O Kalamas, it is fitting for you to be in doubt. Doubt has arisen in you about a perplexing matter. Come, Kalamas. Do not go by oral tradition, by lineage of teaching, by hearsay, by a collection of scriptures, by logical reasoning, by inferential reasoning, by reflection on reasons, by the acceptance of a view after pondering it, by the seeming competence of a speaker, or because you think, 'The ascetic is our teacher.' But when you know for yourselves, 'These things are unwholesome, these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; these things, if undertaken and practiced, lead to harm and suffering', then you should abandon them.

"What do you think, Kalamas? When greed, hatred, and delusion arise in a person, is it for his welfare or harm?" — "For his harm, Lord." — "Kalamas, a person who is greedy, hating and deluded, overpowered by greed, hatred and delusion, his thoughts controlled by them, will destroy life, take what is not given, engage in sexual misconduct and tell lies; he will also prompt others to do likewise. Will that conduce to his harm and suffering for a long time?" — "Yes, Lord."

"What do you think, Kalamas? Are these things wholesome or unwholesome?" — "Unwholesome, Lord." — "Blamable or blameless?" — "Blamable, Lord." — "Censured or praised by the wise?" — "Censured, Lord." — "Undertaken and practiced, do they lead to harm and suffering or not, or how is it in this case?" — "Undertaken and practiced, these things lead to harm and suffering. So it appears to us in this case."

"It was for this reason, Kalamas, that we said: 'Do not go by oral tradition. . .

"Come, Kalamas. Do not go by oral tradition, by lineage of teaching, by hearsay, by a collection of scriptures, by logical reasoning, by inferential reasoning, by reflection on reasons, by the acceptance of a view after pondering it, by the seeming competence of a speaker, or because you think, 'The ascetic is our teacher.' But when you know for yourselves, 'These things are wholesome, these things are blameless; these things are praised by the wise; these things, if undertaken and practiced, lead to welfare and happiness', then you should engage in them.

"What do you think, Kalamas? When non-greed, non-hatred and non-delusion arise in a person, is it for his welfare or harm?" — "For his welfare, Lord." — "Kalamas, a person who is without greed, without hatred, without delusion, not overpowered by greed, hatred and delusion, his thoughts not controlled by them, will abstain from the destruction of life, from taking what is not given, from sexual misconduct and from false speech; he will also prompt others to do likewise. Will that conduce to his welfare and happiness for a long time?" — "Yes, Lord."

"What do you think, Kalamas? Are these things wholesome or unwholesome?" -- "Wholesome, Lord." — "Blamable or blameless?" — "Blameless, Lord." — "Censured or praised by the wise?" — "Praised, Lord." — "Undertaken and practiced, do they lead to harm and suffering or not, or how is it in this case?" — "Undertaken and practiced, these things lead to welfare and happiness. So it appears to us in this case."

"It was for this reason, Kalamas, that we said: Do not go upon oral tradition. . .

"Then, Kalamas, that noble disciple — devoid of covetousness, devoid of ill will, unconfused, clearly comprehending, ever mindful — dwells pervading one quarter with a mind imbued with loving-kindness, likewise the second quarter, the third and the fourth. Thus above, below, across and everywhere, and to all as to himself, he dwells pervading the entire world with a mind imbued with loving-kindness, vast, exalted, measureless, without hostility and without ill will.

"He dwells pervading one quarter with a mind imbued with compassion...with altruistic joy...with equanimity, likewise the second quarter, the third and the fourth. Thus above, below, across and everywhere, and to all as to himself, he dwells pervading the entire world with a mind imbued with equanimity, vast, exalted, measureless, without hostility and without ill will.

"When, Kalamas, this noble disciple has thus made his mind free of enmity, free of ill will, uncorrupted and pure, he has won four assurances in this life.

"The first assurance he has won is this: 'If there is another world, and if good and bad deeds bear fruit and yield results, it is possible that with the breakup of the body, after death, I shall arise in a good destination, in a heavenly world.'

"The second assurance he was won is this: 'If there is no other world, and if good and bad deeds do not bear fruit and yield results, still right here, in this very life, I live happily, free of enmity and ill will.'

"The third assurance he has won is this: 'Suppose evil befalls the evil-doer. Then, as I do not intend evil for anyone, how can suffering afflict me, one who does no evil deed?'

"The fourth assurance he was won is this: 'Suppose evil does not befall the evil-doer. Then right here I see myself purified in both respects.'

"When, Kalamas, this noble disciple has thus made his mind free of enmity, free of ill will, uncorrupted and pure, he has won these four assurances in this very life."

"So it is, Blessed One! So it is, Sublime One! When this noble disciple has thus made his mind free of enmity, free of ill will, uncorrupted and pure, he has won these four assurances in this very life.

"Excellent, Lord! Excellent. It is just as if one were to set upright what was overturned, or to reveal what was hidden, or to point out the way to one gone astray, or to hold a lamp in the darkness so that those who have eyes might see forms. Even so has the Dhamma been set forth in various ways by Master Gotama. Let the Blessed One accept us as lay followers who have gone for refuge from today until life's end."

You will be able to read more about these matters at accesstoinsight.org .

For a quick glance at the teaching, I would recommend the following: Buddhism: A Method of Mind Training by Leonard Bullen.

After which you can check out the following: What is Theravada Buddhism.

RE: Getting Back Into Meditation, But Found This Sceptical Review of MCTB..

Ian And — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 22:58:44 GMT

The cycles and stages have been documented in the Buddhist tradition for a while...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visuddhimagga

Thanks for the link, Simon.

Aahh. Another cynic after my own heart. Someone else who has noticed the work of a fraud in the Sangha: Buddhaghosa!

[David] Kalupahana notes that the Visuddhimagga contains "some metaphysical speculations, such as those of the Sarvastivadins, the Sautrantikas, and even the Yogacarins". Kalupahana comments:

Buddhaghosa was careful in introducing any new ideas into the Mahavihara tradition in a way that was too obvious. There seems to be no doubt that the Visuddhimagga and the commentaries are a testimony to the abilities of a great harmonizer who blended old and new ideas without arousing suspicion in the minds of those who were scrutinizing his work.

RE: Hi and help, please!

Ian And — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 21:47:08 GMT

K Jones:

A voice:

It sounds like an Arising and Passing Away event to me. There is plenty of information on this site about the A&P plus Daniel's book Mastering the Core Teaching of the Buddha covers it extensively.

Let me add that if it was you are headed into the Dukkha Nanas so it would be a good idea if you read up on those too. Also known as the Dark Night.

Thanks for your help, Darrin.

Beware of wayfarers (even those with good intentions) bearing gifts of opinions that may turn out to be either benign observations or self-fulfilling prophecies.

Remember the Moody Blues lyric, especially the last two or three emphasized lines:

Beauty I've always missed
With these eyes before
Just what the truth is
I can't say any more

"Some try to tell me
Thoughts they cannot defend
Just what you want to be
You will be in the end

"Breathe deep the gathering gloom.
Watch lights fade from every room.
Bedsitter people look back and lament.
Another day's useless energy's spent.
Impassioned lovers wrestle as one.
Lonely man cries for love and has none.
New mother picks up and suckles her son.
Senior citizens wish they were young.

"Cold-hearted orb that rules the night.
Removes the colours from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow white.
And we decide which is right.
And which is an illusion!"

RE: Hi and help, please!

Ian And — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 21:26:31 GMT

K Jones:

A few weeks ago, I had a dream that was not really a dream, but an experience. My (non-corporeal) consciousness was part of a field of boundless, light energy. I understood that this was creation, a present yet eternal place where all living things exist.

This realization made all ideas fall away: time, space, life, death, right, wrong, authority, deference, suffering. These became artificial, arbitrary constructs. I recall finding this calming and, frankly, pretty funny--that the ideas we use to structure our lives were all leveled in an instant.

There is nothing that we have to do or be--only exist.

There was also a pervading sense of oneness with all life, peaceful and complete.

As soon as I began to think that I did not want to leave, my consciousness began to pull away. I asked, “How can I return here?” I was answered that I must annihilate my ego. I felt my consciousness snap back into my (invisible) body and I opened my eyes. It was the middle of the night and I lay in the bed, awake.

In the days that have followed, a calmness has remained within me (for the most part!), because I no longer feel any pressing need to achieve anything or rush to be anywhere.

Perhaps more importantly, I feel a growing empathy, because I view others as part of myself. If they suffer, I do as well. We are all one.

(I also have found a couple of times that if I mentally ask a question before going to bed, I wake up with an answer in the morning...strange.)

While the meaning of the dream/experience was very clear to me, I began to wonder what the whole ego annihilation thing was about. That has led me to read a bit about Buddhism over the last couple of weeks. While I have always been interested in ideas of consciousness and faith, I have never pursued them in a structured way. So, the Buddhist terminology and levels as well as formal meditation are new to me.

I read through the MCTB Progress of Insight. Some of the levels (including the Dark Night) might parallel experiences I have had, but I’m not positive. I certainly have had my share of strange perceptions and experiences over the years, but never really knew what to make of them.

Ever heard of the phrase "throwing pearls to the swine"? Not that I'm suggestion any relationship (other than ignorance) between yourself and the "swine." But the fact that all these realizations occurred to you, and yet you have no idea what they mean in the long term picture of things certainly suggests ignorance of some kind, wouldn't you say.

But actually, if you want an honest opinion, I'd say some entity in the celestial (deva) realm is having their way with you through the dream sequence realm. Dreams are one avenue open to them to communicate with the physically living.

I mean, look at the clues you've provided: "My (non-corporeal) consciousness was part of a field of boundless, light energy. I understood that this was creation, a present yet eternal place where all living things exist." What does that suggest to you?

K Jones:

I have a few questions: To your knowledge, was this some level of the Buddhist awakening experience? If so, what type/level?

Maybe. Maybe not. That all depends upon the observer. Maybe you should spend some time looking into the "levels of the Buddhist awakening" and discover this for yourself, and not rely on the word of someone else. What do you think?

K Jones:

I was asleep and don’t formally meditate, so I didn’t have any control over entering this state. I got the sense that I was not at the end of understanding, but the beginning. I’m not really sure how to proceed, except to try to integrate this new knowledge into my everyday life.

Well, that ought to tell you something. What do you think it might possibly be? Do you think that someone was sending you a message and giving you clues where to look for the answers?

K Jones:

Do you have any suggestions about how I explore this further? Thanks in advance for your help!

Well, you ended up here, didn't you? What do you think the message is that someone wants you to get?

What does ending up at a Buddhist forum suggest to you? If you think anyone else can answer this for you, you must be crazy. Or really naive.

RE: About the Five Aggregates

Ian And — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 19:07:15 GMT

An Eternal Now:

http://sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/447451

Excerpt:

"Firstly, nibbāna isn't a "state." Secondly, nibbāna is the cessation of passion, aggression, and delusion. For a learner it is the cessation of the fetters extinguished on each path. The waking states where "suddenly all sensations and six senses stop functioning" are (1) mundane perceptionless samādhis, and (2) cessation of apperception and feeling. Neither of these are supramundane and neither of these are synonymous with experiencing nibbāna."

And further on he states:
"This type of blackout cessation is experienced by all sorts of yogis including those practicing non-Buddhist systems. Thus, it has nothing to do with the correct engagement of vipassanā. The cessation of unsatisfactoriness (dukkhanirodha) is the cessation of craving (taṇhā), not the cessation of phenomena."

Along with others who have chimed in on this issue I would unhesitatingly agree with this characterization of nibbāna.

Unlike Daniel, when I experienced sannavedayita-nirodha (the cessation of perception and feeling) it wasn't something that I had any craving for experiencing. (Daniel has mentioned in times past getting off work and going home so that he could meditate and enter this state; don't know what his thoughts are now on the subject, usually time and maturity bring greater clarity of thought about such things.)

And yes, it is, as Geoff has said "a mundane perceptionless samadhi." I was glad that I had an opportunity to experience this state in order to be able to talk about it rather than to speculate. It taught me that it was indeed possible to shut the mind/body experience down entirely; and at the time, I thought that that was a valuable insight. However, it was not something I had any desire to enter again and again. I much prefer the appana samadhi of the fourth dhyana as it allows insight to occur, which I think is one of the points being inferred in Geoff's message.

An Eternal Now:

Indeed, I concur with Ajahn Amaro. Venerable Nanananda's Nibbana Sermons are also great and explains Nirvana in pretty much the same way Ajahn Amaro did in that excerpt.

Also for readers out there, I find Geoff* (online buddhist forum poster jnana/nana, not Thanissaro)'s posts on Nirvana to be highly informative in ridding the misconceptions of what Nirvana is based on Buddha's teachings.

*Geoff: a scholar-practitioner with a Theravadin and Mahamudra practice background and author of MeasurelessMind, great stuff: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2012/09/great-resource-of-buddhas-teachings.html

Ah, the tale of the two Geoffs. Geoff DeGraff and Geoff Shatz. Perhaps Tan Geoff and Geoff S. might suffice to differentiate their thought. I've corresponded with Geoff S. from time to time. Have known him since 2005/2006 when the old E-Sangha forum was still around.

RE: Getting Back Into Meditation, But Found This Sceptical Review of MCTB..

Ian And — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 06:51:25 GMT

From the TC Review::

Ingram himself has recognised that he has further to go (which "sutta arahats" don't) and a couple of years ago started practices inspired by a teaching called Actual Freedom, . . .
. . .and the perceptual instabilities and vibrations that he calls the Three Characteristics (the Buddha actually never used this term, and meant something different by the term Three Perceptions which he used) and it's what pushes people into the Dark Night. The Buddha taught a very different whole-body awareness practice that did not separate samatha (calm and concentration) and vipassana (insight) and he described nothing remotely resembling the Dark Night.

Isaac L:

IE, why are there 8 jhanas, and not more, or less? My gut feeling is these are different neurological states, similar to those caused by mind-altering substances, but self-controlled. And modern neurology (as far as I understand it) pretty much agrees with the Buddhist idea that the ego is an illusion created by the mind, and that perception consists of discrete units which the mind stitches together, etc - in which case, meditation is training the mind to actually undo these illusions.

From the X Review::

The author talks about reaching the peak of insight practices, and then only says that at this point concentration can be cultivated or one can sit in pure egolessness. Seeing as the author basically stopped here, the reader is left to assume that the author does not have practice beyond this point. When truly, the Yogic Journey is no where near complete until both paths are mastered. The Buddha DID in fact teach this, yet this idea is not discussed in the book at all.

The general attitude of the Author in regards towards some of the concentration states and their associated features is reflective of that of ignorance and lack of practice. It is almost as if he tries to downplay their importance in regards to obtaining full liberation. The funny thing is, the book is all about the teachings of the Buddha, while 98% of the book is about insight practices, although the Buddha himself obtained enlightenment through concentration practices combined with insight practices, while also teaching both paths.

Hello Isaac,

While Fitter and Jigme do an excellent job of explaining and defending the methods of practice recommended in MCTB, your own intuitions about it vis a vis the review (or reviews) you've read and your personal understanding (as related in the above quotation of yours) are also well to consider.

The answer to your question about "why are there 8 jhanas, and not more, or less" has more to do with what has been recorded about the history of what Gotama is said to have taught than anything else. If you've never read widely the suttas, then you can be excused from knowing why and being able to answer this question yourself. Apparently (we are told in the discourses), Gotama was aware of the first six levels of dhyana meditation before (or as) he met Alara Kalama and Uddaka Ramaputta who taught him the seventh and eighth levels respectively, as outlined in the following passage:

Siddhattha studied meditation under two famous teachers, Alara-Kalama and Uddaka-Ramaputta.

The state attained by Alara-Kalama was that of a much higher formless world where physical matter no longer exists. [The sense base of nothingness.]

Uddaka-Ramaputta reached an even higher state at which neither thought nor non-thought existed. [The sense base of neither perception nor non-perception.]

Siddhatha did not find it difficult to attain either state. Attaining these states of mind did not ease his mental anxieties, because once he stopped meditation, he returned to the mental state of depression.

He knew that the true liberation from the attachment of ignorance and suffering could be attained only by reaching a state of absolute tranquility.

He left his teachers to continue his search for the ultimate truth.

The preceding passage, by the way, contains some interesting insights all its own, if one has the clarity of vision to be able to see them.

There is also a so-called ninth dhyana capable of attainment that is known as the "cessation of perception and feeling," or sanna-vedayita-nirodha. One's perception of attainment to this level of quietude, however, can only be assessed once one has come out of the attainment itself and is reflecting on one's experience afterward. I know this from personal experience.

If you are concerned that you may not have access to someone (on this forum) who has learned this path from the perspective of the sutta practice and not from MCTB, you can put that concern to rest. There are people here who can provide answers to those questions too. So, the forum accommodates the best of both worlds.

Best to you on your journey to reestablish your meditation practice.

In peace,
Ian

RE: Personal liberty in a lawless world

Ian And — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 23:10:22 GMT

I'm re-posting this from the previous thread as it contains, in brief, all the knowledge one needs to become apprised of in order to maintain their personal liberty. While it may not make much sense now, by the time this thread is fleshed out (and presuming that the reader is keeping up with the information being posted) a reasonably informed person should be able to understand each and every point made in this post.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Conor O'Higgins:

Ian And:

The two most important things to keep in mind with regard to the establishment of personal liberty are being able to withdraw one's "consent" and cognizance of the jurisdiction one is in. One needs to know how to avoid what are called "franchise agreements" with the state and federal government (and how to exist within that system without drifting over into statutory jurisdiction).

Are you saying that a person can live in a country but renounce the state and its laws? I think I've heard something like this before.

First, you have to understand that the "state" is a fiction. It is considered a fiction at law and therefore subservient to the non-fiction at law. This is how black letter law considers this issue.

Second: Who created the fictional state?
Answer: "We the People." Through the Articles of Confederation, the Northwest Ordinance, and finally, the Constitution for the united States of America. These documents, along with the Declaration of Independence, constitute organic law for the inhabitants of the north American continent in the area known as the union of States in America. (It is interesting to note that neither the Articles of Confederation nor the Northwest Ordinance have ever been repealed and were never nullified by the Constitution and are therefore still in effect. Think about the implications of that!)

Next question: Who are the People?
Answer: Those non-fiction, flesh and blood men and women who inhabit this geopolitical area known as the United States of America (or their own State without – meaning outside of – said national boundaries).

Third: Realize that the 14th Amendment is where "the People" become confused and mixed up. Anyone consenting to being identified as a "14th Amendment citizen," who is therefore "subject to the jurisdiction" of the "United States" (read: the corporate state created and sanctioned by the de facto and not the de jure Congress in 1871 in the city of Washington, district of Columbia) has now transferred, by consent, their state Citizenship to a diminutive national citizenship, thereby becoming "subjects of" the corporate State. (This is no different than those who may have, at one time or other, been subjects of a king or queen in a European state or nation.) This condition of "citizenship" is further "evidenced" by the claim of ownership of the Social Security number, the state issued "certificate of birth" and "driver license," among other documents issued by this corporate conglomerate State.

Fourth: Realize that within the founding documents of this nation state in the First Judiciary Act of 1789 at section 9 of that document reads the following:

SEC . 9. And be it further enacted, That the district courts shall have, exclusively of the courts of the several States, cognizance of all crimes and offences that shall be cognizable under the authority of the United States, committed within their respective districts, or upon the high seas; . . . and shall also have exclusive original cognizance of all civil causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, including all seizures under laws of impost, navigation or trade of the United States, where the seizures are made, on waters which are navigable from the sea by vessels of ten or more tons burthen, within their respective districts as well as upon the high seas; saving to suitors, in all cases, the right of a common law remedy, where the common law is competent to give it;...

Fifth: Realize that you have a choice of law (where there have been no contracts or agreements brought forth as evidence) in any court situation and your choice or preference for the common law where the common law is competent to give it, is inviolable. (This speaks to your inalienable "right of avoidance" of statutory law.) However, if you inadvertently (ignorantly) "consent" to a statutory jurisdiction without refutation or rebuttal, then you have bound yourself over to that jurisdiction.

Sixth: Realize that there is no need to formally renounce anything. Just establish your identity as being within the substantive law realm (where law goes unwritten and is based on universal observations or maxims of law such as the writings on law composed by Fredric Bastiat in 1850) and therefore outside the statutory realm (written law, laws written by men – legislative congress – who are self-serving sycophants existing at the leisure of their benefactors who intend to diminish and thus enslave their fellow man). Substantive law (such as the English common law from which our American common law derives) deals with non-fictions; statutory law deals with fictions at law (corporations, associations, partnerships, public officers, public employees, public office holders, and various other "actors" on the public stage such as agents, deputies etc.).

Seventh: Realize that the majority (if not all) courts in America these days (municipal, state and federal courts) are set up to adjudicate statutory law (and ordinances) and not the common law. If you wish to access the common law, you need to know how to go about doing that! Also, make certain you are in a "court of record" and not a "court of no record", and keep – document – "the record" of your truth yourself. If you allow the state to identify you or create the record (without refutation) about the issue under examination, your chances of prevailing will be significantly reduced!

RE: Personal liberty in a lawless world

Ian And — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 19:37:41 GMT

tom moylan:

Hello Ian And,
Now that you have opened this particular can-o-worms, however, I am particularly happy to see this subject here.

Over the past two years, my interest in legal / consitutional / liberty matters has paralleled my deepening insight practice and particularly my DN stable cleaning. I have viewed the abolishment of long held political and social beliefs and positions as another type of awakening. All is linked and questioning the long accepted programming has been astonishing to me personally.

I look forward to reading your source material and any further discussions on the subject here or otherwhere.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Tom. I can assure all who stop by to read this thread and who look into the information linked to or provided in PDF form that you will not be disappointed by the education that is provided. It will truly open your eyes!

I've personally vetted a great deal of the information that will be presented here (based on my first hand experience in many of the issues discussed; I've been involved in court issues and actually won; of course, previous to my understanding of these concepts I had suffered some losses too, but that's all in the learning curve). And I encourage anyone who is seriously interested in these matters to do their own research and due diligence study of these issues.

Actually, learning about the law can be fun, especially when you begin to realize that you can beat even a so-called "kangaroo court" at their own game, and there's not a thing they can do about it. It just takes some nerve to stand one's ground and overcoming any pre-conceived notions (and mental conditioning) that has built up over the years.

I've been following these particular issues since 1975. It's only been since 1994 that I began to come across credible information about what has taken place here (and elsewhere around the developed world) with regard to these issues of personal liberty. And it's only been within the past decade that I have been able to uncover, to my own satisfaction and with the availability of the Internet, a lot of the historical evidence about what has taken place as well as effective ways to remedy these issues we have with the seeming tyrannical turn that domestic government has taken in recent years.

There actually is a way to work this information in with one's practice, as when I have some time to prepare it, I intend to show some of the parallels between knowing one's "identity" in a legal sense and as well as in a Dhamma sense (anatta). One's peace of mind (in both areas) comes from knowing and understanding one's identity!

I've even come across an explanation of the Christian mythology/story that explains Yeshua's mission in terms of educating people about the Roman law of the times (without all the hype and circumstance of the personal "savior" mythology) and how his sacrifice could be viewed in terms of a civil law sacrifice (and "redemption") meant to educate the people. Of course, those who formed a church around this mythology changed significant portions of the story to suit their agenda of control over the masses.

Perhaps the best explanation about how people become entangled in these matters involving government is explained in the Consent.pdf linked to in the other thread. While there is some overlap and repetition in this piece, the repetition of concepts helps to bring home the point in a convincing fashion. This will help to clear up a lot of misconceptions and perceptions about how the present setup in government works. That and the concept of assumption/presumption in the Presumption.pdf. If you can understand these two concepts and how they work in the real world, you're half way home to understanding how to preserve your personal liberty.

Anyway, it should make this an interesting thread.

Personal liberty in a lawless world

Ian And — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 23:57:39 GMT

For those interested in looking into avenues for expanding their knowledge of their own personal liberty in what can appear to be a lawless world, I've set aside this thread for further development on themes about education in the law and how it applies in different circumstances.

Originally a few of these themes were misplaced in a practice thread here. As I have time and the inclination, I will add some of my research here, linking to sources to help others interested in furthering their knowledge along these lines.

If anyone has any related questions or needs clarification, I will endeavor to accommodate them here in this thread, so as not to interrupt any Dhamma related threads.

To start off the thread the following attachment will help establish a foundation in the history of law in this county. Written and researched by Lee Brobst, a respected tireless legal researcher, it covers each of the significant historical developments leading up to the system of law that is in place today in the United States. Following are the first three paragraphs from the piece to set the tone:

Our Republic (at time of this writing) is now celebrating the 200th birthday of the Bill of Rights
to our Constitution. Through the wisdom of a few free-thinking men, we have come incredibly
far in 200 years. Our nation has been blessed with prosperity more than any other in world
history. The technology in this country compares with no other. Our leadership in world politics
and economics has no rival. Yet, all this has happened outside the “house” our predecessors on
this continent designed and built.

This fantastic and majestic political building, which our forefathers constructed with their lives
and sacred honor, has fallen into disuse and now sits empty. When it was new, it was the most
beautiful mansion in the world. There was nothing else like it for it was built on a foundation
called the “common law.” The walls were shaped in liberty by a unique arrangement referred to
as the separation of powers and its roof was made of transparent material to let in the light of the
Law. So all encompassing that it is adaptable to any people regardless of color, race, creed or
religion.

It didn’t crumble overnight. What took place was the result of a delusion, for people would never
give up liberty knowingly – only through deception. Gradually the deceptive rot took hold and,
one by one, the citizens of the house called a “Republic” moved out for a third rate structure
called a “democracy.”

RE: What do Buddhists mean by 'sexual misconduct'?

Ian And — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 18:40:50 GMT

Conor O'Higgins:

Ian And:

Are you saying that a person can live in a country but renounce the state and its laws? I think I've heard something like this before.

First, you have to understand that the "state" is a fiction. It is considered a fiction at law and therefore subservient to the non-fiction at law. This is how black letter law considers this issue.

Second: Who created the fictional state?
Answer: "We the People." Through the Articles of Confederation, the Northwest Ordinance, and finally, the Constitution for the united States of America. These documents, along with the Declaration of Independence, constitute organic law for the inhabitants of the north American continent in the area known as the union of States in America. (It is interesting to note that neither the Articles of Confederation nor the Northwest Ordinance have ever been repealed and were never nullified by the Constitution and are therefore still in effect. Think about the implications of that!)

Next question: Who are the People?
Answer: Those non-fiction, flesh and blood men and women who inhabit this geopolitical area known as the United States of America (or their own State without said national boundaries).

Third: Realize that the 14th Amendment is where "the People" become confused and mixed up. Anyone consenting to being identified as a "14th Amendment citizen," who is therefore "subject to the jurisdiction" of the "United States" (read: the corporate state created and sanctioned by the de facto and not the de jure Congress in 1871 in the city of Washington, district of Columbia) has now transferred, by consent, their state Citizenship to a diminutive national citizenship, thereby becoming "subjects of" the corporate State. (This is no different that those who may have, at one time or other, been subjects of a king or queen in a European state or nation.) This condition of "citizenship" is further "evidenced" by the claim of ownership of the Social Security number, the state issued "certificate of birth" and "driver license," among other documents issued by this corporate conglomerate State.

Fourth: Realize that within the founding documents of this nation state at the First Judiciary Act of 1789 at section 9 of that document reads the following:

Fifth: Realize that you have a choice of law (where there have been no contracts or agreements brought forth as evidence) in any court situation and your choice or preference for the common law where the common law is competent to give it, is inviolable. (This speaks to your inalienable "right of avoidance" of statutory law.)

Sixth: Realize that there is no need to formally renounce anything. Just establish your identity as being within the substantive law realm (where law goes unwritten and is based on universal observations of law such as the writings on law composed by Fredric Bastiat in 1850) and therefore outside the statutory realm (written law, laws written by men – legislative congress – who are self-serving sycophants existing at the leisure of their benefactors who intend to diminish and thus enslave their fellow man).

Seventh: Realize that the majority (if not all) courts in America these days (municipal, state and federal courts) are set up to adjudicate statutory law (and ordinances) and not the common law. If you wish to access the common law, you need to know how to go about doing that! (Also, make certain you are in a "court of record" and not a "court of no record", and keep – document – "the record" of your truth yourself.)

RE: Rick's practice log

Ian And — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:51:55 GMT

Rick M:

5 January 2013
30 minutes, then a break, then 60 minutes. Better than yesterday, but mind kept racing. I'm starting to worry that I'm lacking basic concentration abilities after all this time, so I went back to just focusing on the breath, and bringing it back to that over and over again. Helped a bit, but was a struggle most of the time.

5 March 2013:
90 minutes this morning. Started by sensing the breath, and then my pulse. Rather quickly I started noting sensations all over my body, which became ~5 Hz vibrations as they got more rapid. Almost as soon as the vibrations started, my body started shaking with them. The shaking was much finer than yesterday, almost a quivering.

Twice during the session my mind was all over the place, so I stopped the shaking, went back to slow noting out loud, and let things develop again.

One time the shaking started again, the second time it did not. This was shortly after the 45 minute chime. I got distracted at this point by how to sit (back of the chair vs upright), how cold the room was, etc. Managed to get focused again, the vibrations started again at an even lower amplitude, and it was more of a dissolution-like feeling of being in a sea of things that I noted.

Take a look at the gradation pattern of your practice over this period of two months. What patterns do you see? How far have you traveled?

Are you seeing the same one's I'm pointing out?

First, let's address the sitting position issue. Don't think that you have to be seated in any particular position. Choose whatever position is most comfortable for meditation. And that means at any time, at any place. If that means sitting in a chair, then so be it. Don't fret over it. Just do it and get on with your session. If you find that you have to adjust your position during the sit, then do so and return to your meditation immediately without thinking about it. The lesson is: don't let your sitting position become a hindrance to the development of concentration. Make whatever adjustments are necessary for comfort, and then return to the meditation.

For example: I usually start out sitting cross-legged on the edge of my couch. If I feel the legs losing circulation and it becomes mildly distracting (yes, only mildly for me at this point) I will adjust my legs by dropping my feet to the floor to allow circulation to resume. I don't think twice about it. I immediately return to the meditation and resume where I left off. Takes less than a couple of seconds to do. Bam! I'm back in a concentrated state examining phenomenon.

One thing to be aware of when following the Burmese instruction for "noting" is that by doing so, you have given up, to a certain extent, focusing on calming the mind and allowing the mind to sink deeper and deeper into that calm tranquil spot where concentration develops to its maximum potential. So, whenever you have to break away from that endeavor, you encourage the mind to become active by "noting" this and "noting" that. See?

Once the mind becomes active, it ceases to search after the calmness and the tranquility which helps to fuel the development of concentration. Concentration is developed through the practice of samatha meditation techniques. Mental activity, on the other hand, stimulates examination and evaluation which is a necessary ingredient for insight to arise during insight contemplation. If what you wish to accomplish first is a mind that follows your instructions whenever you issue them, work at developing concentration states. Once your mind begins to obey your instructions, then you are ready to pursue insight meditation techniques. "Noting" is an insight meditation technique.

Perhaps you might want to set noting aside for a bit to focus on becoming absorbed in the natural calm and tranquility of the mind. Once you begin to master this ability to enter the "silence of the calm," then you can return to the insight meditation techniques that will help stimulate discovery of insight into the Dhamma.

If you set your mind to accomplish an appreciation of calm and tranquility and keep bringing the mind back to that intention time and time again during your sit, eventually the mind will "get it" and obey your commands. When that day comes, you'll think: "Wow! I never knew this kind of control over my mind was possible!" But it is; if you focus on it.

Don't be surprised if, after you have been able to accomplish entering into a calm and concentrated state at will, that the idea of "noting" suddenly becomes dull and boring. The activity of noting is only supposed to serve a brief part of your overall practice: which is to alert the mind to those moments when it loses concentration so that you can then switch to bringing the mind back to the meditation object. Used in this manner, noting is an insight practice which allows you to catch yourself from indulging in a wandering mind.

However, once you are able to enter into a concentrated state at will (through the development of concentration abilities), you will find more intriguing objects to focus upon than simple noting will afford. A concentrated mind (states of appana samadhi or "fixed concentration") allows the mind to examine and evaluate objects more clearly, in an atmosphere of ease, in order to better see them for what they are. It is in such states (or momentary states) that fruition moments (realizations) occur.

So, think about whether or not you want to continue using insight meditation techniques while you are still trying to develop and master sufficient concentration states. Perhaps focusing on attaining to quiet and calm states (extended moments of calm, quietude, and unification of mind in pure unadulterated silence where the only focus is on BEING in that moment, and the last thing the mind has a tendency to want to do is to wander away from that tranquility), at this point in your journey, may profit you overall when you want to begin developing insight into the Dhamma.

Make sense?

RE: What do Buddhists mean by 'sexual misconduct'?

Ian And — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 18:51:44 GMT

Some Guy:

In one of Ayya Khema's youtube talks about jhana practice she mentions that jhana is the key to happy celibacy.

Yes. That can be true. But one needs to understand the context of that comment in order to understand it properly. I don't have time to go into detail here. But if you look into it, you may find some discussion of it somewhere on the Internet.

RE: What do Buddhists mean by 'sexual misconduct'?

Ian And — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 18:47:51 GMT

. Jake .:

Wow, far out. Can you post any good links to follow up on your off topic points about common law vs. being subject to a 'legal fiction' etc? Neat.

I'll respond briefly to this inquiry only. But I do not want to take this thread any further off topic that has already occurred.

I'm in the process of composing some information about the law and the legal system as it is being exercised in this country. If there is an interest in learning about this subject here, I can begin a thread on it somewhere (if I can find a category that will be appropriate in which to maintain it).

One's best bet for informing themselves about this area of study is to examine the historical origins of the systems being studied to apprise oneself directly of the information. That said, there is a lot of disinformation and confusing information on the Internet designed to keep people in the dark and confused about the law and what applies to whom.

While I don't subscribe to everything talked about in the following recommendation, it will help give people here in the U.S. a better idea of the forces they are up against when it comes to enforcing your rights within the present system of "justice" and law. The two most important things to keep in mind with regard to the establishment of personal liberty are being able to withdraw one's "consent" and cognizance of the jurisdiction one is in. One needs to know how to avoid what are called "franchise agreements" with the state and federal government (and how to exist within that system without drifting over into statutory jurisdiction).

Following are two PDFs that will help lay the groundwork for a comprehensive study of the controlling aspects of the current system in play. If you ever find yourself having to attend court, you will learn that most courts in the U.S. act upon "presumption." It is up to the person himself to rebut this presumption in the proper way before his standing as a flesh and blood man (and therefore access to the common law) will be recognized. The common law is where the truth will be found in order to be adjudicated, where the judge's (or in most cases the magistrate's) discretion within statutory law will be attenuated and therefore must yield to the common law. This can all be quite confusing until you begin to see how the system has historically been systematically set up over the years into the system we presently have in place today.

Consent.pdf

Presumption.pdf

RE: What do Buddhists mean by 'sexual misconduct'?

Ian And — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 17:10:57 GMT

The Xzanth:

What I have noticed and perhaps others may chime in. Is that virtue is an important qualifier. Whenever I put myself to practice I observe my own virtue rise along with the 'vibration' that I carry with me. It is truly remarkable the connection.

Yes, it helps to view oneself as aspiring to live a noble life. That aspiration can sometimes override unwholesome intentions, keeping the mind focused on the ideal behavior.

The Xzanth:

From what I understand those Catholic Priests should put a little time on the cushion and they might be able to see through the demons creating sexual misconduct in their lives and those that they come into contact with.

(Sorry if this next comment seems to be a bit "off topic." But I can't help sharing for the edification of the group.)

Oh, now you've gone and done it. You've opened the door on an area of discussion that is a pet peeve observation of mine.

Full disclosure: Between the years 1982 and 1989 I was a monk and priest in an old-Catholic religious Order (Order of the Christian Brotherhood, or OCB for short). By the term "old-Catholic" I mean, the Order practiced the original Latin liturgy (hence the term "old" descriptive of Catholic) rather than the vernacular Mass as was prescribed in the Second Vatican Council of the mid-1960s. OCB was not connected with the Roman Catholic Church. Most lay people aren't generally aware of this fact, but there are Christian organizations within Catholicism, such as the Order I was in, which are not tied to the so-called "Holy See" at the Vatican.

I trained under the American branch superior general of the Order. The American branch itself (at least the part of it that I was aware of) was relatively small and kept to themselves, out of the limelight of publicity. Reverend Father often was heard to lament that Roman Catholic priests (diocesan priests) were not being trained properly, which was the underlying reason why they began to be uncovered and outed in their sexual abuse of their congregations. He often said, "You won't find an OCB priest ever being charged with sexual misconduct. They will never advance far enough in their training to ever be ordained and for that to occur. They'll be ousted from the Order before something like that ever occurs." And I can vouch for the strictness of the Order on that account.

The point being that Roman Catholic diocesan priests are basically viewed as being just "worker bees" (and therefore aren't trained properly) for the whole scam that is the Roman Catholic Church (RCC). If the RCC had any integrity in itself, then you wouldn't be seeing and reading about these multitude of abuse scandals having happened under the Roman church's watch and sanctioning of these atrocities. The RCC is a fraud and an abomination upon the populace. (Note: To be clear here, I said the Roman Church itself (and those who run it) are responsible for the fraud, and not the Christian religion that spawned the Church.)

On a related note, I've been studying the law and its origins for the past four years, and what most people around the world are also not cognizant of is the fact that Roman Civil law runs the legal system in most developed nations in the world. That includes here in the United States of America. This type of law is based on Roman Catholic Ecclesiastical canon law. This is the same Roman Civil law that was in place at the time of the so-called Christian Messiah (Yeshua, more popularly known as Jesus of Nazareth) and which he was attempting (according to some accounts) to teach the people about.

When you enter any courtroom in this country, you are not presumed innocent until proven guilty; rather, you are a defendant having to defend yourself against the accusations of a legal fiction (the state or a municipality), a system held in place by a contractual obligation with the prevailing government. People who admit to being a "U.S. citizen" before a municipal, state or federal court, thereby admitting prima facie evidence that they are therefore "subject to" the jurisdiction of the "United States" (which is a corporation under merchant law), are now subject to that jurisdiction (and not the jurisdiction of the common law) by their own misguided (and often fraudulently obtained) "consent."

End of OFF TOPIC discussion.

RE: Awareness Watching Awareness

Ian And — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 15:45:23 GMT

Richard Zen:

As soon as your mind wanders (it will and that's okay) just acknowledge with a "Yes" or "Un-huh" that your mind has wandered and without any analysis or self-bashing just get back to the breath ASAP. I cannot stress this enough. The students who do best at concentration of any kind go back to the object ASAP.

Moment:

[sorry for the grammar mistakes, english is not my native]

Hey guys, give this guy a break. Just in case he's unaware, don't use acronyms without explaining their meaning:

ASAP = as soon as possible

RE: Getting path through 8th jhana is like a boss battle

Ian And — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 23:35:40 GMT

Joshua, you've got to learn to take the good with the bad. And get your head our of your arse! (Nevermind the comment about the handle; I was just attempting to find out what had changed.)

Your reply to me displayed the thoughts and feelings of someone who found offense when faced with the truth and the facts about himself. Nevermind that it was disrespectful; it showed a depth of immaturity, in addition to displaying a lack of any real self-examination or self-honesty.

You couldn't have done a better job of outing yourself if you tried. Now everyone here KNOWS who you are. If you tried to get away with that kind of behavior in an actual retreat setting (nevermind a monastic setting), you wouldn't even last one day! You'd be gone before the sun went down, son. And that's no lie.

If you want help from this forum with your practice, and you're unwilling to take an honest look into your own "soul" (psyche) and own up to what is actually there, then you will find this a most unpleasant place to be. You would be better served moving on to some other Buddhist forum where they put up with the bullshit of pretentious anonymous posters who enjoy boosting their egos among others who also enjoy doing the same.

You should have more respect for the experienced members who come here (four of whom have spent time responding to your pointless post; myself excluded) to selflessly assist others who are less experienced. Their time is valuable. And now, you've just proven, for everyone to see, that you don't value their time or their advice. So. . . how far do you think that's going to get you around here. (It's a rhetorical question. No need to reply.)

I strongly suggest that you heed Fitter's advice and: ". . . go back to basics, . . . with the intent to master them. [And keep your ego OUT of your practice!] Your goal should be [an] extremely strong, rock-solid, competent grasp of insight instructions.

"If you feel burned by [Ian's] remarks, channel it into mastery. Find a teacher or mentor. Then come back - maybe in a month or two - and tell us what you found."

You have no need to worry, I won't be responding to any more of your posts. At least not until I've seen a change in attitude and the maturity to go with it.

Fitter Stoke:

[Ian] doesn't sound upset or like he's having a bad day. He seems to be expressing in unvarnished terms what competent practitioners think when they read posts like this.

I couldn't have expressed this better.

RE: Getting path through 8th jhana is like a boss battle

Ian And — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 17:25:53 GMT

Joshua,

Baron of the french empire. . .?

What's that all about? Some sort of parody of the ego? A playful dalliance?

Well, be that as it may. . .

Joshua, Baron of the french empire:

Transferred to fourth vipassana jhana yesterday so I had a crack at attaining path today. 8th jhana was very clear, like I was seeing my whole body as sensation in the third person behind me. However for the first time, it is like a dragon is guarding the treasure! Soon after getting to 8th, it was a war of attrition to see who would crack first. I was blasting jhana and the enemy was tightening my chest more and more and more. I alternated stances, width of focus, mind content but it just continued for what I felt to be a very very long time.
I had to retreat but that demonic dragon's days are numbered!

This is an example of a "silly post" that I mentioned on one of my other replies. The kind I usually don't respond to. Primarily because its premise verges on the ridiculous.

In actuality, it seems to be evidence of someone "practicing" without the assistance of a qualified mentor or instructor, who has only the slightest idea about what he is doing, and who is having a problem with an accurate discernment of phenomena. Such a person needs to go back to square one and focus on discernment of a long breath as opposed to a short breath. When one is then able to clearly discern that, then perhaps they are ready to move on to discern other, more complicated states of consciousness.

I'd have to agree with the comments provided by Nikolai and Daniel, as difficult as it may have been for them to spend their time writing them.

Could you elaborate on what you mean by 'go and crack a path in the 8th' and why it was a 'boss battle'? These poetic descriptions are confusing. Did your chest tighten during this occurrence? When you say you 'alternated stances, width of focus and mind content', was this all going on as what you are calling '8th jhana' was being given shape? Or was that pre?

Perhaps doing something more simple will help, like hanging out there with the very same dispassion mentioned informing how the 8th jhana of neither perception nor non-perception's object of consciousness (the very hard to describe neither perception nor non perception part) is held.

None of that sounded all that 8th jhana or Equanimity-esque.

Tone-wise it sounds more like Re-Observation, no?

Phenomenologically the descriptions are light, so not a lot to go on. . .

Rather than that, there is this dramatic, hero-esque thing, which sounds below that, before that, what might come in earlier stages, so it sounds to my ear, and not based on a lot of data...

People who seem to be too preoccupied with "reaching path" (whatever that is) don't seem serious enough to actually focus on accomplishing what the practice of the Dhamma itself aims to help one with: namely, the alleviation of greed (unconscious passion), hatred (or aversion), and delusion (personal ignorance).

Don't put the cart before the horse. There's a reason it's called a "gradual teaching" or a "gradual path." Spend some time, as Nikolai suggests, contemplating where you are. Spend some time identifying the five aggregates within your ability to discern them from your direct experience of them. Spent some time contemplating dependent co-arising and what that means in terms of your direct experience. This all takes TIME! It is a gradual path. See?

If this comment feels like a smack in the face, well, then it ought to. It was meant to STOP you from continuing down the pathway that you have misguidedly chosen to walk. It was meant to be a SHOCK!

It was meant to say: "Wake up and pay attention! For once in your miserable life."

RE: Goals for jhana practice

Ian And — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 00:28:59 GMT

Dee Miller:

Last night I noticed I can get into at least the sixth jhana.

If I wanted to take a break from insight practice for a month or two, what might be some goals or at least areas to work on? I'd prefer to make progress in ways that will also benefit my insight practice when I return to it.

Your question is too vague.

In terms of what are you referring? What do you see yourself accomplishing?

Do you mean making further progress in the arupa jhanas? Or do you have something else in mind?

RE: MCTB-- "Where" Am I?

Ian And — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 21:24:55 GMT

Hello Eric,

My attention to your dilemma of existential angst was brought to the fore on reading a recent post by Tom Moylan in a previous thread you had posted (Every Moment is Unbearable) where you made the following observations of your state of mind at that time:

Eric Michaels:

The past few months, every moment of my existence has been unbearable. Everything feels hostile, causing intense anxiety and even panic attacks. Everything pisses me off, especially at work. The whole idea of having to work for someone else in order to feed my family seems like a cruel injustice. I stay up late into the night fearing for the lives of my children, for whatever reason.

Everything is just so meaningless, so incredibly meaningless. And I can't stand it. My natural state of being is one of deep existential despair and quiet panic. It has affected my marriage and my performance at work.

There are many here who, if they were being honest, would say that they, too, have experienced these very same "feelings" themselves at one time or another. I know that I certain have. So, you are not alone in this respect. That said, it doesn't bring much practical solace, does it, to know that you are not alone. That is, it doesn't help you to deal with the present moment events that contribute to the "feelings" of angst and panic that can easily overcome your mind and mental state of being.

Your case deserves more attention and consideration than the limited (yet well meaning) unprofessional help you may receive by posting on a forum such as this present one and expecting to receive practical answers that will assist you in dealing with a very REAL circumstance in terms of your perception of individual reality. And if I had more time available I would delve into an analysis of the posts you have presented here thus far in order to gain a clearer idea of your mental state. As it is, I have looked at one or two of the most recent posts in order to arrive at an idea of a semblance of what might pass for your state of reality.

What you (and in essence, the rest of us) are currently facing (in terms of our economic livelihood and the stress that can bring on) has to do with circumstances that are, in general, out of your control. Out of your control only in the sense that you likely have little or no idea how to deal with or handle such circumstances. Once those problems have been overcome (or at least the concern over them has been alleviated), it will be easier for you to concentrate on more personal areas relating to your ontological and soteriological concerns. (Ontology being "the branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being, reality or ultimate substance," and soteriology being "spiritual salvation.")

What you are able to deal with (at least to some extent as you become able) is your perception of the problems as they lay before you, so that you can begin to develop a plan or strategy for seeing your way through them for the time being. In that respect, the change in attitude you initiated a while back (to "prefer to find happiness in family and spiritual practice") is a step in the right direction. In addition to that there may be some other steps that you might take that will help you begin to put the pieces of the puzzle that is your life back together again, such that it becomes an area of focus for wholesome activities and thought, thus adding to a sense of self-empowerment (if you will allow me that "new age" type expression).

What I'm about to suggest will involve spending some time on other endeavors in addition to your meditation practice, and while I realize that time is in short supply, these suggestions may more than prove helpful and practical in the long run enough to justify finding the time to pursue them. In addition I should say, I have taken my own advice here, as this is how I pursued my education in and practice of the Dhamma (although, to be fair, in a more forgiving atmosphere – in seclusion on private retreat – than the one you face, having to deal with your responsibilities to other people in close proximity to you, meaning your family).

Rather than pursuing an eclectic approach to your pursuit of peace of mind, (I formerly followed, to my detriment, that same kind of approach, so I know whereof I speak on such matters) I suggest you become one-pointed, so to speak, and focus on what records we have available to us in terms of what the "Buddha" actually taught in his own words. Meaning the translated Pali canon of discourses, wherein you will undoubtedly find some major golden nuggets of advice and inspiration if you look for them. The older volumes of the Sutta Pitaka (the Samyutta Nikaya and the Anguttara Nikaya) are chock full of insightful passages which help to clarify what Gotama taught. In that same vein, the Majjhima Nikaya can also be very helpful (in terms of clarification of the meditation practice) as well as various selected discourses from the Digha Nikaya (in terms of sorting through ontological concerns and his response to those areas).

Although you may not be able to at the moment for financial reasons, I recommend, when you are able, to find and purchase the Wisdom Publication editions of these volumes, as they will become a wellspring of reference that you will enjoy referring back to time and again. In the meantime, the accesstoinsight.org website contains many of the discourses from these volumes, and you can download the entire website to be able to read it off line if you wish (which I also recommend your doing).

What I found from doing this was clarification and inspiration for and about the man who uttered these ideas as well as a desire to understand what he was saying and its intended meaning. Once you begin to observe a sense of the integrity of thought and approach to spiritual matters that Gotama demonstrates, it becomes quite apparent that this man and the insight he uncovered was quite extraordinary, even for his times. Just reading the discourses helped me to re-frame my attitude toward life and to begin to embody the integrity and spirituality on display there, as well as beginning to re-condition my mind in more wholesome ways.

I mention this because it will begin to bring meaning to what seems to be a meaningless world. And right now, your mind could do with some inspiration and hope for your future. It is there, believe me, you just have to grab hold of it.

When I have some time, I'll get back to you with further suggestions for some specific suttas which you might find to be useful. In the meantime, these two from the Sutta Pitaka may prove to be a useful start:

The Kalama Sutta (AN 3.63) as well as this brief essay by Bhikku Bodhi, A Look at the Kalama Sutta.] In this sutta, the Buddha explains to a group of skeptics the proper criteria for accepting a spiritual teaching.

and

The Brahmajāla Sutta: The All-embracing Net of Views (DN 1) In this important sutta, the first in the Tipitaka, the Buddha describes sixty-two philosophical and speculative views concerning the self and the world that were prevalent among spiritual seekers of his day. In rejecting these teachings — many of which are alive to this day — he decisively establishes the parameters of his own.

Also, there are brief essays by Bhikkhu Bodhi (as well as others, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, for one, comes to mind) that can be very instructive and illuminating. I am speaking about the "Cover essays from the BPS newsletter" (about a third the way down by scrolling) as these tend to be short but pithy essays. Although his other essays (further up) can be equally illuminating.

Establishing this ground of appreciation for what the Buddha taught in his own words can add a dimension to your practice that heretofore was absent, in addition to beginning to establish in your mind a respect and appreciation for revisiting original source material as well as helpful explanations of this from learned contemporary writers.

In peace,
Ian

RE: Why does attaining to higher paths facilitate great concentration abili

Ian And — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:22:11 GMT

Cedric in Miami, FL.:

I was wondering why is it that with progress in insight (attainment of further paths etc) that concentrations abilities (think ability to attain jhanas) tend to increase concomitantly.
What is the mechanism behind this?

What is increased as a result of progress in insight?

The short answer is mindfulness (sati). As insight into the mediums that facilitate greater awareness of what causes one's dukkha begin to take place, one realizes that lack of mindfulness is the key element that has caused one to devolve down into dukkha (dissatisfaction), to experience unsatisfactoriness from life.

Mindfulness is concentration's older brother, so to speak. Mindfulness brings into focus a much wider range of phenomena than concentration, which itself has a narrow focus upon only one object at a time. Mindfulness can be translated as "presence of mind" about objects, having "recollection" of their meaningful elements. Mindfulness is an all-encompassing activity. It encompasses a whole panorama of objects and therefore results in an increased ability to stay in the present moment and thus to avoid causing oneself dukkha! See?

Mindfulness, coupled with insight, helps in the increase of concentration abilities in terms of one's being able to improve ones level of concentration to the level of dhyana. The insight lets one know what he is doing right (in terms of meditation) so that he can repeat those actions in order to enter dhyana at will. And dhyana (at least in my experience) helps one to develop and to be able to sustain deeper levels of concentration for longer periods of duration, which in turn helps one to increase mindfulness in areas outside of meditation practice (meaning normal waking life). Think of dhyana as reaching deeper and deeper levels of calm and tranquility such that the mind can become more easily established in appana samadhi or "fixed concentration."

It is from this level of samadhi (this calm and tranquil state that feels "rock solid" as though one could go on forever) that one can make progress in the "progress of insight."

Cedric in Miami, FL.:

Is it that the generalized tension associated with strong belief in self is weakened and that tension dis-facilitates subtle/deeper levels of attention? This would seem to make sense.

Maybe so. It all depends on how one views these things and what you mean by the term "dis-facilitates." I take it that you meant to say "de-facilitates?" If by "dis-facilitate" you mean "to take away" or "to subtract" from "deeper levels of attention," I hardly see that as a beneficial attribute in the development of awakening and the progress of insight. Do you? Or did you misspeak here and mean to say something different?

RE: How to regain state of effortless concentration?

Ian And — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 16:35:27 GMT

Hi Dee,

Dee Miller:

I guess I'm not really sure what the distinction between mindfulness and concentration is!

Richard seems to have a good handle on assisting you with concentration. So, I'll focus this reply on the question posed above.

For a more in-depth answer regarding how mindfulness (sati) is defined, please see the following thread The Practical Aspects of Establishing Mindfulness. Especially, the first two posts.

Here is a brief quotation from that thread that may help to answer your question:

As Ven. Analayo has written in his book Satipatthana, The Direct Path to Realization, "What this definition of sati points to is that, if sati is present, memory will be able to function well. Understanding sati in this way facilitates relating it to the context of satipatthana, where it is not concerned with recalling past events, but functions as awareness of the present moment. In the context of satipatthana meditation, it is due to the presence of sati that one is able to remember what is otherwise only too easily forgotten: the present moment.

"Sati as present moment awareness is similarly reflected in the presentation of the Patisambhidamagga and the Visuddhimagga, according to which the characteristic quality of sati is 'presence' (upatthana), whether as a faculty (indriya), as an awakening factor (bojjhanga), as a factor of the noble eightfold path, or at the moment of realization."

Therefore if mindfulness is present (upatthitasati) it can be understood to imply presence of mind, in as far as the direct opposite of this is absent mindedness (mutthasati). Having a presence of mind implies that, endowed with sati, one is wide awake in regard to the present moment. Such presence of mind with regard to whatever one does or says will be clearly comprehended by the mind, and thereby more easily remembered later on.

Mindfulness has to do, in the present instance with regard to the problem posed in your primary post, with keeping the mind "established" in the present moment and not letting it wander off. Maintaining present moment awareness. Concentration has, in the present context, to do with maintaining focus on an object of meditation, such as the breath, without a break (or an unnoticed break) in attention on the object. Concentration is more aimed at a single object and remaining focused on that object, whereas mindfulness can take into consideration more than one object at a time into conscious awareness. Mindfulness, in general, has a wider scope of focused awareness, while concentration's scope is narrowed and limited to a single object of interest – kind of like focusing a beam of light through a magnifying glass onto a single object.

Establishing mindfulness first, before beginning meditation, is helpful in allowing a person to enter into meditative concentration (either in samatha – or mental calming, tranquility – meditation states or insight meditation states). Mindfulness helps to ground the mind, to give it a foundation for the development of deeper states of tranquil meditation, which helps to facilitate the arising of insight during these meditative states.

I hope this helps to better illuminate this word sati for you.

In peace,
Ian

RE: Bare Attention and Its Uses

Ian And — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 05:31:02 GMT

Richard Zen:

Bagpuss The Gnome:

The feeling tone is noted and then DROPPED, as per Nyanaponika's instruction: "If during the time, short or long, given to the practice of Bare Attention, any such comments arise in one's mind, they themselves are made objects of Bare Attention, and are neither repudiated nor pursued, but are dismissed, after a brief mental note has been made of them."

Right. Then I did understand it right. Not sure why I seem to have this hangup on vedana - something to do with the way the mind thinks about the four foundations (surely you can't DROP vedana!?!) but you've patiently nailed the point home and I am in your debt as usual.

Many thanks Ian,

I think it's dropping the clinging thoughts about liking or disliking something that gives relief. Sensations will happen anyways but I guess quoting from Lawrence of Arabia "the trick is not minding that it hurts".

Thank you, Richard. That's an elegant way of stating it. :Applause:

RE: Failure to attain

Ian And — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 05:23:43 GMT

Hi Chris,

Chris Coleman:

Ian And:

The heart of what I focused on was this last paragraph, keeping mindful of all the preceding ideas. I looked at (contemplated) my own experience in light of that last paragraph, and the insight struck me like a thunderbolt! I'll leave it to you to make sense of it.

Ian,

I've been following your comments in this thread with careful attention. It's possible that I've attained this insight, but it's also possible that I'm a million miles away from it. It depends upon exactly what you mean in this final statement.

On the one hand, I feel (a) that I understand the proposition that there is no "me," only a stream of perceptions; (b) that I believe that this statement is true based upon my own observations of my own experience; and (c) that I could probably explain the proposition back to you using different words that you would recognize as expressing the same truth.

On the other hand, my reaction is sort of "so what?" -- no thunderbolts.

Actually, "thunderbolt" may have been a bit of a hyperbolic term to use, but it drives home the point. It was definitely eye-opening from a different angle that I had hitherto not considered. Just yet another way of looking at anatta. Gotama was famous for making these kinds of points in several different ways. Just pick one and run with it; whatever strikes your fancy.

Chris Coleman:

I'm pretty sure that's because all I have is a dry intellectual understanding (which is relatively easy to attain), but not a true insight in the sense that you mean it.

It doesn't matter how you came by the perception (whether by "dry intellectual understanding" or by "clearly being able to see" the truth directly based upon clear, unobstructed observation — what you might call "insight").

What matters is that you saw it and processed it as factual. And now that has changed your perception of reality. The real question is: will you remain mindful of it in your normal everyday living.

Chris Coleman:

In other words, I'm pretty sure you don't mean "I finally put all the clues together and figured out that there is no "me," but rather perhaps something like "something clicked from an unexpected direction in a way that caused me to directly be aware -- before and outside of any thought on the matter --that there is no "me."

Yes, you are correct in both assumptions. Although I wouldn't phrase the last part of that in those words ("that there is no me"). What I saw was exactly what the Buddha stated, directly: "“Were a man to say: I shall show the coming, the going, the passing away, the arising, the growth, the increase or the development of consciousness apart from matter, feeling, perception, and mental formations, he would be speaking of something that does not exist.”

What I saw was the truth about "the coming, the going, the passing away, the arising, the growth, the increase or the development of consciousness," that there had to be a body (in existence) with the six senses first in order to be able to perceive these objects, and that without that body there was no one there (no "thing" there) to perceive. "The coming, the going, the passing away, the arising, the growth, the increase or the development of consciousness" is dependent upon having a body.

But you see, I had already had a previous insight about the five aggregates, and this played right into that insight. From a slightly different way of looking at it. That's all.

Chris Coleman:

I find myself reading these boards and constantly thinking "I already know this." But I can't quite tell if that's because I've somehow stumbled into great wisdom (highly unlikely, but I've had some unusual experiences so perhaps not completely impossible) or if that's because "knowing" it is easy and obvious but really isn't the point at all (probably much more likely).

Of course you already know this. We all DO. It is just that through the process of living and reacting to the events in our lives we sometimes lose sight of these truths and begin to believe the mental conditioning that physical life brings on based upon the conditioning of the culture we live in. When that mental conditioning takes precedence over what we already know in our deepest conscience, then that's when the mind begins to fabricate a reality around the conceptions we have, an ego is formed and developed, and our "feelings" (not in the sense of vedana, which is "feeling," meaning an affective quality based upon one of three variables) are at risk to become "hurt." When the ego is felt to be "hurt" or "stroked" or whatever, that's when the person loses equanimity of formations and becomes involved in and "of" the world.

What you want to develop is to be in the world but not become part of it. Keep ego and conceit out of the mix. Otherwise you create the perfect condition for the arising of dukkha!

I'll have more to say on the concept of "conceit" later on when I have time to sit and compose something about it. It seems there are those here who have a rather shallow idea about what conceit is. If you see it for what is really is, you begin to realize how subtle it can actually be. Mental events that one might have previously not considered displayed any conceit, would then be realized as being an example of conceit at a very subtle level.

Have I confirmed your understanding?

In peace,
Ian

RE: Dispassion is very effective!

Ian And — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 21:15:47 GMT

super fox:

I just had a couple sits today and yesterday that have introduced me to what I think is a very promising strategy during meditation.

I use to read a lot of buddhist sutras and such where they talk about how a yogi needs to adopt an attitude of dispassion / disgust with the body, thoughts, etc - I mostly chalked them off as somewhat of a monkish/ascetic oriented thing.

However during meditation recently I've been having a lot of trouble with either the attention wave fidgeting with body tensions or getting lost in rather vivid day-dreams, and trying to escape out of them / reduce them seemed difficult. I figured I need to bulk up on concentration. However, I found that by simply adopting a dispassionate attitude towards all phenomenon that arise in the field of experience (basically the five aggregates), I was able to actually avoid getting lost in anything and found that I could very easily reach equanimous states.

I've also found that maintaining an attitude of dispassion helps in cultivating the faculty of bare attention (see Ian's recent thread on bare attention and its uses).

Yes, indeed, Super Fox. That (i.e. dispassion) is what I think that Mahasi Sayādaw was aiming to accomplish with his innovation of the concept of "bare attention" when he taught this method to Nyanaponika Thera, who in turn explained it in his book The Heart of Buddhist Meditation.

If one has the insight to more closely consider what is in the suttas (discourses) in terms of suggestions for practice, one will undoubtedly come across more of these useful instructions for developing "skillful means" that one previously cast aside or decided to ignore.

RE: Bare Attention and Its Uses

Ian And — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 04:55:12 GMT

Bagpuss The Gnome:

I probably wasn't making my question as clear as it could be. Let me try again...

What I find a little confusing is how this relates to vedana. Can you have BA of vedana? Or is vedana considered to be the baggage? If something is unpleasant, pleasant or neutral then it is the mind that decides which of the three it is right?

What about the following is it (from my last post) that you do NOT understand?

Ian And:

Yes, the object of bare attention is the sensation, and your reaction to that object ("unpleasant") is what you are attempting to filter out of the experience. By filtering out "unpleasant," the sensation is just a "tension in the head." Period! See?

In other words, yes, vedana is considered to be the baggage. I thought that was clear from the original statement.

Bagpuss The Gnome:

So does the practice of BA mean observing the object before a "feeling tone" is mentally assigned? I think it does, but then what of the vedana itself?

Perhaps my understanding of vedana is lacking...

That's where you would be wrong. Right?

It is your understanding of the correct way to use "bare attention" that is lacking. . . . It sounds, from your way of "thinking" about this, like you're trying to have your cake and, at the same time, stab yourself with the knife used to cut it. What I'm (and by implication, Nyanaponika is) attempting to do is to take the knife out of your hand before you stab yourself.

The feeling tone is noted and then DROPPED, as per Nyanaponika's instruction: "If during the time, short or long, given to the practice of Bare Attention, any such comments arise in one's mind, they themselves are made objects of Bare Attention, and are neither repudiated nor pursued, but are dismissed, after a brief mental note has been made of them."

For example, within the context of an intense negative encounter with another person, the noting and dropping of the feeling tone is used to short circuit one's impulsive reaction to the negative encounter so that no unwholesome deed by word or physical action (or thought) might be executed. This would give the person time to assess the situation further before allowing it to blow up into an altercation of some kind (for example).

Or is there some other context that you have in mind?

RE: Where to begin with Dharma studies?

Ian And — Sun, 06 Jan 2013 17:18:21 GMT

Taking into consideration the following two translations of the same Pali text, and using that as a foundation upon which to work.

"Mind foreruns (all evil) conditions, mind is chief, mind-made are they; if one speaks or acts with wicked mind, because of that, pain pursues him, even as the wheel follows the hoof of the draught-ox.

"Mind foreruns (all good) conditions, mind is chief, mind-made are they; if one speaks or acts with pure mind, because of that, happiness follows him, even as the shadow that never leaves." — Narada Thera

"Mind is the forerunner of all actions. All deeds are led by mind, created by mind. If one speaks or acts with a corrupt mind, suffering follows, as the wheel follows the hoof of an ox pulling a cart.

"Mind is the forerunner of all actions. All deeds are led by mind, created by mind. If one speaks or acts with a serene mind, happiness follows, as surely as one's shadow." — Ananda Maitreya

Fitter Stoke:

Ian And:

"It is volition (cetana), monks, that I declare to be kamma. Having willed, one performs an action by body, speech, or mind." — AN 6.63

What is the relationship between cetana and intention?

I'm reading Wings to Awakening right now, and Thanissaro Bhikkhu seems to be making a big point about the intention behind every act determining or at least influencing its kamma.

I don't understand your question. What is your definition of cetana, and what is your definition of intention? Is there some fundamental difference that you perceive?

In another translation (which I like) of those same two verses above, Acharya Buddharakkhita's translation is fundamentally the same as Narada Thera's, except that he phrases it a bit differently, adding another dimension to the meaning, in that "mind precedes all mental states," which should be understood but is only implied by the previous two translations:

"Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with an impure mind a person speaks or acts suffering follows him like . . .

"Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with a pure mind a person speaks or acts happiness follows him like . . ."

Is there some difficulty in seeing that the nature of one's mental state (being one of greed, hatred or ignorance on the one hand, or one of non-greed, non-hatred, or non-ignorance on the other) would not fundamentally influence the outcome of some human interaction?

If someone were yelling and screaming at you out of either disrespect or ignorance as opposed to calmly and rationally attempting to make their point, would not these two opposed (karmicly influenced) approaches yield vastly different results in the listener's mind?

Hence, the underlying factor being the "intention" or "volitional" seed (sometimes in awareness and sometimes not in awareness of the perpetrator) behind each approach.

RE: Where to begin with Dharma studies?

Ian And — Sun, 06 Jan 2013 05:02:36 GMT

Rick M:

Ian And:

There's nothing like going back to "the horse's mouth" and finding out exactly what was said and taught. You might find the following thread helpful: Essential Books from Theravadin Resources.

I like your suggestion about reading the primary sources, and would like to get started. What has always stopped me in the past is some frustration with penetrating the Pali canon.

Sometimes the canon seems like a recitation of list after list pertaining to a moral code that I accept is a prerequisite for a meaningful meditation practice, but which doesn't give me the practical instructions for actually meditating that, say, MCTB does.

I flipped through Thanissaro's translations of the Dhammapada and the Udana and again got the same feeling as I've had in the past. Is there one particular book on your list that you might recommend to me with this in mind?

I felt the same way about the Tao Te Ching before I found Mitchell's translation, which really brought it alive for me.

I know what you mean by the impression of the canon seeming to be like endless recitations of lists. But that is due to the compiler's fault of setting up their publications in that manner in order to list many of the concepts/teachings together in one place, and not the fault of the canon or the discourses themselves, which you should find intriguing and compelling and less dogmatic than a series of dry lists.

Since you're primarily interested at this point in practical instruction on meditation practice, although there are numerous subtle tips and hints about meditation spread about in all four of the main Nikayas, the one that addressed this subject matter head on more so that the rest is the Majjhima Nikaya, the Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha.

And although one can find many of the discourses online at accesstoinsight.org, where a great many there have been translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, I recommend the Wisdom Publications books not only for the accuracy of the translations but for the invaluable introductory notes and footnotes in each of those volumes, three quarters of which were written and/or edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi. The work he has done to help bring these volumes to Western readers in a form that is worthy of the preservation of the original intended meaning to be found in the discourses is truly unmatched and is a great gift to us.

I'll give you one example of the insight I happened onto while reading a used copy of a translation of the Dhammapada by Narada Thera that I picked up on the cheap. In the footnotes on the very first verse, The Twin Verses, where the entry begins:

"Mind foreruns (all evil) conditions, mind is chief, mind-made are they; if one speaks or acts with wicked mind, because of that, pain pursues him, even as the wheel follows the hoof of the draught-ox. . . . if one speaks or acts with pure mind, because of that, happiness follows him, even as the shadow that never leaves.[2]"

The footnote below read:

"[2] Verses 1 and 2 were uttered by the Buddha on two different occasions to show the inevitable effects of evil and good kamma (deeds) respectively. Strictly speaking, kamma is purely mental, and its effect is also mental. Where there is no mind or consciousness there is no kamma."

It was those last two sentences in the footnote that so intrigued me. I contemplated those sentences for quite some time, and came upon an epiphany. Later on, I was able to come across one of the places in the discourses where the Buddha defines what he means by kamma (or karma). He stated that:

"It is volition (cetana), monks, that I declare to be kamma. Having willed, one performs an action by body, speech, or mind." — AN 6.63

For a long time I had been under the mistaken impression that karma had something to do with a metaphysical law or truth related to the action itself, that "whatever goes around comes around." And while this is true to a point, it isn't literally true for each and every action that one performs. In other words, not every unwholesome action that one has performed is bound (through some metaphysical mechanism) to come back upon the perpetrator. But rather, "where there is no mind or consciousness (no mental volition), there is no kamma." It helped put my mind at ease (guilt over past deeds), and opened up a whole new vista of understanding and appreciation for the discourses. This is why I say they are worth tracking down and reading.

There are also talks on this and other volumes from the Nikayas that Ven. Bodhi has given that one can access online which may help you better understand what is being communicated in the sutta. The ones for the Majjhima Nikaya can be found here. As well, Thanissaro Bhikkhu has many recorded talks online that may be of interest and assistance.

RE: Rick's practice log

Ian And — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 16:19:38 GMT

Rick M:

30 minutes, then a break, then 60 minutes. Better than yesterday, but mind kept racing. I'm starting to worry that I'm lacking basic concentration abilities after all this time, so I went back to just focusing on the breath, and bringing it back to that over and over again. Helped a bit, but was a struggle most of the time.

Don't beat yourself up over this. Every meditation session that you perform, no matter whether it was perceived to be a "good" session or a "bad" session, is all just grist for the mill. It's all good, no matter how you are inclined to view it in the moment.

This is how most people experience this practice, until they begin to make some breakthroughs in insight. Then, things can begin to take on an added dimension of interest and wonder and urgency.

Every time you bring the mind back to the meditation object is a small victory, whether you realize it at the time or not. What you're doing is exercising the mind, just as you would when lifting weights to build muscle, disciplining it to follow your directions and orders. If you do this long enough and consistently enough, the mind will eventually break down and begin following the directions you give it. You will gain some control over the mind, and the amount of that control will gradually increase the more you stay at it. But you have to be persistent and dogged in your practice, and don't give up!

Look at it this way: it took years for your mind to develop the unwholesome habits it has developed, and to gain control over your best intentions for it. Undoing that conditioning isn't going to happen over night. It takes discipline and endurance and diligent practice to overcome those years of unwholesome conditioning. So, just remember, every time you sit in meditation is a small victory for you over the conditioning of mind you're trying to break.

Once you figure out how to enter dhyana at will, things will begin to become a bit easier. Dhyana leads to samadhi, and this is where you eventually want to end up at, as samadhi will be used during contemplation/insight practice in order to allow insight to arise and enlighten the mind.

You're doing fine. Everything you're mentioning is just par for the course. Just keep at it.

RE: Bare Attention and Its Uses

Ian And — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 05:55:15 GMT

Bagpuss The Gnome:

I understand the concept fully now I think.

I'm not buying it, Bagpuss. I don't think you've understood a word that anyone in this thread has explained. Because if you had, you wouldn't have asked the questions you've asked.

I suggest you go back to the very first post and re-read it s l o w l y, sentence by sentence, not progressing from one sentence until the previous one was understood and digested. The answers to your questions are in that first post! You just didn't GET IT! (Or you weren't paying attention, which is even worse.) And no amount of my further attempt to explain it is going to help you with that. This one is all on your shoulders.

Sit in a quiet place, undisturbed by outside influences, and focus your concentration and re-read slowly every sentence in that first post. Think about what you're reading, don't just gobble it up like it was last night's apple pie. Sit and savor each sentence until you fully understand what is being communicated. Relate it to your experience. Then go onto the next sentence.

Bagpuss The Gnome:

But I do have a couple of questions:
Reading this passage,

attention or mindfulness is kept to a bare registering of facts observed, without reacting to them by deed, speech, or by mental comment which may be one of self-reference (like, dislike, etc.), judgement or reflection. If during the time, short or long, given to the practice of Bare Attention, any such comments arise in one's mind, they themselves are made objects of Bare Attention, and are neither repudiated nor pursued, but are dismissed, after a brief mental note has been made of them.

How does this fit with the three flavours of vedana? If I have tension in the head, it is "unpleasant", rather than "neutral" or "pleasant". But that "unpleasantness" is surely my own judgement. The bare object is "sensation" right? How in this instance is that handled for example?

Yes, the object of bare attention is the sensation, and your reaction to that object ("unpleasant") is what you are attempting to filter out of the experience. By filtering out "unpleasant," the sensation is just a "tension in the head." Period! See?

"If during the time, short or long, given to the practice of Bare Attention, any such comments arise in one's mind, they themselves are made objects of Bare Attention, and are neither repudiated nor pursued, but are dismissed, after a brief mental note has been made of them."

When you don't filter that out, through proliferation of thought, it can grow to become not only a "tension in the head," but a "tension in MY head." And: "I don't like this tension in MY head." And: "I wish this tension would GO AWAY." And: on and on to who knows what's next. Are you beginning to get the picture, yet?

In the second paragraph underneath the Preface of the first post, there is this statement: "The purpose of bare attention is to assist the mind in ending mental proliferation and fabrication and thus to allow the practitioner to remain undistracted and unperturbed on the object of observation without extraneous data interfering in the process of recognizing 'things as they are'."

Now do you understand that statement?

Bare attention reduces the object of observation to its "bare essence," in other words. Removing all extraneous commentary, so that the mind doesn't become distracted by focusing on and proliferating discursive thought about the commentary. All that discursive thought is CAUSING DUKKHA!!! In addition to being distracting.

Bagpuss The Gnome:

Also, is bare attention a practice that can be done effectively both on and off the cushion?

Of course it is. That is its whole purpose. But then, you should already KNOW that, now shouldn't you.

If I could reach my hand across the POND I'd smack you on the back of the head.

RE: Where to begin with Dharma studies?

Ian And — Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:20:46 GMT

Rick Muller:

Ian And:

Also (and this may or may not apply to you), do not be fooled into thinking that by some "magical happening" that meditation alone will somehow bring you to enlightenment. It is what you do with the abilities of mind that you develop as a result of meditation and concentration practice that makes the difference in the level of attainment you ultimately reach.

I'll read over your entire post and respond at length. But when I read the above sentence I felt like singing. That's one of the wisest things anyone has ever said to me. Thanks!

Good. I'm glad that resonated with you. I was hoping it would. It was one of the delusions I had to break, too.

This is why I say that you will benefit from reading the discourses, as your life's experiences will come into play and your common sense about what you are reading should/will take hold to keep you from straying too far into delusion.

By the way, I live just over the boarder from you, in Arizona.

RE: Where to begin with Dharma studies?

Ian And — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 19:13:18 GMT

Hello Rick,

If you've had almost thirty years experience in having been exposed to meditation and such not, you are very well positioned to make good progress in your current study of the Dhamma. You've gathered a lifetime of real world experience such that it will be very difficult to fool you about what is authentic and what is not. Use that experience wisely as you make your way through your current Dhamma studies, and insist on authenticity of instruction. Find out the difference between people's opinions about what the Buddha taught and what he actually taught through first hand exposure to his instruction. That way you will develop a strong foundation for your practice.

Rick Muller:

I spent ~2 months doing fairly intense concentration and insight exercises. He was part of a Theravada order whose meditation style was directed at generating the jhanas as quickly as possible, which they achieved by focusing on a crystal ball in the center of ones body, and then doing various exercises with it, making it larger/smaller, making it glow, and so on. In retrospect, it was a very good style of meditation. However, after a few months, I had a very hard time doing any meditation exercises, and ended up quitting.

One of the things I had the most trouble with was maintaining mindfulness during the day. I was instructed to keep focusing on the crystal ball throughout my daily work, studies, lectures, etc., and the strain of maintaining that focus was altogether too much for me. I felt like I was turning into a robot after a while, and stopped meditating altogether.

Your description here sounds very similar to a technique I was first taught some 32 years ago and which was based on the manipulation of a mantra (a Hindu technique) that was used as the main meditation object. After nearly 20 years of practicing that technique and finding very little success in the way of gaining insight into spiritual development, I finally decided to look more deeply into what the Buddha taught, and by that I mean going back to the very source material (the Pali canon of discourses) and starting from scratch. There's nothing like going back to "the horse's mouth" and finding out exactly what was said and taught. You might find the following thread helpful: Essential Books from Theravadin Resources.

Perhaps like yourself, I found that the simplicity of focusing upon the breath and watching for any sensations that may arise from that practice was far more conducive and rewarding a practice than all the mental gyrations involved in moving imaginary energy around the body using a mantra. As well, it was more down to earth and grounding. The breath is always with us and can easily be used at any time to refocus one's mindfulness throughout the day.

Rick Muller:

About 7 years ago I started meditating again. I read a lot of books, among them Mindfulness in Plain English, and this gave me a good enough foundation to start daily morning meditation sessions of 30 minutes. I've done these fairly faithfully over this period. Mostly focusing on the breath and some noting practice. I also discovered Thanissaro Bhikku's Dharma talks online, which I have gotten a great deal of good advice from.

Two very good contemporary sources for instruction. Good choices.

Rick Muller:

I honestly thought this was all there was (everything there was) to meditation until I discovered this site a few weeks ago. I was curious about jhanna training. I think that I can get to jhanna 3 or 4, but I'm not sure. My meditation has been pretty intense lately, with an intense bliss that I associate with jhanna 1-2, which is followed by a dissolving of my self (jhanna 3?). Around this time I lose concentration, and have to go back to focusing on the breath, which leads to jhanna 1-2 intense bliss, followed by self dissolving, etc.

Attempting the practice of what has come to be known as dhyana (in the original vernacular, or jhana, as its Anglicized spelling is known) in Buddhist meditation circles can sometimes be confusing and difficult to grasp. Unless one has a good analogous experience to refer to, it can be as slippery as attempting to grasp a wet fish.

You might be better off just attempting to get to whatever idea you have of what the fourth level is like than attempting to discern the intervening levels leading up to the fourth dhyana. I say this because the more you are able to successfully practice attaining to the level of concentration necessary to maintain the fourth dhyana, the better your concentration (and hence, discernment) will become such that, on mental review after the practice, you can go back and look at the experience in retrospect and be better able to discern what occurred.

Also (and this may or may not apply to you), do not be fooled into thinking that by some "magical happening" that meditation alone will somehow bring you to enlightenment. It is what you do with the abilities of mind that you develop as a result of meditation and concentration practice that makes the difference in the level of attainment you ultimately reach. That development being in the dual realms of concentration ability and discernment. These two realms of development are both intimately related to one another, and can reliably correspond to the relation of the development of calm (or tranquility) and insight (or what is known as "clear seeing") — in other words, samatha and vipassana. Technically speaking, though, concentration (samadhi) is more aptly related to the ability to hold the mind on an object long enough for insight about that object to develop or arise. Yet, when that concentration is able to occur within a relatively calm atmosphere, it is more likely to result in reliable insight development.

Rick Muller:

I'd like to begin more structured Dharma training, but I don't really know where to begin. I can normally get to a state where my sense of self mostly dissolves, and hold that state for a while. My plan is to focus more on jhanna traning until I'm fairly confident I can reach jhanna 4, and then use that as a base for the Dharma training. But I would be grateful for any advice people can offer. I live in Albuquerque, NM, if anyone can recommend a good Sanga here.

Your best bet for developing a more structured Dhamma training program would, of course, be to find a guide or teacher in whom you have great confidence, and to follow that person's instruction. But failing that option, the next best thing to do would be to find reliable sources within the monastic community (such as Thanissaro Bhikkhu and Henepola Gunaratana) to read, study, and to follow as best as you can, getting clarification from whatever other sources of information that you have access to (such as forums like this present one).

Although the book that Fitter Stoke suggested is a fine book as far as it goes (and may give some valuable instruction about meditation and meditation practice), it does not even begin to open up the vistas that a comprehensive study of the Dhamma through the discourses of the Buddha would open up. It all depends upon how far one wants to take this, though, and in that sense it is a decidedly personal decision. All the best to you on your journey.

In peace,
Ian

RE: Any books that explain Dependent Origination well?

Ian And — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 16:47:43 GMT

In addition to the other two suggestions made, you might want to consider one of the books from the thread Essential Books from Theravadin Resources. It was written with the exact need you have in mind: increasing understanding of dependent co-arising.

It's title is The Great Discourse on Causation, The Mahanidana Sutta and Its Commentaries, and it was translated, compiled, and written by Bhikkhu Bodhi. It's been around for a while, and was the book I used to help me better understand this most important of concepts. It's only 140 pages long, but contains an in-depth analysis of dependent co-arising (or dependent arising, as some like to term it). I used to term it as "dependent origination," too, before I realized that "dependent arising" or, my preferred term, "dependent co-arising" was a more accurate term and way to characterize this phenomenon. This book comes well recommended (there may be others out there, but I have not recently searched for any that have addressed this study as I have been well served by the present book).

The blurb on the back of the book sums up it contents very well:

book blurb:

The Mahanidana Sutta, "The Great Discourse on Causation," is the longest and most detailed of the Buddha's discourses dealing with dependent arising (paticca samuppada), a doctrine generally regarded as the key to his entire teaching. The Buddha often described dependent arising as deep, subtle and difficult to see, the special domain of noble wisdom. So when his close disciple Ananda comes to him and suggests that this doctrine might not be as deep as it seems, the stage is set for a particularly profound and illuminating exposition of the Dhamma.

This book contains a translation of the Mahanidana Sutta together with all the doctrinally important passages from its authorized commentary and subcommentary. A long introductory essay discusses the rich philosophical implications of the sutta; an appendix explains the treatment of dependent arising according to the Abhidhamma system of conditional relations.

RE: You are (probably) not suffering.

Ian And — Sun, 30 Dec 2012 06:11:23 GMT

the who?:

The translation as "suffering" was such a bad fit to my own experience that it became something of an impediment to my learning when I first started reading about meditation years ago. Before I started practicing, I could really only stomach the most modern, secularized writings (e.g. Charles Tart) about Buddhism because I couldn't get past the idea that "there is suffering" was a premise that the whole thing started from. There was something, and something bad, that drove me to try to learn more about this practice, but "suffering", with all its baggage, was mostly not it.

This is an example of how "Buddhism" (the religion of "Buddhism") is being packaged and sold to unsuspecting people who have not taken the time to honestly investigate the Dhamma as taught by Gotama beyond just contemporary third person accounts and opinions. The impression these people obtain about "Buddhism," then, is colored (tainted) by the ideas/opinions that other people have about something that they too have likely never honestly explored! Either that, or there is a hidden (political?) agenda behind their writings about "Buddhism," meant to influence people's minds about, in this case, the religion of "Buddhism," and, by implication, the Dhamma that Gotama taught. My point is: misunderstandings and misstatements abound around subjects like this. It's always best to return to source material if you want to have even a shred of a chance of discerning the truth about such things. That is, if the truth is even what one is interested in obtaining.

If people would go back to source documentation first rather than rely on biased, contemporary opinions from people who are either ignorant about the source material or who have some kind of hidden agenda to air, they might find that there is less to be skeptical about beyond what they discovered in the contemporary fare they have read and, apparently, digested and accepted as being true.

Source material would be something like the Dhammapada, which is a compendium of thought gathered in a short volume put in verse form endeavoring to put forth the key fundamentals of early Buddhist philosophy. If, after reading something like this one still has doubts or criticisms, then at least they can claim to have taken a look at source material and honestly say that they were unimpressed. But to base one's impressions on third person opinions and biases is not giving the source (in this case, the Buddha) a fair shake in the deal.

From the Samyutta Nikaya at 56.11 (Dhammakakkappavattana Sutta or Setting in Motion the Wheel of the Dhamma) Gotama defines dukkha as follows (Note: I have replaced the translation of the word dukkha originally rendered as "suffering" with "dissatisfaction" and "unsatisfactory" to more clearly reflect the intent of the passage):

"Dissatisfaction [dukkha], as a noble truth, is this: Birth is unsatisfactory, aging is unsatisfactory, sickness is unsatisfactory, death is unsatisfactory, sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair are unsatisfactory; association with the loathed is unsatisfactory, dissociation from the loved is unsatisfactory, not to get what one wants is unsatisfactory — in short, the five aggregates subject to clinging are unsatisfactory."

A more complete description of dukkha can be had at accesstoinsight.org The First Noble Truth and the translation of the discourse Dhammakakkappavattana Sutta.

What follows is taken from the Dhammapada (as translated by Ananda Maitreya) in the chapter on Mind:

Just as an arrowsmith shapes an arrow to perfection with fire,
So does the wise man shape his mind,
Which is fickle, unsteady, vulnerable, and erratic.

Like a fish taken from the safety of its watery home
And cast upon the dry land
So does this mind flutter, due to the lure of the tempter.
Therefore one should leave the dominion of Mara.

How good it is to rein the mind,
Which is unruly, capricious, rushing wherever it pleases.
The mind so harnessed will bring one happiness.

A wise man should pay attention to his mind,
Which is very difficult to perceive.
It is extremely subtle and wanders wherever it pleases.
The mind, well-guarded and controlled,
Will bring him happiness.

One who keeps a rein on the wandering mind,
Which strays far and wide, alone, bodiless,
Will be freed from the tyranny of the tempter.

A man of fickle mind
Will never attain wisdom to its fullest,
Since he is ignorant of the Dhamma
And has wavering faith.

The heart of the fully conscious man is fearless —
He has transcended both good and evil.

Observe this body, as fragile as an earthen vase,
Build a mind as solid as a fortified city,
Then confront Mara with the weapon of insight
And (proceeding without attachment)
Guard what you have already conquered.

Certainly before long this body will lie on the ground,
Lifeless and unconscious,
Cast aside like a useless log.

A mind out of control will do more harm
Than two angry men engaged in combat.

A well-directed mind creates more well-being
Than the wholesome actions of parents
Toward their children.

RE: You are not suffering. . . Oh Yeah?

Ian And — Sat, 29 Dec 2012 05:15:43 GMT

Fitter Stoke:

Western society has been introduced to "meditation", but it's hardly obvious that (a) we're doing the same meditation the Buddha was doing or (b) that meditation was even the main thing the Buddha taught. The main thing the Buddha seemed to be teaching was sila. But that's the part relativistic, hedonistic Westerners don't want. So we end up with lots of weirdness, confusion, meme-driven behavior and beliefs, and pablum.

I like that you brought up the question about meditation and whether or not it "was even the main thing the Buddha taught." Then, to bring in the idea that sila "seemed to be" the main thing the Buddha was teaching, juxtaposing these two related yet not totally different practices against one another.

The former being the main interest on forums like this present one, and the latter hardly even mentioned at all on forums like this. And yet these are both intricate and essential pieces of the puzzle Gotama was attempting to help others put together in their lives.

He taught the systems of meditation in order to help people begin to gain control over their thoughts and minds. Begin to see the content that goes through their minds. Begin to see the mental mechanisms (the processes) that can be triggered by these thoughts so that they might be able to catch them before they exploded in an emotional bomb.

So too, practitioners can become caught up in achieving what they are led to believe is a meditational marvel, this thing called dhyana. There's all sorts of confusion about just what is dhyana, mainly because there are authoritative voices out there sending out conflicting signals. And then too, it can be a very subjective experience for some, mysterious and not quite graspable in conceptual terms. At least not until one experiences it. And yet, dhyana is only a tool to be used, in order to develop a deepening of samadhi, which itself is used to assist in insight meditation. If one could find a way to deepen samadhi without the use of dhyana, that too would work to accomplish the same thing.

The whole meditation experience is meant to enhance the practitioner's ability to begin seeing reality as it actually is without all the mental conditioning filters with which most of us are plagued. If people were able to get to this state of mind without meditation, they'd be doing that. But the sad fact is that we all seem to need some help getting there, and meditation provides that vehicle. Meditation and silence, so that we can begin to hear our own thoughts over the cacophony of distractions in the atmosphere.

What seems to end up happening is that practitioners begin to narrow their focus on a certain few practices (meditation, dhyana, metta, noting, vipassana, and whatever else), without attempting to gain a sense of the whole picture of the path that Gotama had painted. Or maybe it's just a matter of the wooden fence and the four peep holes, where four different people looking through different peep holes see different parts of the elephant that walks by. One day each person will eventually get around to viewing the other three peep holes and begin putting the picture of the whole elephant together. And it will make sense.

Fitter Stoke:

Ian And:

The whole question about which path (stream entry, once returner etc.) one is at is a personal concern and should remain in the background of one's practice. Something that one refers to from time to time when attempting to self-analyze their own progress. Not something to bring out in public on a forum like this where it has the possibility of unintentionally arousing competition among fellow practitioners and hence encouraging frustration in those who feel like they can't or haven't achieved. The focus should be on understanding the Dhamma and one's own practice, and not on where they are on some imaginary totem pole of achievement. The achievements will take care of themselves if one concentrates on and practices understanding the path they should be following.

That's not to say it wouldn't be helpful to ask questions about such things as stream entry. For personal clarification purposes. But to talk about it in such an offhanded way as "I made stream entry! Woo-hoo!" Such proclamations of self aggrandizement can actually be counter-productive, even and especially within a group of serious practitioners.

Now that is very interesting. How on Earth do you tolerate this place? :-)

The short answer is equanimity with regard to formations!

A more in-depth answer would be that I've developed an acceptance of what is. Some people will hear what you have to say, others will not. I try to work with those who I think might listen to my opinion, while realizing that 98% will just tune me out. Basically because they're only interested in achieving some short term goal they have in mind, which may only be to end a form of suffering (unsatisfactoriness) that they are undergoing at the moment. And, don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with having something like that as a goal. It's just that it seems to be to be somewhat short-sighted, to leave a whole other part of the teaching on the table, left for another lifetime to learn and undergo trials with.

It comes down to this: I end up ignoring ninety-eight percent of the silliness and melodrama that ends up being published here, and focus on finding the two percent who just might stop long enough to consider that I might know what I'm talking about, and who are willing to at least listen and give it a try. It works on the theory "you can bring a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." It's pretty much the same theory that Gotama used: "Come see and find out for yourself."

RE: You are not suffering. . . Oh Yeah?

Ian And — Fri, 28 Dec 2012 06:16:16 GMT

Jane Laurel Carrington:

I think householders need this practice. Ona's comment about renunciation in daily life is spot-on. We can all of us work at it within the context of our lives.

Yes, my thoughts exactly.

Jane Laurel Carrington:

I don't disparage monastic practice at all, but I would hate to think that the only people who can practice have withdrawn in that way. I am, though, deeply curious about how the practice manifests for various people, and it's not just idle curiosity, it's wanting to understand better what it means to be awake. That's yet another reason for more openness.

Obviously, Gotama taught both householders as well as his monastic community. What he mostly asked of the householders was to keep a strong commitment to maintain high personal standards of themselves (perhaps within the realistic context of their lives). I don't think even monks and nuns can do much more than that. Obviously, householders are not monks and nuns, so their life's context is a little wider than their monastic brothers and sisters. In the end, it's the mental training that matters most, not whether or not one is always a perfect angel at keeping the precepts. As people develop, keeping the precepts become easier. It's a gradual practice and progression.

Openness is fine. Sharing experiences is fine. Just endeavor to keep the ego out of it (or recognize that you've slipped up and try to do better the next time).

RE: You are not suffering. . . Oh Yeah?

Ian And — Fri, 28 Dec 2012 05:55:33 GMT

Jason B:

Ian's admonishment to read the suttas is well taken, but I always wonder at the claim of historical authenticity.

That's something that each individual needs to work out on his (or her) own. In my own case, I'd had training in meditation and other spiritual practices (the Latin Mass) from a highly qualified person, in addition to having spent nine years in association with a Western religious order, so I was at an advantage with regard to my ability to discern authenticity from fakery.

What I began to notice almost from the start (as I was able to read the discourses and study essays written in explanation of them) was that the Path of the Dhamma was exactly what I had been searching for my whole life. Not only did it make good intellectual sense, but also good pragmatic sense from my own first hand experience of it's practice. So, in my case at least, I've not had any trouble authenticating the Dhamma that I've been exposed to. Much of it parallels my previous spiritual training. Because of my exposure to the Dhamma, I came to better understand some of the training I had already undergone.

Jason B:

If renunciation is the only correct practice, that unfortunately diminishes the relevance of the teachings - for the vast majority of people - by quite a lot. I suspect there has never been one true practice or one true enlightenment.

Make certain you understand what the word "renunciation" means in terms of the practice. It's not only used in reference to a monastic way of life, a life of austerity and few pleasurable pursuits. Read Ona Kiser's post for a bit of a discussion of this.

One of the ideas that Gotama stressed was that renunciation implies the development of dispassion for things that cause one dukkha. If one can recognize those things in life that seem on their surface to be pleasant, yet carry the sting of dukkha underneath, the renunciation of those aspects of life will go a long way toward alleviating dukkha altogether from one's life.

Jason B:

Nevertheless, Ian, is there a specific text and/or publication you would recommend as a starting point for a Suttic beginner?

Well, if you haven't checked it out already, I posted some of my recommendations in a thread titled Essential Books from Theravadin Resources. As far as a starting point, I was first impressed by the Dhammapada. The short, pithty verses inscribed there can contain a wealth of valuable knowledge.

Yet, if you want to begin wading into the discourses themselves, I would recommend the Majjhima Nikaya (The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha) first as its contents are fairly accessible to the modern reader and not overly long or repetitive. Make sure you don't overlook the footnotes as there is a wealth of valuable information covered there.

From there, either the Samyutta Nikaya (The Connected Discourses) or the Anguttara Nikaya (The Numerical Discourses) would be interesting and valuable to read. The Digha Nikaya (The Long Discourses), of course, is indispensable as it contains several important discourses, not the least of which is the first sutta the Brahmajala Sutta (The Supreme Net, What the Teaching Is Not) and later on the Mahaparinibbana Sutta (The Great Passing, The Buddha's Last Days). Of the smaller volumes, the Sutta Nipata is excellent as the suttas contained there are relatively short but carry a lot of punch. In that same vein, the Ittivuttaka and the Udana are also good, containing short pithy discourses easily digestible.

RE: You are not suffering. . . Oh Yeah?

Ian And — Fri, 28 Dec 2012 04:43:36 GMT

Oh my goodness! Such a stir from one little innocent post.

I'll respond by taking these one at a time.

Andy W:

IanAnd:

This is not a practice that is easily followed while living the life of a householder. . . .But, the practice, as it has been originally presented, was not designed with the householder in mind. It was designed for renunciates. And the vast majority of today's modern people are not of a mind to abandoned "the life of the senses" in order to find peace of mind.

Ian, do you think it significant that the life of a householder is a somewhat different one from the householder of 2,500 years ago? I am thinking of the fact that we live longer, don't have to spend all our waking hours in back-breaking labour, are generally healthier and have access to a vast array of teachings and dharma resources. Now obviously there are other obstacles, particularly, as you say, a culture not known for promoting renunciation. But it seems to me that the potential in the householder life might be there in a way that it wasn't previously.

Well, of course there are differences. Some for the better, some not so much, as you've pointed out. In terms of access to the information, it's probably better today: there are books, magazines, Kindles, the Internet, all kinds of media on which the Dhamma can be found. Also, people are better educated (at least some of us are, on the whole). Yet as far as the practice itself is concerned, the very same hurdles need to be cleared, so in terms of that very important aspect, nothing has changed.

One big difference between now and 2,500 years ago is that householders in ancient India had Gotama himself to consult. He spent a great deal of time traipsing back and forth between the same set of population centers. The people, when they could get through to him, had direct access to him. If you read some of the accounts of these experiences, many counted the direct experience of meeting and conversing with him as being as being key to their development. You cannot discount that personal contact, and the charisma and effect that he had when he spoke and answered questions.

Of course, today we don't have direct access to Gotama. Yet, through those accomplished practitioners (Ajahn Chah during his lifetime and in audios and videos, Bht. Gunaratana, Thanissaro Bhikkhu and many others) we have people we can look up to and consult (if only by reading their works or watching or listening to their talks). So, in that sense, at least, there's still the availability of that personal contact with accomplished ariyas (noble persons).

Andy W:

I have a huge respect for monastics and will be the first to defend them against people who accuse them of being "selfish", "escapists" or "drop-outs". But I still hold out hope that one of the achievements of Western Buddhism - particularly with "hardcore" input - will be the careful crafting of an effective path to awakening that can be adopted by householders. This may necessitate some changes to what the Buddha taught, which is dangerous, but probably necessary.

Well, of course. We've seen some of that change come from the monastic community itself in terms of the innovations that Mahasi Sayadaw made in the way he taught householders in Burma, which has carried over to the West by Asian trained Westerners (Daniel Ingram being one of them).

My only point in mentioning that the path was originally designed for renunciates was just to point out the obvious. That it was designed to be rigorous from the beginning. And that anyone who was really serious about taking up the practice would be at an advantage to take that into consideration.

I think that the biggest advantage at present for Western Buddhism is the fact that there are now more accomplished native born Western practitioners to draw from. But not only that, the fact that the discourses themselves (the important ones at least) have now been translated into English by qualified native speaking practitioners who have been able to unpack much of the original intent (in terms of their choice of words to translate complicated terminology and so forth) such that we can now obtain a more accurate account in terms of the subtle intent found in these writings. That in itself is a huge plus. Because it helps to cut down on inauthentic versions of the Dhamma.

If you want to find out what the founder said, you can read his words for yourself, and not have to rely upon someone else's interpretation who's written a book about the teachings. That was one of my biggest pet peeves in the early days of my journey, was being able to distinguish between what was actually taught and what wasn't. There's a lot of misleading information out there that a person needs to wade through. That's primarily why, when the opportunity was presented, I jumped at the chance to find and read reputable translations of the discourses so that I could find out for myself, firsthand, what was taught.

RE: You are not suffering. . . Oh Yeah?

Ian And — Thu, 27 Dec 2012 08:12:03 GMT

Fitter Stoke:

When I wrote my post, I was thinking of the ideal you've set, . . .

It isn't an ideal that I have set, but rather one set by Gotama that I happened to uncover through personal study and agree with. Like him, I am a monastic. I live a monastic way of life. Were I alive during the time of Gotama, people would label me "a recluse" in the same way they labeled him.

One of the problems I see with modern people in terms of their desire to learn and practice an ancient system of liberation such as Gotama's Dhamma is that they seem to want to refuse to consider contemplating the system as it was originally constructed. They want to insist upon adding their own innovations which were not contemplated by the originator.

Yet, beyond even that, in the interest of an instant solution to their own personal problems with confronting life, they don't want to bother studying and learning about what Gotama had to say (via a reading of the discourses, because that can't happen in an instant!), but rather have opted to follow and practice "short cuts" which others have innovated in an effort to modernize the study and practice for the contemporary modern person living in a politicized post-industrial society.

This dovetails very nicely into one of your other comments, which seems to confirm this view:

Fitter Stoke:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this was a training in renunciation. If you're to free yourself from taṇhā, a great way to do that is to live away from women and wine and the class structure of ancient Indian society. If you're trained in that context for many years, stream-entry is going to be a different experience for you than if you're Joe Blow from Hoboken doing these same practices while going to school at NYU.

Of course, renunciation doesn't sit well with post-60s America. We're used to doing what we want, when we want, and in what position we want. We jettison Buddhist sila and instead graft Western psychotherapy on to the practice, with all the promises and perils that brings. I'm curious to hear your thoughts on that.

Yes, as you may already have surmised, I quite agree. Yet, also, don't you think, that part of the problem here is that there are so many other voices out in this modern wilderness that it confuses people about what it is that they are putting their time in on. The breakdown in communication of the Dhamma is something that Gotama foresaw would occur.

The modern voices teaching it from the pulpits of Tricycle magazine, Buddhadharma magazine, Shambala Sun magazine and from other venues seem to have captured the popular imagination of the interested populace and have them following something like what might be described as a "Dharma lite." The people who are following this brand of "Buddhism" seem for the most part to be ignorant that there is anything alternative to follow or be realized. And/or they certainly don't have the time to spend years of their life reading the suttas, going on retreats, contemplating the intricacies of the Dhamma, or even investigating its original historical intent.

This is not to say that there are not voices out there who are attempting to preserve the original intent of Gotama's Dhamma. Voices like Narada Thera, Nyanaponika Thera, Ven. H. Gunaratana, Ajahn Chah, Ajahn Lee Dhammadaro, Ajahn Fuang Jotiko, Ajahn Sumedho, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Bhikkhu Bodhi, Ven. Analayo and countless other monastics too numerous to name here.

This is not a practice that is easily followed while living the life of a householder. And yet, I know of one or two householders who have had the courage and determination to "stick it out," and who are now very accomplished in their own right. But, the practice, as it has been originally presented, was not designed with the householder in mind. It was designed for renunciates. And the vast majority of today's modern people are not of a mind to abandoned "the life of the senses" in order to find peace of mind. Of course, it also doesn't help when the contemporary media (and society in general) promotes "the life of the senses." In today's society, a person really needs to take a serious approach to finding peace of mind. A superficial approach to this will only fall short of the mark. A person really has to want it, and want it badly enough to put in the requisite time and effort to achieve it.

With regard to the "jettison[ing of] Buddhist sila and ... graft[ing] Western psychotherapy on to the practice," I don't doubt that there is that going on. However, I don't see (and I don't think your statement implies) that an education in or application of psychology and/or psychotherapy cannot be of some help, especially in the area of personal insight. I have a healthy appreciation for the works of people like Carl Jung and Harry Stack Sullivan, the latter of which I found some insightful observations which helped me early on in my study of the mind. But nothing like the insight of the five aggregates which Gotama brought to light and their connection with dependent co-arising.

Fitter Stoke:

It seems like pragmatic/hardcore dharma takes the Buddha's message - which was comprehensive and radical - and translates it into a problem which is easily solved with psychotherapy or technology rather than enlightenment.

If I'm understanding you correctly, I agree that there seems to be some people here who appear to have that view and anticipation of their practice.

Fitter Stoke:

I'm thinking less about the whole "what constitutes stream-entry" or even "what constitutes jhana" thing (which maybe I ought to think more about) than the whole "why are we doing this in the first place" thing.

Aahh. I see. A broader overall view. Yes, I agree that such an expanded view of one's practice would be beneficial.

The whole question about which path (stream entry, once returner etc.) one is at is a personal concern and should remain in the background of one's practice. Something that one refers to from time to time when attempting to self-analyze their own progress. Not something to bring out in public on a forum like this where it has the possibility of unintentionally arousing competition among fellow practitioners and hence encouraging frustration in those who feel like they can't or haven't achieved. The focus should be on understanding the Dhamma and one's own practice, and not on where they are on some imaginary totem pole of achievement. The achievements will take care of themselves if one concentrates on and practices understanding the path they should be following.

That's not to say it wouldn't be helpful to ask questions about such things as stream entry. For personal clarification purposes. But to talk about it in such an offhanded way as "I made stream entry! Woo-hoo!" Such proclamations of self aggrandizement can actually be counter-productive, even and especially within a group of serious practitioners.

Fitter Stoke:

To some it must appear like I'm dealing purely in semantics, but it's clear from where I'm sitting that the word "suffering" conceals and reveals a lot. That's because every time you use a word with heavy connotation where you could use simpler, more specific words, you're engaged in covert identification.

Yes. That's a good observation and insight into the processes of the mind.

You are not suffering. . . Oh Yeah?

Ian And — Tue, 25 Dec 2012 17:58:50 GMT

Nice post, Fitter.

Fitter Stoke:

I would like to start a campaign - which will be entirely unsuccessful - to stop people from translating dukkha as "suffering". It's an excessively melodramatic, gloomy translation of the word. It's also inadequate.

No need to start a campaign. . . rather, insist that people fully understand the first noble truth: that this life we live – in a universe of finite existence – is dukkha! This is a more monumental task than it first appears, because people, in general, do not wish to view their own existence in such grandiose and negative terms. So the number of people to whom this might appeal becomes limited at the very start. This is why we don't read about accounts of hoards of householders (either in ancient times or contemporary times) flocking to become monks and nuns, or to study and practice the Dhamma.

Also, I like John Peacock's breakdown of the definition of dukkha, too. "Unpleasant space."

Fitter Stoke:

Here to tell you why is John Peacock. This is from his lecture "Buddhism Before the Theravada":

John Peacock:

The prefix “du” (as in du-kkha) means dirty, unpleasant, painful. “Kha” means space. Dukkha is a dirty space, an unpleasant space to be in. It referred to the hole to which an axle fitted in a wheel. It's a hole filled with dirt, grease, and grit, and it went round and round. It also meant a wound inflicted by an arrow. There's a sense of lack as well.

“Suffering” does not do dukkha justice. Suffering is a very, very inadequate translation. It means anything unpleasant or qualified by lack in your life.

Dukkha is what you’re experiencing right now. Anything you find you want to have changed at this moment in time as you sit there. “I wish the chairs were more comfortable.” “I wish it were sunnier and cooler.” Not something happening in the future. It’s happening right now. Fundamental aspect of human experience.

I long ago stopped solely referring to dukkha as only "suffering." Suffering, it is true, is part of dukkha. But as you have pointed out, there is much more to this than just suffering (be it physical or mental suffering or unpleasantness). I've taken to the terms "unsatisfactory" or "dissatisfying" or "unsatisfactoriness" or "dissatisfaction," which, in one word, at least begins to point toward the definition that Gotama had in mind when he used the word dukkha.

Fitter Stoke:

And you should listen to John Peacock, because he is a Grand Mucky Muck.

I think I know what you mean, but I don't think you really meant what you said.

Listen to John, not because he is "a Grand Mucky Muck," but rather because he reflects the original intentions expressed in Gotama's proclamation of his Dhamma.

Even Gotama didn't view himself as a high "mucky muck." Although those around him seemed to want to apply those attributes to him, which he rejected at every opportunity (if we can rely on the discourses as evidence).

Some quotes I thought were particularly relevant.

Fitter Stoke:

Dukkha should bring to mind disappointment, irritation, annoyance, uneasiness, unsatisfactoriness - not just complete human misery. Because that trivializes real human misery while it allows you to solidify a situation that is annoying and blow it up into a cosmic travesty.

The connection with anicca and anatta is instructive. One of the main ways we invite dukkha into our lives is by trying to build our lives on a secure foundation which in fact cannot support the weight of a good life.

Of course, it was the Buddha's view - and it was the view of many holy men in his time and throughout the ages - that things like love and money shouldn't be pursued at all if you want to be happy.

You should only pursue that which is outside of time and hence beyond all cause and effect. In Buddhism, this unconditioned is called Nibbana. It signifies the blowing out of greed, aversion, and delusion, but really it signifies the blowing out of all attachment to things that are conditioned, the way the element of fire was said to disperse back into the air once it was detached from the wood.

So, like it or not, Buddhism - at least sutric Buddhism - is about renouncing all conditioned things - especially sex, drinking, and money - and extinguishing all craving, not merely attentuating it or observing it as not-self. The sutric ideal is the renunciate, the monk.

We're free to take that or leave that. But that does seem to be the message.

Dukkha is supported by the failure to realize that happiness cannot be staked on anything conditioned (i.e., anything that exists/is in time), because all those foundations are wobbly and outside our control. So the only solution is to get off the ride, i.e., detach from worldly things and stake a claim solely in the timeless. [Or the Deathless]

And this dimension of it is likely to be lost if we think of dukkha as "suffering" and the goal of sutric Buddhism as "the end of suffering". Because the Buddha was actually saying something far more radical than that.

But if your goal is to uproot all the uneasiness of existence and to stake a claim in the unconditioned, it seems there are relatively few ways to do that. You really must extinguish your desire (the word in Pali is "taṇhā") for this world. At least according to this and other ancient traditions, that's the only way it can be done.

"Yeah? So?"

So, why are you really doing whatever practice it is you're doing? The Buddha's term "dukkha" seems vague, but he had something pretty definite in mind when he said it, and it's probably not what you have in mind when you use the term "suffering". "Reducing suffering" is an answer that isn't an answer. Or it's a reply that avoids an answer, which avoids the real reasons we're doing this. It's a blanket term that keeps us from looking at ourselves, that deflects attention from the true motivations for doing this, the real, underlying pain or set of problems we secretly hope will go away with enough hours clocked on the cushion.

Let's stop using it. Let's start using simpler, more specific terms to talk about what we're trying to do and what this practice really accomplishes.

And keeping with one of the last points made ("that keeps us from looking at ourselves"), the Dhamma wasn't designed or intended to be used as a "spot therapy" to assist someone alleviate a momentary experience of unpleasantness or anxiety like what psychotherapy claims to do. If a person needs that kind of assistance beforehand, they need to get their psychological field straightened out prior to undertaking the practice, as a poor psychological field may compromise the attainment of "right view" in practice.

So too, getting "stream entry" is not meant as a cure-all for one's personal psychological ills. In addition, one might do well to be wary of whose definition of "stream entry" they are accepting. And the methods being espoused for gaining it. Stream entry has more to do with one's personal overall intentions and realization of the Path that Gotama declared (the noble eightfold path) than it does with any given definition or praxis.

Of course, the drawback to that view is: there's no appeasing the ignorant, who, in their rugged determination, still proceed in seeking that which cannot be had by following such a course in belief that a path fruition will end their troubles.

RE: Bare Attention and Its Uses

Ian And — Tue, 25 Dec 2012 16:02:10 GMT

Rod C:

...Bare Attention is like thoughtful noting where instead of just noting a sensation or phenomena, it is watched and in the watching, the phenomena itself is teased apart from the mind's biases in the form of reactions, emotions, biases, judgements etc and thus bare attention is applied and works to diminish the impact on the awareness of the mind's perception of reality in place of reality as it truly is...

Yes, if you wish to think of it in this way.

Although I personally wouldn't view it in this way (though I know what you are saying) because bare attention has more to do with "equanimity toward formations" than it does with the practice of noting as people have come to be familiar with and as it is normally taught. Bare attention strives to provide the observer with just the bare facts about a phenomenon so that the mind can deal with "things as they actually are," rather than with a mental formation (in the form of a bias or prejudice) created in the mind which represents a delusion in regard to what IS. In regard to what is actually the case or reality. It seeks to bring to a halt to that mental proliferation which attempts to hijack one's view of true reality.

One might say that "bare attention" seeks to deconstruct, if you will, delusion before it has a chance to take hold of the mind. In other words, if the mind goes ahead and constructs a delusive view of what it is observing, then it's already "made up its mind," so to speak, about what it is observing, rather than to watch the object and let whatever reality it presents unfold.

One caveat is: that one needs to be mindful of information whose source is the intuition. Just as seeing an iron frying pan placed over a roaring fire one would be hesitant to pick up the frying pan without some protection from being burned, one needs to heed common sense and one's own intuitive knowledge base to avoid being burned in certain circumstances. And this points back to mindfulness (sati) in its capacity of "recollection." The Pali word sati is derived from the Pali word sarati which means "to remember, recollect, bear in mind, call to mind, think of, be mindful of."

RE: Failure to attain

Ian And — Tue, 25 Dec 2012 05:39:36 GMT

If you're not getting anywhere with your present contemplation of "What am I," consider any of the following as a substitute object of contemplation.

First, realize that concentration focuses your attention; meditation deepens awareness; and contemplation invites insight. What you want to do is the latter of these three, once you've been able to bring the mind to unification, which you seem to be able to do.

The following are two quotations taken from the Nikayas. Take them one at a time, or combine them (if you can see the connection implied), into a session of contemplation and see what you come up with.

"Bhikkhus, just as the dawn is the forerunner and first indication of the rising sun, so is right view the forerunner and first indication of wholesome states." – Anguttara Nikaya, 10:121

"Now this has been said by the Blessed One: “One who sees dependent co-arising sees the Dhamma; one who sees the Dhamma sees dependent co-arising.” And these five aggregates affected by clinging are dependently arisen. The desire, indulgence, inclination, and holding based on these five aggregates affected by clinging is the origin of suffering. The removal of desire and lust, the abandonment of desire and lust for these five aggregates affected by clinging is the cessation of suffering." –Majjhima Nikaya, 28:28.

The implication here is that in order to overcome ignorance of the truth of the Dhamma, right view must first become established. Set up this condition first and you can't go wrong. In conjunction with the second quote, the right view needing to be set up is that "these five aggregates affected by clinging are dependently arisen, and the desire, indulgence, inclination, and attachment based on these five aggregates affected by clinging is the origin of suffering. The removal of desire and lust, the abandonment of desire and lust for these five aggregates affected by clinging is the cessation of suffering." You might want to start your contemplation here, at this point. (This is only a suggestion; you can start wherever you feel the need.)

In order to properly contemplate these passages, one needs to understand the role that dependent co-arising plays in this process. I'll provide a hint: this process is more easily understandable by examining the process described by the eight middle factors linking the arising of the five aggregates: 3. vinnana or consciousness, 4. namarupa or name and form, 5. salayatana or the six sense doors, 6. phassa or contact, 7. vedana or feeling, 8. tanha or craving, 9. upadana or clinging, and 10. bhava or becoming. I'll let you take it from there.

If you're having trouble with the above example, perhaps the following will open up some "doors of understanding." I will quote the sutta passage I read in Walpola Rahula's book which spurred the onset of a satori moment for me. You need to pay close attention to the concepts mentioned and gather a complete picture of them in the mind for the realization to dawn upon you. This is taken from an essay I wrote shortly after that realization. Pay particular attention to the final two paragraphs, which present the vehicle for the insight I had.

It is necessary here, in order to fully comprehend the Buddhist psychological position on this point, to differentiate consciousness from the commonly held convention that a “self” or “soul” or “ego” is involved with this conscious awareness. There is only the function of awareness itself which is taking place, in its bare essence as arising by result of one of the six sense faculties. According to the Dhamma teaching on anatta, no self, soul, or ego exists which sees, hears, smells, tastes, touches, or cognizes an object. The very idea that a “self” exists is in itself a mind phenomenon based on the functioning of the fourth aggregate: volition or mental formations. Thus it is the mind itself which mistakes the continuity of consciousness and the five aggregates of a being for a “self” or “soul” which continues as a permanent substance throughout life.

To underscore this point let us examine what the Buddha himself has said about it. In the Mahatanhasamkhaya-sutta — or The Greater Discourse on the Destruction of Craving — in the Majjhima Nikaya (MN 38), he states: “Haven't I in many ways explained consciousness as arising out of conditions: that there is no arising of consciousness without conditions.” He then went on to explain consciousness in detail.

“Consciousness is reckoned by the particular condition dependent upon which it arises. When consciousness arises dependent upon the eye and forms, it is reckoned as eye-consciousness; when consciousness arises dependent upon the ear and sounds, it is reckoned as ear-consciousness; when . . . dependent on the nose and odors, it is reckoned as nose-consciousness; when . . . dependent on the tongue and flavors . . . as tongue-consciousness; when . . . dependent on the body and tangibles . . . as body-consciousness; when . . . dependent on the mind and mind-objects (thoughts and ideas) . . . as mind-consciousness.” . . .

The Buddha stated (at SN 22.53; III.53): “Consciousness may exist having matter as its means, matter as its object, matter as its support, and seeking delight it may grow, increase and develop; or consciousness may exist having feeling as its means . . . or perception as its means . . . or mental formations as its means, mental formations as its object, mental formations as its support, and seeking delight it may grow, increase and develop.

“Were a man to say: I shall show the coming, the going, the passing away, the arising, the growth, the increase or the development of consciousness apart from matter, feeling, perception, and mental formations, he would be speaking of something that does not exist.”

RE: Bare Attention and Its Uses

Ian And — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 17:47:45 GMT

Bagpuss The Gnome:

Even after reading all this though Im still unclear on what the technique actually is. Is it just "not reacting". How does this work in meditation and in daily life?

Hello Bagpuss,

You ask a very good question. One which no doubt has likely troubled other readers attempting to understand the process of dependent co-arising. What Nyanaponika is talking about is this very process of dependent co-arising as it takes place in real time in the mind of the observer.

It is this process that allows the mind to associate identity to an object which in turn can trigger a reaction in the observer who then identifies the object with a pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral event or identity that it has experienced in the past, thus eliciting a response of like, dislike, or neutrality toward the object, without seeing or realizing the object for what it is in its bare essence. In undergoing this process, the mind's prejudices and biases toward the object are brought to the fore (in the form of proliferative thought), which then becomes the triggering mechanism for the reactive response based upon the mind's assignment of a false identity (and likely a false reality) to the object in question.

A careful reading and reflection on the material will reveal the answer to your question. Perhaps you went past some words or ideas whose definitions you weren't sure of (weren't able to identify and corroborate through your own experience), and this caused confusion (and non-recognition) in the mind. It is a common enough happenstance to a reader who goes past a word they don't have a definition for, causing comprehension to shut down at that point. Or perhaps you read too quickly, thinking that you understood but did not, because you weren't attending to the essential meaning of the passage in an effort to corroborate it with your experience and thus trigger comprehension.

The purpose of bare attention is to assist the mind in ending mental proliferation and fabrication and thus to allow the practitioner to remain undistracted and unperturbed on the object of observation without extraneous data interfering in the process of recognizing "things as they are". Developing this ability is crucial to being able to use the instruction in satipatthana (and parenthetically sampajanna or comprehensive recognition) to its fullest extent in order to apply the "direct path to realization" in one's practice.

Bare Attention is the clear and single-minded awareness of what actually happens to us and in us, at the successive moments of perception. It is called "bare" because it attends to just the bare facts of a perception as presented either through the five physical senses or through the mind....When attending to that sixfold sense impression, attention or mindfulness is kept to a bare registering of facts observed, without reacting to them by deed, speech, or by mental comment which may be one of self-reference (like, dislike, etc.), judgement or reflection. If during the time, short or long, given to the practice of Bare Attention, any such comments arise in one's mind, they themselves are made objects of Bare Attention, and are neither repudiated nor pursued, but are dismissed, after a brief mental note has been made of them.

When you have a prejudice or bias about something, that prejudice colors your perception of the object it is applied to. For example, lets say that you had a particularly bad run-in with a law enforcement officer. He treated you badly, did not listen to your explanation or whatever, and seemed to lord it over you. Now the mind has formed an impression about law enforcement officers; this is how they are: rude, arrogant, tyrannical.

The next time you run into another law enforcement officer, you notice that your palms become sweaty and you become anxious, remembering back to your previous experience with a law enforcement officer. The mind super-imposes the previous experience onto the present event. That previous experience prejudices your response to the present event. Your reactive mind instinctively harkens back to the first incident with an officer, and you begin proliferating thoughts, constructing a preconceived perception about this event. In other words, the mind begins to jump to conclusions without any evidence to back up the conclusion it is jumping to.

What "bare attention" aims to help you overcome is this process of "jumping to conclusions." The process of "jumping to conclusions" based upon an inner bias toward an object is a graphic demonstration of dependent co-arising, taking place in REAL TIME within the mind!

What the practice of "bare attention" aims to have you accomplish is to recognize this process taking place in the mind so that you can preempt it in order to allow the present event to form and take place. It may very well be that this new officer will not act in the same way that the previous officer acted. In other words, one needs to take each incident as a totally new experience, and not allow prejudice to color one's perceptions or reactions.

In the context of the present example, which is based upon a practical experience, bare attention allows the mind to take a step back before jumping to any conclusions and taking any actions which might prejudice the outcome of an event.

Bare attention consists in a bare and exact registering of the object. This is not as easy a task as it may appear, since it is not what we normally do, except when engaged in disinterested investigation. Normally we are not concerned with a disinterested knowledge of "things as they truly are", but with handling and judging them from the viewpoint of our self-interest, which may be wide or narrow, noble or low. We tack labels to the things which form our physical and mental universe, and these labels mostly show clearly the impress of our self-interest and our limited vision. It is such an assemblage of labels in which we generally live and which determines our actions and reactions.

Now, do the above and below quotations begin to make more sense to you?

Hence the attitude of Bare Attention — bare of labels — will open us to a new world. We will learn that whereas we first believed ourselves to be dealing with a single object presented by a single act of perception, there is in fact a whole series of different physical and mental processes presented by corresponding acts of perception following each other in quick succession. We will also notice how rarely we are aware of a bare or pure object without the addition of subjective judgements, which spoil the pureness of the object. We may see something as beautiful or ugly, pleasant or unpleasant, useful, useless, or harmful. If it concerns a living being, there will also enter into it the preconceived notion that: "This is a personality, an ego, just like myself," which connotes substance and hence individuality to the person. We won't see them as a consciousness living inside a body like we are, but rather as a substantial being set before our path which we must somehow deal with.

Bare attention acts as a gate keeper of the mind, allowing in only that bare, undiluted information which will help us to form a true picture of what is! Of "things as they truly are." Without prejudgment or prejudice to get in the way to color our perception of whatever object we are observing.

When you can see these processes taking place in the mind as they are occurring (by assistance of the practice of mindfulness), you are able to practice "bare attention" in order to preempt and "walk back" the pre-conceived notions attempting to invade and color our thinking about an object of observation.

Go back and reread that first post again (s l o w l y) and see if you aren't able to make more sense of it.

Bagpuss The Gnome:

I actually have this book but gave up reading it once I realised that it looked like he'd be talking a lot about Mahasi noting (which I don't do).

I posit that you gave up your reading too soon. Keep an open mind, and read the whole thing again and use the parts that make sense to you.

RE: Time to force things (Adam's practice journal)

Ian And — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 16:41:58 GMT

Adam . .:

Concentration is improving... ALOT. I just got done with easily the most pleasurable and amazing sit of my career. I had just read Gunaratana's essay "Should We Come Out of Jhana to Practice Vipassana?" and had a couple new things to try.

1. Stabilizing states prior to the 4th jhana
2. Simply paying bare awareness to everything at once in jhana as the main form of practice.

You might want to check out a new thread I started (inspired by your conversation) entitled Bare Attention and Its Uses. It may provide you with some good ideas and practice methods that you are seeking.

Bare Attention and Its Uses

Ian And — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 16:30:55 GMT

Ian And:

These are the second half of the extracts taken from Nyanaponika's book The Heart of Buddhist Meditation. These extracts contain suggestions about how bare attention can be of practical benefit in our daily lives, assisting us in alleviating unnecessary suffering and anguish.

The Value of Bare Attention for Shaping the Mind

The greater part of man-made suffering in the world comes not so much from deliberate wickedness as from ignorance, heedlessness, thoughtlessness, rashness, and lack of self-control. Very often a single moment of mindfulness or wise reflection would have prevented a far-reaching sequence of misery or guilt. By pausing before an action, in a habitual attitude of Bare Attention, one will be able to seize that decisive but brief moment when mind has not yet settled upon a definite course of action or a definite attitude, but is still open to receive skillful directions. The next moment may change the situation fully, giving final supremacy to tainted impulses and misjudgments from within, or harmful influences from without. Bare Attention slows down, or even stops, the transition from thought to action, allowing more time for coming to a mature decision. Such slowing down is of vital importance as long as unprofitable, harmful or evil words and deeds possess an all too strong spontaneity of occurrence, i.e. as long as they appear as immediate reactions to events or thoughts, without giving to the inner brakes of wisdom, self-control and common sense a chance to operate. Acquiring the habit of slowing down will prove an effective weapon against rashness in words and deeds. By learning, through Bare Attention, to pause, to slow down and to stop, the plasticity and receptivity of the mind will grow considerably, because reactions of an undesirable nature will no longer occur automatically, with the same frequency as before. When the supremacy of these habitual reactions, which are so often left unopposed and unquestioned, is regularly challenged, they will gradually lose their power.

Bare Attention will also allow us time for the reflection whether, in a given situation, activity by deed, word, or mental application is necessary or advisable at all. There is often too great an inclination for unnecessary interference, and this becomes another avoidable cause of much suffering and superfluous entanglement. When acquainted with the peace of mind bestowed by the attitude of Bare Attention, one will be less tempted to rush into action or to interfere in other people's affairs. If, in that way, complications and conflicts of all kinds are lessened, the endeavor to shape the mind will meet with less resistance.

In regard to these two points mentioned last (rashness and interference), the practical advice is in brief: to look well before leaping, to give the mind a chance to take a longer and longer view of things, to curb the urge for "action at any cost."

Bare Attention is concerned only with the present. It teaches what so many have forgotten: to live with full awareness in the Here and Now. It teaches us to face the present without trying to escape into thoughts about the past or the future. Past and future are, for average consciousness, not objects of observation, but of reflection. And, in ordinary life, the past and the future are taken but rarely as objects of truly wise reflection, but are mostly just objects of day-dreaming and vain imaginings which are the main foes of Right Mindfulness, Right Understanding, and Right Action. Bare Attention, keeping faithful to its post of observation, watches calmly and without attachment the unceasing march of time: it waits quietly for the things of the future to appear before its eyes, thus to turn into present objects and to vanish again into the past. How much energy has been wasted by useless thoughts of the past: by longing idly for bygone days, by vain regrets and repentance, and by the senseless and garrulous repetition, in word or thought, of all the banalities of the past. Of equal futility is much of the thought given to the future: vain hopes, fantastic plans and empty dreams, ungrounded fears and useless worries. All this is again a cause of avoidable sorrow and disappointment which can be eliminated by Bare Attention.

Right Mindfulness cuts man loose from the fetters of the past which he foolishly tries even to re-enforce by looking back to it too frequently, with eyes of longing, resentment, or regret. Right Mindfulness stops man from chaining himself even now, through the imaginations of his fears and hopes, to anticipated events of the future. Thus Right Mindfulness restores to man a freedom that is to be found in the present.

Thoughts of the past and the future are the main material of day-dreaming which by its tough and sticky substance of endlessly repetitive character crowds the narrow space of present consciousness, giving no chance for its shaping, making it still more shapeless and slack. These futile day-dreams are the chief obstacle to concentration. A sure way to exclude them is to turn the mind resolutely to the bare observation of any object close at hand, whenever there is no necessity or impulse for any particular purposive thought or action, and when, consequently, a mental vacuum is threatening that, otherwise, is quickly invaded by day-dreams. If they have entered already, one need only make these day-dreams themselves objects of close observation in order to deprive them of their mind-diluting power, and finally disperse them. This is an example of the effective method of transforming disturbances of meditation into objects of meditation of which more will be spoken about later.

Bare Attention brings order into the untidy corners of the mind. It shows up the numerous vague and fragmentary perceptions, unfinished lines of thought, confused ideas, stifled emotions, etc., which are daily passing through the mind. Taken singly, these vain consumers of mental activity are weak and powerless, but by their accumulation they will gradually impair the efficiency of mental functions. Since these thought-fragments are mostly allowed to sink into the subconsciousness without being properly attended to, they will naturally affect the basic structure of character, dispositions, and tendencies. They will gradually reduce the range and lucidity of consciousness in general, as well as its plasticity, i.e. its capacity of being shaped, transformed, and developed.

The unflattering self-knowledge gathered through introspective Bare Attention about the squalid and disreputable quarters of our own mind will rouse an inner resistance to a state of affairs whereby clarity and order are turned into untidiness, and the precious metal of the mind into dross. By the pressure of that repugnance the earnest application to the practice of the Way of Mindfulness will increase, and the excessive squandering of mental energy will gradually come under control. It is the automatic tidying function of Bare Attention that serves here for the shaping of mind.

Bare Attention, directed toward our own mind, will supply that candid information about it which is indispensable for success in its shaping. By turning full attention to our thoughts as they arise, we shall get a better knowledge of our weak and our strong points, i.e. of our deficiencies and our capacities. Self-deception about the former and ignorance of the latter make self-education impossible.

By the skill attained through Bare Attention to call bad or harmful things at once by their names, one will take the first step toward their elimination. If one is clearly aware, e.g. in the Contemplation of the State of Mind: "There is a lustful thought," or, in the Contemplation of Mental Contents: "In me is now the hindrance of agitation", this simple habit of making such express statements will produce an inner resistance to those qualities which will make itself felt increasingly. This dispassionate and brief form of mere "registering" will often prove more effective than a mustering of will, emotion, or reason, which frequently only provokes antagonistic forces of the mind to stiffer resistance.

Our positive qualities, too, will of course be focused more clearly, and those which are either weak or not duly noticed will get their chance, and develop to full bloom and fruition. Untapped resources of energy and knowledge will come into the open, and capacities will be revealed which were hitherto unknown to oneself. All this will strengthen the self-confidence which is so important for inner progress. In these and other ways the simple and non-coercive method of Bare Attention proves a most efficacious helper in shaping the mind.

The Value of Bare Attention for Liberating the Mind

Let us consider for a moment the advantages of an experiment in Bare Attention in which the experimenter tries to keep as well as he can to an attitude of Bare Attention toward people, the inanimate environment, and the various happenings of the day. What might such an experiment yield? By doing so one might notice how much more harmoniously such days are passed as compared with those when he gave in to the slightest stimulus for interfering by deed, word, emotion, or thought. As if protected by an invisible armor against the banalities and urgent entreaties of the outer world, one might walk through such days serenely and content, with an exhilarating feeling of ease and freedom. It is as though, from the unpleasant closeness of a hustling and noisy crowd, one has escaped to the silence and seclusion of a hilltop and, with a sigh of relief, is looking down on the noise and bustle below. It is the peace and happiness of detachment which will thus be experienced. By stepping back from things and men, one's attitude toward them may even become friendlier, because those tensions will be lacking which so often arise from interfering, desire, aversion, or other forms of self-reference. Life may become a good deal easier, and one's inner and outer world more spacious. In addition, we may notice that the world goes on quite well without our earlier amount of interference, and that we ourselves are all the better for such a restraint. How many entanglements will not be avoided, and how many problems will not solve themselves without our contribution. Herein Bare Attention shows visibly the benefit of abstaining from karmic action, be it good or evil; that is, from a world-building or sorrow-creating activity. Bare Attention schools us in the art of letting go, weans us from busy-ness and from habitual interfering.

The inner distance from things, men, and from ourselves, as obtained temporarily and partially by Bare Attention, shows us, by our own experience, the possibility of finally winning perfect detachment and the happiness resulting from it. It bestows upon us the confidence that such temporary stepping aside may well become one day a complete stepping out of this world of suffering. It gives a kind of foretaste, or at least an idea, of the highest liberty, the "holiness during a lifetime" that has been alluded to by the words: "In the world, but not of the world."

For achieving that highest, and final, liberation of mind, Bare Attention forges the principal tool — that highest of penetration of truth which, in the Dhamma, is called Insight (vipassana). This, and only this, is the ultimate purpose of the method described here, and it is the highest form of its mind-liberating function.

Insight is the direct and penetrative realization of the Three Characteristics of Existence, i.e. Impermanence, Suffering, and Impersonality. It is not a mere intellectual appreciation or conceptual knowledge of these truths, but an indisputable and unshakable personal experience of them, obtained and matured through repeated meditative confrontation with the facts underlying those truths. It is the intrinsic nature of Insight that produces a growing detachment and an increasing freedom from craving, culminating in the final deliverance of the mind from all that causes its enslavement to the world of suffering.

That direct confrontation with actuality, which is to mature into Insight, is obtained by the practice of Bare Attention, and of Satipatthana in general. Even its casual application in routine life will show its liberating influence on mind, and, if persistently applied, it will create a mental background helpful to the strict and systematic practice.

It is the nature of Insight to be free from Desire, Aversion, and Delusion, and to see clearly all things of the inner and outer world as "bare phenomena" (suddha-dhamma), i.e. as impersonal processes. Just that is characteristic also of the attitude of Bare Attention, and therefore the practice of it will make for a gradual acclimatization to the high altitudes of perfect Insight and final Deliverance.

This high goal of perfect detachment and insight may still be very distant to the beginner on the Path, but owing to his own kindred experiences during the practice of Bare Attention it will not be completely foreign to him. To such a disciple the goal will have, even now, a certain intimate familiarity and thereby a positive power of attraction which it could not possess if it had remained to him a mere abstract notion without anything corresponding to it in his own inner experience. To him who has entered the Way of Mindfulness, the goal may appear like the contours of a high mountain range at the distant horizon; and these outlines will gradually assume a friendly familiarity for the wanderer who gazes at them while plodding his toilsome way that is still so far from these exalted summits. Though the chief attention of the person must needs be given to the often dull piece of road under his feet, to the various obstacles and confusing turns of his path, it will be of no small importance that, from time to time, his eyes turn to the summits of his goal as they appear on the horizon of his experience. They will keep before the eyes of his mind the true direction of his journey, helping him to retrace his steps when he has gone astray. They will give new vigor to his tired feet, new courage to his mind, and hope which often might fail him were the sight of the mountains always blocked, or if he had only heard or read about them. They will also remind him not to forget, with all the little joys on the way, the glory of those summits waiting for him on the horizon.

Bare Attention and Its Uses

Ian And — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 16:15:45 GMT

Ian And:

P R E F A C E

Several years ago I posted the following in another forum both to inspire and to help other practitioners to begin understanding the original teachings as they were first taught as I had come to understand them from my own study and practice. The practice of paying "bare attention" to phenomena in the manner herein prescribed in relation to the practice of satipatthana was a practice that I personally found to be of great benefit. I wondered at the time why it wasn't more often taught. You be the judge.

This extract should provide a better idea of the comprehensiveness and thoroughness with which the method of satipatthana practice attempts to engage the diligent practitioner. Though its practice is far reaching and may seem at first glance to be a vastly more complicated practice as its main highlights here seem to indicate, if broken down into the practice and the attainment of the abilities to be able to practice it properly, once one obtains those abilities its practice will be considerably easier.

One of those abilities is the ability to observe phenomena with what is known as "bare attention." I first came upon this concept and term in a book by Nyanaponika Thera, The Heart of Buddhist Meditation. In this book, Nyanaponika breaks down the method he was taught by Mahasi Sayadaw in the mid-1950s after attending the Sixth Buddhist Council held back then. The present extract ends with a mention of "bare attention," and I intend to follow-up this post with another taking a more in-depth look at bare attention. The purpose of bare attention is to assist the mind in ending mental proliferation and fabrication and thus to allow the practitioner to remain undistracted and unperturbed on the object of observation without extraneous data interfering in the process of recognizing "things as they are". Developing this ability is crucial to being able to use the instruction in satipatthana (and parenthetically sampajanna or comprehensive recognition) to its fullest extent in order to apply the "direct path to realization" in one's practice.

Ian And:

The following excerpts are taken from Nyanaponika Thera's book The Heart of Buddhist Meditation, first published in the late 1950s. These cover his ideas on "bare attention" and its general application in practice. The present post covers the first half of these excerpts. A succeeding post will cover the second half of the excerpts. I have lighly edited these extracts for better transition between paragraphs at natural breaking points in the text in order to gather them together into one piece. For the most part, these are Nyanaponika's own words and ideas.

Bare Attention

Between the two factors of Mindfulness and Clear Comprehension, it is Mindfulness, in its specific aspect of Bare Attention, that provides the key to the distinctive method of Satipatthana, and accompanies the systematic practice of it, from the very beginning to the achievement of its highest goal. So, just what is Bare Attention and how does it work in conjunction with this method of Satipatthana?

Bare Attention is the clear and single-minded awareness of what actually happens to us and in us, at the successive moments of perception. It is called "bare" because it attends to just the bare facts of a perception as presented either through the five physical senses or through the mind which, in Buddhist thought, constitutes the sixth sense. When attending to that sixfold sense impression, attention or mindfulness is kept to a bare registering of facts observed, without reacting to them by deed, speech, or by mental comment which may be one of self-reference (like, dislike, etc.), judgement or reflection. If during the time, short or long, given to the practice of Bare Attention, any such comments arise in one's mind, they themselves are made objects of Bare Attention, and are neither repudiated nor pursued, but are dismissed, after a brief mental note has been made of them.

Every effort of worth requires thoroughness if it is to achieve its purpose. This is particularly so if the work is as lofty and arduous as that mapped out by the Buddha in the Noble Eightfold Path, which leads to the extinction of suffering. Among the eight factors of that Path, it is Right Mindfulness that represents the indispensable element of thoroughness. It is obvious that the practice of Right Mindfulness itself will have to employ thoroughness of procedure to the highest extent. The absence or neglect of it would be just the opposite of a quality deserving the name of Mindfulness, and would deprive the method of its chances for success. Just as detrimental consequences must result from an unstable and carelessly laid foundation, so the blessings of a solid and reliable one will extend far into the future.

Therefore, Right Mindfulness starts at the beginning. In employing the method of Bare Attention, it goes back to the seed state of things. Applied to the activity of mind this means observation reverts to the very first phase of the process of perception when mind is in a purely receptive state, and when attention is restricted to a bare noticing of the object. That phase is of very short and hardly perceptible duration, and it furnishes a superficial, incomplete, and often faulty picture of the object. It is the task of the next perceptual phase to correct and to supplement that first impression, but this is not always done. Often the first impression is taken for granted, and even new distortions, characteristic of the more complex mental functions of the second state, are added.

Here starts the work of Bare Attention, being a deliberate cultivation and strengthening of that first receptive state of mind, giving it a longer chance to fulfill its important task in the process of cognition. Bare Attention proves the thoroughness of its procedure by cleansing and preparing the ground carefully for all subsequent mental processes. By that cleansing function, it serves the high purpose of the entire method set forth in the Discourse: "for the purification of beings. . .", which in the Commentary is explained as the purification, or cleansing, of mind.

Obtaining the Bare Object

Bare attention consists in a bare and exact registering of the object. This is not as easy a task as it may appear, since it is not what we normally do, except when engaged in disinterested investigation. Normally we are not concerned with a disinterested knowledge of "things as they truly are", but with handling and judging them from the viewpoint of our self-interest, which may be wide or narrow, noble or low. We tack labels to the things which form our physical and mental universe, and these labels mostly show clearly the impress of our self-interest and our limited vision. It is such an assemblage of labels in which we generally live and which determines our actions and reactions.

Hence the attitude of Bare Attention — bare of labels — will open us to a new world. We will learn that whereas we first believed ourselves to be dealing with a single object presented by a single act of perception, there is in fact a whole series of different physical and mental processes presented by corresponding acts of perception following each other in quick succession. We will also notice how rarely we are aware of a bare or pure object without the addition of subjective judgements, which spoil the pureness of the object. We may see something as beautiful or ugly, pleasant or unpleasant, useful, useless, or harmful. If it concerns a living being, there will also enter into it the preconceived notion that: "This is a personality, an ego, just like myself," which connotes substance and hence individuality to the person. We won't see them as a consciousness living inside a body like we are, but rather as a substantial being set before our path which we must somehow deal with.

In that condition of mind (i.e. closely intertwined with subjective additions) the perception will sink into the store house of memory. When recalled, by associative thinking, memory will exert its distorting influence on not only present perceptions but also those which occur in regard to similar objects in the future, as well as on the judgements, decisions, moods, etc., connected with them. The task of Bare Attention then becomes to eliminate all those additions from the object proper which is in the field of perception. These additions may be considered later singly if wanted, but the initial object of perception has to be kept free from them. This will demand persistent practice during which the attention, gradually growing in its keenness, will filter out first the grosser and then the ever subtler admixtures until only the bare object remains. In the beginning this process may take an act of will in order to break our mental habits of making choices. But as we become more adept, having trained ourself to mentally slow down and stop ourself from making snap judgements etc., our mental habit changes to one of Bare Attention from one of instant reaction, and the effort involved on our part will become less and less as this new habit is reinforced through our subsequent behavior.

The Threefold Value of Bare Attention

Bare Attention has the same threefold value as attributed earlier to Right Mindfulness, that is, it will prove a great and efficient helper in knowing, shaping and liberating the mind.

The Value of Bare Attention for Knowing the Mind.

Mind is the very element in and through which we live, yet it is what is most elusive and mysterious. Bare Attention, by first attending to the basic facts of the mental processes, is capable of shedding light on mind's mysterious darkness, and of obtaining a firm hold on its elusive flow. The systematic practice of Mindfulness, starting with Bare Attention, will furnish all that knowledge about the mind which is essential for practical purposes, i.e. for the mastery, the development, and the final liberation of mind. But even beyond this, when once clear awareness and comprehension have been firmly established in a limited but vital sector of the mind's expanse, the light will gradually and naturally spread, and will reach even distant and obscure corners of the mind's realm which hitherto had been inaccessible. This will be due mainly to the fact that the instrument of that search for knowledge will have undergone a radical change: the searching mind itself will have gained in lucidity and penetrative strength.

"Only things well examined by Mindfulness can be understood by Wisdom, but not confused ones," said one commentator to the Sutras. A specimen of research that is to be examined with the help of a microscope has first to be carefully prepared, cleaned, freed from extraneous matter, and firmly kept under the lens. In a similar way, the "bare object" to be examined by wisdom is prepared by Bare Attention. It cleans the object of investigation from the impurities of prejudice and passion; it frees it from alien admixtures and from points of view not pertaining to it; it holds it firmly before the eye of Wisdom by slowing down the transition from the receptive to the active phase of the perceptual or cognitive process, thus giving a vastly improved chance for close and dispassionate investigation.

This preliminary work of Bare Attention is of importance not only for the analytical aspect, i.e. the dissecting and discriminating function of mind by which the elements of the object's make-up are revealed. It is also of great assistance to the equally important synthesis aspect — for finding out the object's connections with and relations to other things, its interaction with them, its conditioned and conditioning nature. Many of these will escape notice if there is not a sufficiently long period of Bare Attention. As a maxim of great importance and of varied application, also to practical matters, it should be kept in mind that the relations between things can be reliably ascertained only if first the single members of that relationship have been carefully examined in their various aspects which are pointers to diverse connections. Insufficient analytic preparation is a frequent source of error in the synthetic part of philosophical systems and scientific theories. It is just this preparation that is carefully attended to and remedied by the method of Bare Attention.

Bare Attention first allows things to speak for themselves, without interruption by final verdicts pronounced too hastily. Bare Attention gives them a chance to finish their speaking, and one will thus get to learn that they have much to say about themselves, which formerly was mostly ignored by rashness or was drown in the inner and outer noise in which ordinary man normally lives. Because Bare Attention sees things without the narrowing and leveling effect of habitual judgements, it sees them ever anew, as if for the first time; therefore it will happen with progressive frequency that things will have something new and worth while to reveal. Patient pausing in such an attitude of Bare Attention will open wide horizons to one's understanding obtaining, in a seemingly effortless way, results which were denied to the strained efforts of an impatient intellect. Owing to a rash or habitual limiting, labeling, misjudging, and mishandling of things, important sources of knowledge often remain closed. This attitude of Bare Attention will, by persistent practice, prove to be a rich source of knowledge and inspiration.

When practicing Bare Attention, the first powerful impact on the observer's mind will probably be the direct confrontation with the ever-present fact of Change. In terms of the Dharma, it is the first of the three Characteristics of Existence: Impermanence (anicca). The incessant sequence of individual births and deaths of the events observed by Bare Attention will become an experience of growing force and will have decisive consequences on the meditative progress. From that same experience of momentary change, the direct awareness of the other two Characteristics of Life will emerge in due course, i.e. of suffering (dissatisfaction; dukkha) and Impersonality (Not-Self; anatta).

Though the fact of Change is commonly admitted, at least to a certain extent, people in ordinary life will generally become conscious of it only when it challenges them fairly vehemently, in either a pleasant or, mostly, unpleasant way. The practice of Bare Attention, however, will bring it forcibly home that Change is always with us; that even in a minute fraction of time the frequency of occurring changes is beyond our ability to fully comprehend it. Probably for the first time it will strike us — not only intellectually but touching our whole being — in what kind of world we are actually living. Coming face to face with Change, as experienced in our own body and mind, we have now started "to see things as they really are." And this refers particularly to the "things of the mind." Mind cannot be understood without knowing it as a flux and remaining aware of that fact in all investigations devoted to the knowledge of mind. To show the fact as well as the nature of Change in mental processes is a fundamental contribution of the practice of Bare Attention to mind-knowledge. The fact of Change will contribute to it in a negative way, by excluding any static view of the mind, assuming permanent entities, fixed qualities, etc. The insight into the nature of Change will be a contribution in a positive way, by supplying a wealth of detailed information on the dynamic nature of the mental processes.

In the light of Bare Attention focused on sense perception, the distinctive character of material and mental processes, their inter-relation and alternating occurrence as well as the basic objectifying function of mind will gain in clarity.

After the practice of Bare Attention has resulted in a certain width and depth of experience in its dealings with mental events, it will become an immediate certainty to the meditator that "mind is nothing beyond its cognizing function." Nowhere, behind or within that function, can any individual agent or abiding entity be detected. By way of one's own direct experience, one will thus have arrived at the great truth of No-Soul or Impersonality (anatta), showing that all existence is void of an abiding personality (self, soul, or over-self) or any abiding substance of any description. Bare Attention will, in addition, supply surprising as well as helpful information about the workings of one's own mind: the mechanism of one's emotions and passions, the reliability of one's reasoning power, one's true and pretended motives, and many other aspects of mental life. Clear light will fall on one's weak and strong points as well, and of some of them one will become aware for the first time.

Thus, this method of Bare Attention, so helpful to mind-knowledge and, through it, to world-knowledge, is analogous with the procedure and attitude of the true scientist and scholar: clear definition of subject-matter and terms; unprejudiced receptivity for the instruction that comes out of the things themselves; exclusion, or at least reduction, of the subjective factor in judgement; deferring of judgement until a careful examination of facts has been made. Thus the Buddha has in some quarters been favorably compared with a super-scientist or spiritual super-scientist, and we begin, at least in a small way, to understand the immense complexity of his vast intellect and why he is so revered by those who have come to know and understand his Dharma.

RE: Failure to attain

Ian And — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 04:35:36 GMT

Okay Garrett, listen. . .V E R Y. . .C A R E F U L L Y.

Open up your intuition and relax, and then listen. . . cognize what is being communicated, hear it, take it in, understand it.

Garrett E:

Ian And:

Perhaps you are just frustrated at not having experienced a moment of satori or kensho ("seeing into one's own nature").

I think this is a large part of what is going on. I get frustrated that I have not had a kensho experience yet and start [a] story about how I am failing or not making any spiritual progress.

Do you not see what you are saying here?

Is it lost on you the intention and the meaning being expressed in the emphasized passage above?

You are admitting to "start[ing] [a] story" in your mind about "how I am failing or not making any spiritual progress." Do you not see that you are your own worst enemy in this endeavor? Your ego wants it so much, with such fervor, that you admit to now sabotaging your own practice by creating views about what just occurred! "I FAILED!!"

You are trying TOO HARD to achieve something that you have PUT UP on a pedestal in your mind which you cannot now reach because you have set it too high in your mind to be able to grab onto. You're sabotaging your own practice by wanting "this thing" that you've created in your mind. (Likely, your Zen teachers won't be as blunt with you as I am. They would rather you figure it out for yourself. Even if it takes you thirty years! Heaven forbid.)

Slow down and R E L A X. Stop your striving and let things come to you all on their own. This doesn't mean you have to "back off" or "space out." It's not about shutting down your intensity. It means developing yoniso manasikara or "wise attention toward the object" of your meditation. "Critical reflection" or "appropriate attention" are also good translations of this Pali term. This means maintaining your mindfulness (sati or intense investigation) while in contemplation and focusing wisely (meaning "with comprehension of what IS") on the object enough to allow the insight to A R I S E on its own. See?

Garrett E:

Ian And:

Yet, there is no time frame for this to occur in any practitioner. It occurs when it occurs.

I have difficulty practicing from this perspective, though it is a point of view I wish to be able to see from. You know it's like "I want this and I'm gonna go fuckin' get it." Then I strive, don't get it, and get frustrated. There seems to be some blockage in the way of me practicing without thought of gain or loss.

That's because of the expectations that you allow your mind to cling to. Your own ego is sabotaging your efforts.

Garrett E:

This is actually something that has been going on for some time. I remember retreats where for days I would be stuck on the loop of excitement (I'M ABOUT TO GET IT) --> disappointment (I didn't get it) over and over (sounds like samsara, huh).

Trying to get it, trying to get it, having the teacher tell me that at this point it was just a matter of grace, that I couldn't *make* anything happen. I try to follow the instruction, but I would end up backing off too much and just spacing out or staying caught in the same loop (although to a lesser degree).

I'll try this again to see if it gets through. . .

When just the right amount of elements combine, you may have a moment of total clarity wherein this prize is captured. Be patient and things will occur in the fullness of time.

In the meantime, you may find some food for thought (a gathering of the elements) by reading and contemplating some of the discourses of the Buddha. They may also prove to be a worthy contemplation object for your meditation.

Now. . . wisely contemplate everything in this post that you have just read, and if you still don't understand it, go back and read it again, and again, until you do. Think about EVERY idea that is being communicated (as if your life depended on it) and do your best to exhibit self-honesty, to admit to yourself what you are doing or not doing. Examine your experiences in these endeavors and be brutally self-critical. OWN what is YOURS. Then, figure out how you're going to change it.

RE: Failure to attain

Ian And — Sat, 22 Dec 2012 03:46:18 GMT

Garrett E:

The practice of following the breath in the body is highly recommended by the teachers at the monastery. For me, keeping the attention there as opposed to at the tip of the nose help me notice thoughts more quickly, it also helps me from going unconscious during meditation (something I have a bit of a problem with). They have also spoken about using inquiry once the mind is quiet to gain insight.

Aaahh. That explains a lot. That is sound advice. Sounds as though your instructors know what they are doing, and I wouldn't want to interfere in their training regimen with you.

One thing that did pass through my mind, though, is that the Zen approach and the Theravada approach to awakening and meditation, while having the same goal can vary somewhat in the things they emphasize in practice. The Zen approach is very stripped down and streamlined, short and concise instruction ("chop wood, carry water") meant for a highly intelligent clientele, while the Theravada tend to explain things to death. While I at first featured in myself a preference for the former, I learned through bitter experience that I longed for the latter approach. I needed things explained so that I could see where I was going and how I was to arrive there.

Zen can be a very solitary practice, leaving one on his own to figure it all out for himself. It sounds as though you may have become frustrated with this approach at some point in your travels, reading MCTB and the many forum posts here of practicing yogis "making progress." If I were you I wouldn't put too much focus on what other people are doing or claiming they are doing. It's really hard to know what is true unless you have personal contact with them anyway. Better to just focus on yourself and your own practice and leave it at that. Envy can be a bitter pill to swallow.

Also, I wouldn't become too fascinated with the paths and with achieving them in a certain amount of time. There's no set time frame for anyone to achieve anything in this kind of practice, and publicly airing these kinds of things so that others can read about them just leaves a bad taste in the mouth. These are things best kept to oneself and one's trusted confidant (teacher or guide). To allow oneself to become caught up in the excitement of it all may not always be the healthiest approach.

On the other hand, if you are wanting to learn of some different approaches than the one's you are being taught at the monastery, or are wanting to develop skills and abilities that are not being taught there, you may be able to find some assistance here. In that vein, then, there may be some compatible instruction that can be shared to help you achieve those goals.

Garrett E:

Ian And:

I need to ask a question at this point. What is it that you are attempting to accomplish by this practice of self inquiry? Is there someplace you are going with this? Is there some insight practice that you may be anticipating to perform? I'm just asking, not criticizing. I want to know how clear you are on what your intentions are, as well as what those intentions might be, and what they are designed to accomplish with regard to your current practice.

I am using it as a pointer (maybe an unnecessary one) to help me carefully examine my experience. My understanding was that paying attention in this way is what leads to insight (even if not intentionally noticing the 3Cs, paying attention to the immediate, direct experience reveals them naturally). My thought is: I do this, look closely and carefully then boom, stream entry.

There is nothing wrong with the approach you have been taught with regard to self inquiry. We do the same thing in the Theravada approach, although with perhaps a slight twist in the way it is gone about.

I used an insight I had through contemplation of the five aggregates to gain a stark and totally surprising view of anatta that I had never considered before. It was sparked by something I read in the book What the Buddha Taught by Walpola Rahula, and it happened outside of meditation. Yet, there it was, right before me, as though someone had shot me between the eyes. I saw with complete comprehension the selfless nature of form, feeling, perception, volition, and consciousness. I realized in that moment that there was no self in every experience I had. That my sense of identity had been wrapped up in ideas (thoughts) about myself being fabricated as it related to the events taking place in my life. That there was, in reality, actually no substantial being taking an action of any kind. That it was all just thought! And that that thought could change in a moment's notice. Arise and pass away. It was quite an amazing moment. And it passed very quickly. Almost too quickly for me to recall. But I still recall the flavor if not the smell and texture of the moment.

Perhaps you are just frustrated at not having experienced a moment of satori or kensho ("seeing into one's own nature"). Yet, there is no time frame for this to occur in any practitioner. It occurs when it occurs. When just the right amount of elements combine, you may have a moment of total clarity wherein this prize is captured. Be patient and things will occur in the fullness of time.

In the meantime, you may find some food for thought (a gathering of the elements) by reading and contemplating some of the discourses of the Buddha. They may also prove to be a worthy contemplation object for your meditation.

RE: Advice for concentration skills, please

Ian And — Sat, 22 Dec 2012 01:54:06 GMT

Any questions or problems you may confront while beginning to establish your renewed practice, post here and I'll do my best to attend to them.

Take it easy and don't beat yourself up so much. Be at ease, and things will work themselves out.

One way to establish mindfulness is: think about how you might approach walking on a tightrope over a deep gorge. If you're a bit skittish of heights like I am, you'll realize that you need to develop strong focus and attention to each step you take. Bring that strong focus and attention (as though your life depended on it) into your practice and watch the difference this makes in your meditation sessions. While this may sound a bit extreme, it should give you an idea about the level of mindfulness you should be aiming for. It really will make a difference.

Be well,
Ian

RE: Advice for concentration skills, please

Ian And — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:53:44 GMT

Hi Nick,

Nick Andrew Ludvigson:

By doubt I do not mean that I am questioning Dhamma. I only mean that I question whether my mind is strong enough to be able to maintain the practice until I am able to see any real development. I am most likely to skip a sit when this thought goes through my head. I know that from a personal standpoint that Dhamma is beneficial but there is a large gap between my expectations of Dhamma and what I have thus far experienced.

I know what you mean when you say that you become discouraged about sitting and want to skip a sit because you're not sure of yourself. What I'm here to say is: "If YOU are not willing to take hold of this and begin to turn it around, then NO ONE is." And you don't sound to me like someone who is willing to give up just yet. That's why you're here, seeking advice and counsel.

What you have to realize is: There are going to be "good" days and "bad" days in proceeding with any kind of practice or endeavor. What you need to do is to develop equanimity about how each day is proceeding, and become firm in your conviction that eventually you will prevail in accomplishing your goal if you just keep at it. The journey of a thousand miles begins by taking one step, and keep putting one foot in front of the other. Once you begin to experience some successes with your practice, that alone will begin to propel you forward to further achievement. If you can realize that, then you're on the right path to succeed.

Another way of looking at this is: You are in a battle with your mind! Either it is going to win this battle, or YOU are! If your resolve is so low that you wish to capitulate to the will that your monkey mind is putting before you, then perhaps you are too easily dissuaded. However, I do not think that this is the case with you. You've come too far, put too much study into this, that to leave it now would be anathema to you. You've got too much invested in this to give up now. Just learn to accept what is the apparent rejection of your mind to bend to your wishes at the moment and redouble your resolve to defeat it at the next battle! If you're in relatively good psychological health, this is the way to defeat the resistance your mind is putting up. By the way, everyone goes through this battle with their mind, so you aren't alone!

Nick Andrew Ludvigson:

I feel confident in my education of Dhamma. I have been reading Dhamma books for years and took several Buddhist Philosophy classes as an undergrad--I was lucky to have a practicing Buddhist in the philosophy department. I think if anything I have spent too much time studying and not enough time practicing. It wasn't until a year and a half ago when I read MCTB and discovered this site (and your concentration thread) that I realized that these things are attainable for those that dedicate themselves to the practice. Before reading this material I was still stuck in a theoretical understanding of Dhamma and my sits were about as beneficial as a mere theoretical understanding.

I have not read the Bhikkhu Bodhi book you mentioned but I will have an electronic copy and plan to read it. Right now I am reading his The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha so it will be a little while till I'm done--though I could take a detour.

This background information is good to know, and further, is a good sign that you are serious about this endeavor. You have an inquiring mind that won't be satisfied until it learns what it wants to learn. I was the same way myself. And once I began to get some insight into how the Dhamma worked, I became unstoppable in my practice. I wouldn't miss a sitting if it killed me, and I think that you will develop in a similar way. You just need some direction and a few successes under your belt to become gung-ho about this.

If you are reading the Middle Length Discourses, you are reading a very good Nikaya for meditation practice. There are lots of good suggestions there to take into a practice. I would suggest taking it slowly and taking notes as you go along as this will help to add incentive to your meditation practice. I read these suttas one at a time, sometimes over a day or two depending on their length. Took me several months to finish the book. I took it slow and easy; I didn't want to go past something I didn't understand. You can intersperse a reading of Bodhi's book in between this and it should only help you begin to get the BIG picture about the Dhamma. His book is very inspirational, if you know what to look for. Also, it can be a quick read, even though it is packed with weighty ideas.

It sounds as though you are on very firm footing here. Reading the suttas and practicing meditation is a winning combination! You will learn from both.

Nick Andrew Ludvigson:

I have been working on this with either breath or the tip of my nose as the object. I suppose my whole reason for posting here is feeling like I'm moving through water trying this. I feel that I should be more proficient at this by now (which leads back to the issue of me doubting myself). I think you are right about pointing out restlessness and worry as a larger factor. Because of restlessness and worry I feel doubt. It seems they usually come together but restlessness and worry is the first to show its face.

Working with the breath is the optimum choice in my opinion. The reason is: the breath is always with us; we can turn to it at anytime during the day in order to bring about a calm demeanor when we need one. It is easy to watch, and can give rise to pleasant sensations that we can use to strengthen the depth of our concentration.

One quick suggestion about working with alleviating any hindrance when attempting to meditate. Before you begin the formal sit, spend some time (maybe five minutes or so) just gathering your mindfulness as best you can before launching into the sit. By this I mean, establish mindfulness in front of you first, and don't take off until you have done so. This was something I had to learn the hard way, but it always works to improve any sitting that you perform.

Some suggestions for establishing mindfulness are: Sit with eyes open and just begin following the breath. Make sure you establish a coarse sense of the breath being breathed in and out. You don't have to manipulate it, just follow it naturally as it wants to go. Another thing you can do is to read a passage from the Dhammapada or some other Dhamma book and just contemplate it for a few minutes, establishing your mind around the ideas being presented. These types of exercises, performed before formal meditation, will help to establish mindfulness as you enter the meditation proper. You should begin noticing a marked difference in the sits you do when you establish mindfulness before hand, and the ones you do when you forego this exercise.

Nick Andrew Ludvigson:

Ian And:

It is at this point that you will want to transfer your practice into an insight practice to go along with your calming (samatha) practice, because now you are able to focus on an object in order to examine it in an effort to gain insight about it. This is a progressive practice, wherein you learn how to first set the mind up with the correct condition for accomplishing the ability that you want to develop, then, having developed that ability, you progress on to the next logical step in the procedure. In this way, you can make palpable progress in successive steps. Make sense?

Yes this all makes sense. I can get impatient with myself. After the Goenka course I thought, 'oh I'll take a couple months to develop my concentration skills and get back to insight.' Now it's four months later and I still feel that I have made minimal progress. After reading of others able to develop these skills in a few weeks or months I have started wondering if there is something fundamentally wrong with my mind that it is taking me so long. I'll try to be more patient about this.

Do not become discouraged by your experience with attempting to develop concentration skills after having taken the Goenka course. Everyone goes through such experiences. What is more important at this moment is what you are deciding to do about it. It's likely that you are just not aware of how to proceed in order to accomplish this goal. And that is why you came here: to find out what it is that you need to do in order to begin making palpable progress.

Although I do not know you personally and have not had occasion to sit and converse with you to find out more about your individual circumstances and what might be causing this apparent rut you are in, thoughts like the ones expressed above are indeed the result of self doubt. Now that I understand what you mean by this, we can devise a plan to help combat that inquiring aspect of mind. Let's begin, though, by developing good habits with regard to meditation, and taking it one step at a time. Learn how to set up a successful meditation session by establishing mindfulness before hand. I think you will surprise yourself once you catch onto this.

In peace,
Ian

RE: Failure to attain

Ian And — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 18:11:13 GMT

Hi Garrett,

Asking yourself these kind of questions helps you to stop and take a REAL look at the practice that you have been practicing. It can give you pause to sit and consider: "Am I doing what needs to be done in order to advance in my practice?" Hence, it provides you with first hand information that you cannot deny because you are the one providing the information.

After reading your reply, my first question is: "Whose instruction are you following, or, where did you come by this practice that you are performing? Is this what your teachers there at the monastery are recommending?"

It sounds as though you've been able to develop a decent level of concentration given your description. This will set you up in good position to make more progress given that you begin making a few alterations to what you are currently doing. Nothing major, mind you, but just some subtle changes that will help you to focus on achieving something substantial that you can then use as a tool to make even further progress down the road.

One thing you might want to keep in mind is: Give yourself enough time (one hour minimum) during your sitting meditation to be able to accomplish some short term goals in order to propel yourself down that road. Practice is all about setting up the right or correct conditions for progress to be made, and this is what I would like to emphasis with you at this point. When the right conditions are in place, progress can be made relatively easily and without strain, confusion, or frustration. Once you begin to understand the Path and the way to proceed along that path, then things can progress much easier, and you won't be fighting against yourself.

Garrett E:

Ian And:

Perhaps you can fill in some details to give us a better, more elaborate idea of the practice that you are following so that we may be of assistance to you.

I read this and thought "Yeah, what is it exactly that I do when I sit?" so I went and did a little 35 minute period to find out.
I started off paying attention to my breath in the belly and chest area. I was usually able to drop thoughts within the first several seconds of their arising, occasionally I would catch it only after a 2 or 3 thought string. After a short while, I noticed that I could drop the idea of "breath" and pay attention to the movements in a more fluid way, so I did that.

This is good that you are able to become aware of the thoughts arising so quickly upon first sitting. When you say "pay attention to the movements" are you referring to the movements in your chest and belly areas? If so, this may be used to guide yourself into deeper and deeper states of concentration and mental quietude. Personally, I used the breath at the tip of the nose; but different strokes for different folks. Let's work with what you are doing (or at least willing to do or attempt).

Garrett E:

At this point, thoughts kind of moved into the background, but I noticed that these low noise background thoughts would regularly go on multiple thoughts in a row before I noticed them. I think of this as some percent, say 70%, of my attention being on my experience, and the remaining attention being on the background thoughts, so when I notice I try to move that remaining attention away from distractions and into my experience.

Good. This sounds like solid, basic instruction. What you need to learn from here is: what to do with your attention once the distractions are out of the way. You seem to answer that in the next quotation.

Garrett E:

At some point I decided that my mind was reasonable quiet (background thoughts still occurring though) and began asking the question "What am I?" and holding that question, letting it fill my awareness. I continued with this until time was up.

Garrett E:

I really appreciate you guys taking the time to respond.

No problem. We're here to help you understand, that's all. It's really not that difficult at all once you begin focusing on getting the right ideas to work with.

In peace,
Ian

RE: Failure to attain

Ian And — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 07:30:56 GMT

Garrett E:

I used to attribute this to a lack of effort on my part [and] decide[d] that maybe if I sat an extra hour each night, things would change. I think I lost hope in that perspective some time ago.

I know you know this, but is bears pointing out again. It's not the amount of time sometimes that can make a difference in temporal progress; it is the quality of time spent doing the right things that counts.

I've spent some time in the past meditating with some Zen groups but found that generally they didn't know what they were supposed to be doing nor were they able to provide adequate instruction to follow. That's why I began reading about Theravada methods of practice, which is much more instructive. I'm not saying that my experience is the case with you, just relating my experience. I have read about some Zen groups which follow a path of practice very similar to the way the original teachings were taught, so it just depends upon which type of group one comes upon for guidance.

If you have the time to sit for three to four hours each day, then you need to use that time more efficiently than you are presently using it. I don't know what instruction you are following, but whatever it is, it doesn't seem to be working for you! Perhaps you can fill in some details to give us a better, more elaborate idea of the practice that you are following so that we may be of assistance to you.

It sounds as though you have the motivation for achieving (you're in a Zen monastery, for goodness sakes) how much more motivation does one need than that! It's just that you are facing frustration in whatever you are practicing, and it is that practice that we need to look at first before coming to any conclusions about what might be sabotaging/troubling your efforts.

RE: Advice for concentration skills, please

Ian And — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 06:58:13 GMT

Hi Nick,

Nick Andrew Ludvigson:

Ian And:

By "high stress" do you mean "restlessness and worry" about worldly matters going on in your life? If so, it is this restlessness and worry which has become the hindrance to your ambition to develop concentration.

There is 'restlessness and worry' for sure, but also a lot of 'doubt' in second guessing myself. I had been thinking that doubt was a bigger hindrance at this stage but it very well could be that restlessness and worry are what is causing slow progress which in turn leads to me doubting myself.

Could you describe how this doubt acts as a hindrance for you. How does it keep you from realizing your practice (meditation and the development of concentration)?

You say "second guessing myself" in relation to doubt. If this is accurate, then is it also accurate to say that there is no doubt about the Dhamma? Or do you have doubt about your ability to follow the Path (and hence the Dhamma)? Or is there some other area of life that you have doubt about? You need to clarify this for me so I can understand what you mean by it.

I guess what I'm attempting to get at is: Have you 1) had opportunity to confirm from a personal standpoint that the Dhamma is something that you want to pursue, and 2) have you been able to educate yourself about the Path espoused by the Dhamma? With regard to this second question, have you read and digested a description of the Path such as Bhikkhu Bodhi's The Noble Eightfold Path: The Way to the End of Suffering? This might go a long way to inspire you to make the effort to follow the Path.

Nick Andrew Ludvigson:

Ian And:

You say 2 hours a day, but is that divided up into two sits of one hour a piece?

Usually it's split into 2 one-hour sits. Sometimes it is one two hour sit. On days that I have off I generally sit for two hours in the morning and another 1-3 hour sit in the afternoon. I notice when I have two consecutive days off (and thus am able to get at least one 2 hour sit each day) that I reach a deeper state of calm-- I'm not sure how much of this is sitting and how much is distance from work.

This is good that you are able to get in sits of at least an hour at any one time.

Your observation about having two consecutive days off and your ability to reach deeper states of calm is indicative of the need to get beyond worldly concerns and worries in order to set the mind at ease. If you can translate that same thing into your other sits on days when you are only able to sit for an hour or so per sitting (setting the mind at ease), that would help you to develop concentration skills more quickly. Yet, of course, it is sometimes easier said than done. Being able to separate yourself from your daily concerns during the time you have set aside for meditation is a skill that you will need to develop to make progress in developing concentration.

Nick Andrew Ludvigson:

Ian And:

Good! Then use your practice in body sweeps to help you increase concentration once you are able to put the mind at ease. Use whatever works for you. And don't give up. You can do it if you keep at it, through thick and thin.

There is a part of me that wants to go back to scanning and sweeping but I feel that it would be beneficial to develop some straight up concentration practices before going back to this practice. Probably the most concentration I can hold is when I have done a couple of scans and then some sweeps and then it actually becomes more difficult to do either scanning and sweeping because the vibrations throughout my body are too strong. I can sit in a state focusing on these vibrations in a mostly concentrated manor most of the time. There is a part of me that feels this is missing something though. After reading on DhO about many people able to sit with no distracting thoughts for an hour, I thought this would try to build up such skills as it will definitely give a boost to my practice.

If you wish to develop an ability to dispel distracting thought, then using and paying attention to the breath (or whatever object you normally use in meditation), will be an adequate way to begin training the mind to settle down. In the instance of using the breath (or any other object), when distracting thought arises and you NOTICE it, just bring the mind back to the breath. Keep bringing the mind back, time and time again, when you notice that the mind has drifted off the meditation object. The more times that you do this, the sooner the mind will begin to obey your intention without you having to keep reigning it in. This just takes practice, doing it over and over, before the mind will begin to respond one day without you having to reign it in.

One way to use the breath to accomplish this which will induce a calm abiding aiming at absorption is to find a pleasant sensation in mindfulness of breathing on which to focus your attention. It could be as simple as following the breath at the tip of the nostrils where the air is being inhaled and exhaled, following the breath at that one spot only, kind of like watching a saw blade saw through a block of wood. Maintain focus on the point where the blade is sawing through the wood (or, the point where the breath is just touching the nostrils) and sooner or later you should find the mind becoming absorbed in that activity.

It doesn't matter too much which pleasant sensation you focus upon, only that you find one that appeals to you and that you follow it. In following it, you may notice that the mind becomes engaged in the soothing sensation that develops as a result of following the pleasantness of breathing. Usually when this happens the mind can easily become absorbed in the object of meditation (in this case, the breath). Once this occurs, you will be propelled into dhyana (jhana) meditation, which will help to strengthen concentration abilities when practiced consistently. Eventually, after much practice getting into this state, you should notice that you can direct the mind toward any object and it will stay there for as long as you intend it to.

It is at this point that you will want to transfer your practice into an insight practice to go along with your calming (samatha) practice, because now you are able to focus on an object in order to examine it in an effort to gain insight about it. This is a progressive practice, wherein you learn how to first set the mind up with the correct condition for accomplishing the ability that you want to develop, then, having developed that ability, you progress on to the next logical step in the procedure. In this way, you can make palpable progress in successive steps. Make sense?

In peace,
Ian

RE: Time to force things (Adam's practice journal)

Ian And — Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:40:51 GMT

Adam . .:

For some reason that link sent me to a different book, but I managed to find Analayo's book, thanks for the recommendation.

Thanks for the heads up. Amazon must have changed their code since I originally saved that link a few years ago. I corrected the link in my post above if anyone else wants to check it out.

I posted that recommendation before reading your thread on "the OTHER thanissaro bhikkhu talks." For others who are interested in this approach, you should check out these talks. I haven't had an opportunity yet to download and listen to them, but both Adam and Bagpuss seem to be getting a great benefit from the information that Thanissaro shares!

Adam, if you are getting into studying about the significance of papanca and related items of the Dhamma then you are certainly on the right track to achieving your goal of awakening. Analayo's book will just help to reinforce what you are already studying and learning and put all these practices into perspective so that you can obtain an overall view and appreciation of their practice in addition to the talks that you are listening to by Thanissaro. It's all great stuff and it helps to put the whole picture of examining the mind together for the practitioner. Once you get through it, it should all make good sense!

If you're interested in reading an analogous take on papanca, pick up Bhikkhu Nanananda's small book called Concept and Reality in Early Buddhist Thought. It contains sutta designations and a lot of great insight into how the mind works.

RE: Time to force things (Adam's practice journal)

Ian And — Thu, 20 Dec 2012 05:33:20 GMT

Adam . .:

the way I am approaching my practice right now after listening to a very informative series of talks on breath meditation by thanissaro bhikku is to get up 4th jhana (i.e. after rapture and pleasure are fully relaxed and the breath is very subtle or even absent) and then to drop all intentions, fully let go, surrender.

I'm consistently hitting the 4th now, every sit pretty quickly I can get there.

Thanissaro can be very helpful, can't he.

If you're able to get to 4th dhyana (or appana samadhi) that quickly, this means you're able to access "clarity of mind" rather early on in your sits. If you haven't read it already, I can recommend a book that will help you fill those moments of mental clarity with much food for thought and contemplation which will amply enhance your insight practice. That book is Ven. Analayo's Satipatthana, The Direct Path to Realization. You can have your pick of working with insight regarding rupa or the body, vedana or feeling, mental states or the mind, or phenomena (dhammas or mental objects) like the four noble truths, the six sense spheres, the seven awakening factors, the five hindrances, or my favorite the five aggregates. Examining the five aggregates in more depth will give you insight into the arising and subsiding of the sense of self, helping you to see each attribute as being empty or without self. It can be very rewarding, and of practical assistance in your daily life.

RE: Time to force things (Adam's practice journal)

Ian And — Thu, 20 Dec 2012 05:09:12 GMT

Adam . .:

All my work is geared towards improvement of the emotions, and the best way to do that it seems is to simply be aware of them in the body and allowing them to cease.

It seems that the moment one is totally equanimous towards an emotion it dissolves, this is apparently because when one is caught up in some reactive loop regarding the emotion, one continues fabricating it to serve as a basis for one's identity.

To be totally equanimous to something means that one is no longer identifying with it as "mine" or related to "me" and so one simply stops fabricating it because one has no reason to do so any more.

Congratulations! It sounds as though your insight practice is going very well. Keep up the good effort! This is exactly the kind of thing you should be becoming aware of in your practice. Well done, Adam!

RE: Advice for concentration skills, please

Ian And — Thu, 20 Dec 2012 04:41:20 GMT

Hello Nick,

Developing concentration can take time and diligent practice. But it also takes a mind at ease. By this I mean setting up the correct condition for the development of deeper concentration skills. Developing concentration isn't a "one size fits all" affair. So, you may have to experiment a while to learn what works for you.

At one point in your post you mentioned that: "However, I tend not to remember to turn my attention inward while working because of high stress." By "high stress" do you mean "restlessness and worry" about worldly matters going on in your life? If so, it is this restlessness and worry which has become the hindrance to your ambition to develop concentration.

Yet, one of the first things you need to do is to provide the mind with the right condition for concentration to take place. That means putting aside the world and worldly matters during your time of practice. This can be difficult to do sometimes because often the only time you have to think about things that are on your mind is during periods of time that you've set aside for meditation, and these worldly concerns invade the mind and distract you from your practice. There are different ways to handle this, and you may have to experiment to find a way that works for you.

One thing I used to do was not to fight the invading worldly concerns, but to use them as an object of my meditation. If there was a problem in my life that I needed to figure out, I would use my time during meditation to contemplate that problem to see if I could come to a resolution. Sometimes I was able to find a resolution, and other times I didn't. But that didn't hamper my development of concentration because I had made the worldly concern my object of meditation. And my mind never wandered while I was contemplating that worldly concern.

Once you've been able to resolve the worldly concern, at least for the moment, you can then turn toward developing a calm mind while taking up a different meditation object to focus upon. Once you're able to set the mind at ease (that is, set up the right condition for concentration to arise and develop) then you can focus on developing deeper states like absorption (dhyana). But never overlook providing the mind with the right condition in which to develop an attribute, or you will just spin your wheels without going anywhere.

Nick Andrew Ludvigson:

Yet even with consistent 2+ hours a day my concentration is terrible. I can rarely keep my attention on my breath for more than a few breaths. I tried using the tip of my nose as my concentration object which seemed better for a couple weeks (despite causing much tension) before going back to being lost in thought for extended periods of time.

You say 2 hours a day, but is that divided up into two sits of one hour a piece? When you're first beginning to increase concentration, the best progress comes when you're able to sit for longer periods. That is, periods longer than just half an hour, meaning 45 minutes to an hour (or more). Sometimes it can take 45 minutes just to calm the mind down, to go through all the things that are causing restlessness so that the mind can become at ease. Make sure you give yourself enough time to create the condition of ease for the mind.

Nick Andrew Ludvigson:

My goal after the retreat was to be able to consistently access first or second jhana and then return to practicing vipassana with these skills (to hopefully gain stream entry). I read in Ian And's concentration thread that focusing on the rapture would aid in concentration, however it almost seems that focusing on the rapture aspect makes my already poor concentration even worse. I very consistently experience rapture but if I try to move the rapture to the center of my focus then my mind has wandered within a minute.

Piti or rapture / elation is not something you want to spend extended time focusing on when attempting to use it to enter into dhyana. Note the rapture, and let it subside naturally, but don't become overly fixated on it. You can note the rapture by gently continuing to follow the breath, making the breath your meditation object and just observing the rapture on the periphery if you observe it at all. The reason for this is because piti is a somewhat excited state for the mind (meaning that there is mental movement), and what you ideally want is for the mind to calm down from the excess movement created by piti. In other words, ideally at this point, you will want to docus on calming the breath. This is why it is pointed out that piti subsides as the mind enters the third dhyana which in addition to the joy or pleasure of sukkha is composed of clear awareness, equanimity, and mindfulness. The third dhyana is more peaceful, and there is less movement going on in the mind. And as joy or sukkha subsides from the third dhyana, one enters the fourth dhyana which is composed of equanimity and mindfulness and is very, VERY peaceful, and clear when practicing tranquility meditation (samatha). This is where the clarity of mind arises when developing insight practice. It is that clarity of mind which provides the condition for insight to take place.

The following is a bit advance for where you are now, but it's always good to know ahead of time. Once you are able to access the fourth dhyana you will notice a marked difference in your ability to concentrate. That concentration ability will continue to develop and become stronger the more often you are able to practice entering the fourth dhyana. The fourth dhyana might be described as appana samadhi or fixed concentration.

When you have mastered being able to practice and enter dhyana at will, you may notice that the mind may naturally gravitate toward this kind of appana samadhi all on its own very quickly, because it has become accustomed with how to achieve it. That's when you will know that you have mastered it.

Nick Andrew Ludvigson:

I can keep more focused practicing the body sweeps I practiced at the Goenka course than with my breath. Even though I have been primarily practicing samatha in my sits I am able to sense the subtle vibrations nearly any time that I turn my attention to my body throughout the day. However, I tend not to remember to turn my attention inward while working because of high stress.

RE: Vipassana headache

Ian And — Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:56:41 GMT

Hello Claudiu,

I apologize, in advance, for seeming to highjack this thread to make these points. But they are related to the discussion taking place.

Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:

Does that explanation make sense?

Thank you for taking the time to explain this for me (and, in addition, for others). Yes, your explanation does make sense to me. You analyzed it perfectly and clearly. At least as far as my own understanding of what you meant is concerned. If you don't mind, I would like to use your analysis to point out a few things which may be of benefit for yourself and others.

Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:

I think it was indeed a matter of "view". Essentially, the view I had taken up after reading MCTB and beginning to practice in accordance with it was that all phenomena must be seen as they really are, that is, as exhibiting the three characteristics of impermanence, not-self, and unsatisfactoriness. Thus, the only problem, from my view, was mistakenly seeing phenomena as permanent, self, or satisfactory. I figured if I could see all phenomena as impermanent, not-self, and unsatisfactory, in real-time, that I would no longer have any problems in my life in a fundamental sense.

It is good that you realized that this was a matter of how you were "viewing" it. The real problem, in addition to being able to address one's own held "views," takes more than just superficially changing one's view on a conscious basis. Just changing how one views such phenomena is only one step on the road to overcoming the effect of unwholesome ingrained views in the psyche. You have to root out the "ingrained" quality of the unwholesome experience in order to actually be free of its effect. Does that make sense?

And in order to do that, there is more work to be done than just simply changing the superficial view of the event (phenomenon) in your mind. In other words, changing that superficial view does not, by itself, root out the ingrained effect this can have on the psyche. There has to be a moment of recognition, of inner knowing, an ah-ha moment so to speak, that disposes (discharges) the effect at the psychic level of the mind. If you haven't done that work, nothing you do on a superficial level of mind is going to work to rid you of those unwholesome and emotionally charged engrams (or underlying tendencies), which will come back to haunt the mind until they are eventually removed altogether.

Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:

After beginning to practice in this way, soon I started experiencing some sort of interesting sensations in my head area, and during my daily life - when I wasn't formally meditating! I thought this was great. Previously, I had only experienced 'interesting phenomena' when deep in meditation. This was, to me, the first evidence that I was doing something right - that I was experiencing something out of the ordinary during my daily life as a direct result of my meditation. I liked it, just as you said you do in your post. I took it as a sign of being mindful and I indeed sought to cultivate it. Ultimately this helped with my then-goal of achieving the MCTB paths as I got its stream entry, and later paths, soon after having first experiencing it. Putting my attention on it definitely helped my concentration and was an easy object to get back to during the day.

Yes. I've had the exact same responses to this phenomenon myself. And there is nothing wrong with cultivating these realizations of this phenomenon and using that realization in your waking conscious life. It corresponds to "skilful means," allowing one to implement dispassion and equanimity in place of attachment. Though these subtleties may not be adequately or clearly explained in the discourses, they are none the less there for those who can read between the lines.

Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:

However, it sort of turned on me. I was very persistent and soon my default mode of experience became paying attention to that nimitta. The problem was that a lot of the time I was going through a dark night, which was not pleasant at all, and I quickly grew to dislike the pressure as it was both physically and emotionally painful. It often got to the point where really all I wanted was to not experience the tension anymore and I would be happy. It was not lost on me that before I ever started meditating I never experienced such a phenomenon.

These statements point to insight. But that insight must be used "skilfully" in order to accomplish your intended goal of rooting out these (what is called in the discourses, asavas) or underlying tendencies.

I'm sure that it is not lost on you that you pointed out that as you were undergoing this period, that you were also in the midst of passing through a dark night. That association in your mind creates an asava or underlying tendency. That underlying tendency was based on information and reactions that were false in nature. In other words, once you realized that the dark night was "false evidence appearing real," that recognition (realization) released (discharged) the energy holding that asava in place in the mind.

The same thing has to happen with every other unwholesome underlying tendency associated in the mind. It takes time to accomplish this, which is possibly why it is not often enough mentioned in places like this. In other words, people want a "quick fix" for the causes of dukkha in their lives. But that's not how it works in reality. You have to root these causes out one by one as you recognize them in your psyche!

Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:

Now, combine this with the view above, that the only problem was mistakenly seeing phenomena as permanent, self, or satisfactory and all I had to do was see them as impermanent, not-self, and unsatisfactory to solve said problem. It was obvious that this pressure had become a problem because it was so unpleasant. I knew it was impermanent as it wasn't there all the time and even when it was it was constantly fluxing. And I certainly knew it was unsatisfactory both as a general concept and in real-time. But I had all sorts of anxieties and thoughts and fears associated with it, and it was so unpleasant, that it basically felt like a painful blob of 'me-ness' that I had not properly seen as not-self to the correct degree... thus it felt like 'self' in some deep, remarkably annoying, painful way.

I hope the language you have used here is not being lost on you. Have you taken the time to really explore (contemplate, either during or outside of formal meditation) the aggregate of vedana or "feeling" and how that affects the dependently co-arising of phenomena? As soon as you begin to recognize (awaken to and know) this fact, it can discharge the energy holding an asava in place!

Therefore, it takes doing insight practice into seeing this process taking place in the mind as it is taking place so that you are then able to preempt its execution! And eventually eliminate the asava causing its arising altogether. This is how to set the mind FREE from being afflicted by events and causations that are dukkha (dissatisfying)!

I've attached an essay I wrote several years ago which might help to shed some light on the contemplation of "feeling." Feel free to search for other writings about this important aspect of the practice for further edification.

RE: Vipassana headache

Ian And — Sat, 15 Dec 2012 18:10:42 GMT

Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:

But if I have inadvertently stumbled onto a feedback loop that allows me to generate and amplify headaches... I would rather not.

It sounds just like the annoying tension in the head I experienced, complete with it feeling like 'self'.

If you could, please, explain how a sensation such as the one being referenced can "feel like self." I'm not quite following you here.

I know that subjective experience can be difficult to communicate to another, it being a subtle experience and totally subjectively perceived, however, it would be fascinating to hear what is meant by this if it can be explained. Perhaps it's just a matter of "view," that is, how one views the experience, thus attributing self to it.

As regards this latter phenomenon of "view," there was an occasion once when I experienced pain in the body and noticed that normally I would have viewed it as being part of the body which I viewed as being "me." As soon as I realized that I was doing this, the pain become viewed as being separate from "me" and "not me," as in "this is not mine, this is not myself, this is not who I am." I realized that the pain belonged to the body, which previously I was already aware of not being me; yet this experience brought home the point all the more emphatically, as it pointed out to me what I had been doing most of my life up until that moment of realization: that is, treating the body as being "me." Ever since then, I don't trouble myself (create dukkha) with identifying bodily pain as having anything to do with myself. It is something that the body is experiencing, and I am not the body.

Viewing this in this way allows me to more effectively deal with whatever the present situation (in this example, the arising of pain in the body) might be, rather than collapsing into a helpless heap, at the mercy of "my body's pain." One of the things I noticed from this experience was that as soon as I became aware (mindful) of this mental habit of transferring "selfhood" to the pain and made a conscious effort not to continue doing so, that the pain gradually dissipated and went away. I'm not saying that there is necessarily a connection between these events (as the pain was rather momentary anyway and may have well easily dissipated whether or not I had made this connection).

What I am saying is: that having made that connection, I was mindfully confronting whatever was happening in that moment and seeking a way to relieve the body of that experience (i.e. the pain) if such was possible. As it was, I just had to wait it out, until it disappeared. Rather than feeling as though I was a victim of the pain (thus possibly increasing its duration), I realized that it had nothing to do with myself (or my view of myself) and therefore became proactive in finding a way for its dissipation.

In relation to this, I've always viewed the pressure between the brow as being a positive sign (nimitta) of concentration, and never have I described it as a headache, because the sensation didn't feel the same as a headache (although I can understand how others might describe it as so). My headaches usually have a throbbing component, and this pressure I felt had nothing of that. It perhaps helped that my view of this pressure (which I've experienced all the way back to childhood) has always been connected in my mind with an increase in concentration levels and not with anything else.

Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:

What happened with me is that a while back, I would sometimes feel it only when I thought I was concentrating well, pre-stream entry. Then one morning I got up and was able to feel it without having meditated! I took that as a good sign, so I started cultivating experiencing sensations in my head like that throughout the day. This did improve my concentration but also had horrendous side-effects, e.g. always experiencing a tension in my head whenever I was not distracted.

Yes. I would agree with the description of "not being distracted" when experiencing this pressure. That's why I like it! It keeps me grounded in mindful awareness. Also, I don't view its arising as being necessarily distracting. Meaning I don't view its arising in a negative manner, nor does it have any negative effect on anything I might be doing. For instance, I sometimes experience this phenomenon when running, at times when I need to increase my concentration to continue maintaining the pace of the speed I'm running at. It keeps me from letting go into a less mindful state where I might give in to the suggestion or thought of slowing down, when what I want to do is maintain or speed up the pace. In other words, this mindfulness helps me to achieve the goal I have in mind to achieve (whatever that goal – large or small – might be).

RE: Time to force things (Adam's practice journal)

Ian And — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 17:28:48 GMT

Adam..:

The main way I judge my practice these days is by whether or not the hinderances are suppressed, so basically my standard of practice is going to be having the hindrances suppressed 24/7.

While that may be a fine objective to have and aspire to, please be mindful of the fact that the hindrances are generally mentioned in the discourses in terms of one's intent to practice meditation and not necessarily in daily living.

That's not to say that the effort to attenuate sensuous lust, aversion and ill will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and worry, and skeptical doubt aren't worthwhile endeavors outside of the meditation setting. If you're able to maintain that kind of mindfulness, then it will have been reflected in your sittings. But, yes, use whatever motivation you can in order to attain your goal.

Use that motivation to assist you in maintaining your practice in meditation (maintaining its regularity), which if done properly will assist you in re-conditioning the mind to become more mindful in situations outside of formal meditation.

"For this reason I am starting to take the 8 precepts today so that i basically have no choice but to meditate all the time." That kind of resolve will work because it's coming from an inner commitment. Just don't become discouraged if it doesn't always work out the way you would like. Stay with it (be consistent in your resolve and efforts), and you will begin to see positive results.

Good luck with your efforts!

RE: The Sense of Self

Ian And — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 05:40:32 GMT

Alan Smithee:

At times my focus gets spacious and wide, and I then try to investigate aspects of the mind, such as the "sense of self." I try to discover where it comes from and how it arises.

At these times it becomes apparent that a sensation will arise and then the sense of self will follow/pop up, trying to "merge" with that sensation. Or when a thought/image/etc. arises the sense of self arises and will try to "merge" with this thought/image/etc.

By merge I mean that it appears that the sense of self wants perception to join once again with the sense of self in the less abstracted way seamless way [sense of self + perception] and then take up the agenda of the sense of self, meaning, take action or "react" to the sensation/thought in some way [sense of self + perception + sensation/thought = reaction].

When in Equanimity it is easier to maintain the separation between the sense of self, perception, and the sensations/thoughts, etc., but viewed at these times the sense of self becomes very confusing.

The sense of self is a kind of thing which wants to colonize all the other thoughts/sensations/perception, as if it wants to own them, or merge with them, take credit for them, react to them. The sense of self wants to take credit for everything: IT perceived something, IT felt something, IT thought something. Is the sense of self a thought like any other thoughts?

What makes it different? What makes it unique and gives it its unique colonizing power? Is the sense of self a thought which refuses to acknowledge that things pass away, in that it always want(s) to arise/perpetuate/maintain? In the scheme of things while in a meditative state it is easy to realize that a thought or sensation just occurs and isn't you, but this sense of self is a real bitch. It will fight tooth and bloody claw to maintain its control and its illusions.

Does anyone have any comments on how to more skilfully investigate the phenomenon of the sense of self?

It always amazes me that modern people seem so "hell bent" on attempting to reinvent the wheel, so to speak, when attempting to understand or gain insight into what Gotama taught. And many times, without bothering to apprise themselves of what he was recorded to have said.

Does it ever occur to people to follow the gist of the main teachings in order to discern the kernel of truth within them? For instance, do people ever bother to study and understand the five aggregates in order to gain a clearer insight into anatta? Anatta, which literally means an- "without" and atta "self," or in the context of the Dhamma "without self [nature]." The five aggregates reveal five processes by which human beings create the illusion of self in every act they accomplish. By means of form, feeling, perception, volition (or mental formations), and consciousness.

The best way I know how to communicate this is to quote Richard Gombrich, from his book How Buddhism Began, The Conditioned Genesis of the Early Teachings, who explains it this way: "The Buddha's interest in how not what, his emphasis on process rather than objects, could be said to be summarized in his teaching of the paticca-samuppada, conditioned origination." Earlier on in this essay, Gombrich states correctly that: "Consciousness is, for the Buddha, a process which illuminates objects. So when there is nothing to illuminate, there is no illumination: 'consciousness has no attribute' (anidassanam)." That last statement, "consciousness has no attribute" really nails the point. No attribute by which to identify itself. Hence, if there is no attribute by which it can be identified, who or what is it that suffers or experiences dissatisfaction?

Gotama spoke of the aggregates in terms of their being "not self" or "without self."

"Bhikkhus, form is not-self. For if, bhikkhus, form were self, this form would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of form: 'Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.' But because form is not-self, form leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of form: 'Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.'

"Feeling is not-self. . . . Perception is not-self. . . . Volitional formations are not-self. . . . Consciousness is not-self. For if, bhikkhus, consciousness were self, this consciousness would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus; let my consciousness not be thus.' But because consciousness is not-self, consciousness leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus; let my consciousness not be thus.'

"What do you think, bhikkhus, is form permanent or impermanent?" — "Impermanent, venerable sir." — "Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness?" — "Suffering, venerable sir." — "Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'?" — "No, venerable sir."

"Therefore, bhikkhus, any kind of form (feeling, perception, volitional formation, consciousness) whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all form should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.' "

He spoke only about the processes of the mind and how to recognize them in action in order that people would begin to see that these processes themselves were the cause, the source, if you will, of the problems they created for themselves. And being able to see the aggregates in this light was deemed to be "right view." If they were viewed in any other light than this, it was deemed to be "wrong view." When form, for example, is reified and seen as a self or as containing a "soul," this is "wrong view."

People can tend to become caught in this vicious cycle while fruitlessly endeavoring to figure out what it is they are doing wrong. It all comes back to "wrong view." Follow the path (Right View, Right Thought, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Contemplation/Concentration) as you are learning to discern and see the truth and you won't go wrong.

Spend some time contemplating that sutta quotation (either during or outside of meditation) and see what you come up with. Or alternatively, contemplate Gombrich's description of the aggregates being a "process" of mind (dependently co-arising) by which the mind fabricates/creates a "self." You may surprise yourself!

RE: How to deal with the 5 Hindrances

Ian And — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 00:19:24 GMT

Vuko Hila:

In the last paragragh Gunaratana talked about the antidotes for the hindrances? How and when can I apply them? (During samatha practice?)

I would really appreciate some thoughts on this topic. How did you solve this problem?

Questions, Questions, Questions,... =) I would be very grateful for some answers, because questions like these tickle and sting me during my practice and that distracts me.

It might help us to know which hindrances you are having trouble with. And what have you tried that has not worked. Are there any hindrances that are playing havoc with your ability to meditate?

Generally speaking, the establishment of mindfulness (and bare attention to this very moment) before embarking on meditation is always helpful with regard to combating the hindrances.

RE: Practice log of Stuart Charles Law

Ian And — Sat, 08 Dec 2012 18:56:51 GMT

Hi Stuart,
I'm 60 y/o also, and have been at this for over 32 years. So, I've got a few years experience on you. But even so, what you are pursuing is eminently doable at your age. If you can maintain a clear (and unclouded) mind as you are undergoing the process.

Stuart Charles Law:

Ian, you asked in your post

depending on whose instructions you've been following

The short answer. None.
I'm stumbling through this like a blind man. Coming upon the Dharma Overground has been like a breath of fresh air. I feel a little less alone, but still looking for guidance. Working through MCTB and hoping that that's IT!

That's good. That means that your mind is not being clouded by preconception! Which means that what you are experiencing is crystal clarity without the waters being muddied. In other words, if you have no expectations, it's easier to experience what IS. What is happening in this moment, that is.

With regard to MCTB, if I were you and wanting to keep my mind clear, I would only use it as an inspirational piece. What Daniel has to say about the amount of grit and determination one needs in order to "get over the hump" is true, and in that light, perhaps some of the meditation tips may be useful. But beyond that, I would be careful attempting to cloud your mind overly much with the maps he's presented.

You are much better off reading the translated Pali discourses and attempting to discover how the original path was meant to be traversed. In that regard, your 60 years of experience will come in handy if you just apply common sense to what you are reading. My recommendation would be to start with the Majjhima Nikaya. If you find that helpful and inspiring, go on to the Samyutta Nikaya and the Anguttara Nikaya; these are the two oldest volumes of the Pali canon, and they contain much useful information with regard to actual practice.

The hardest part is attempting to align the Pali terminology definitions up with your own first hand experience so that you can understand what is being communicated. In that regard, we now have plenty of native-speaking Westerners who have traversed this path (Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Nyanaponika Thera, and Bhikkhu Bodhi come to mind) enough to be able to trust their definitions of these Pali terms. Prior to that, we were having to rely on either Eastern practitioners who weren't proficient in the nuances of the English language attempting to provide us with definitions (which oftentimes may have been misleading) or Western observers and writers who may not themselves have been practitioners attempting to translate the Pali terminology without having any first hand experience in the practice enough to be able to be more accurate in their translations of this subtle terminology.

Stuart Charles Law:

And yes indeed i had been noticing what you've called passaddhi for about the last 5 to 6 months and watching how it was developing. I even made the hopeful observation in my meditation diary that it would be nice to reduce the gap between occurrences of passaddhi to nothing ... join them up.

That's a common aspiration among those of us who have experienced this phenomenon. If you are able to attain samadhi to the level of absorption (dhyana), you will find that this will greatly assist you in attaining this goal, as it will help to condition the mind to remain longer in a peaceful abode, well after a formal sitting.

There are also "skilful means practices" that can assist one to retain or regain this peaceful abode in one's daily waking consciousness. One such practice involves paying attention to the breath (outside of meditation practice) in order to regain a peaceful demeanor. You've heard the phrase "take three deep breaths" as advice being applied in stressful situations? Well, the same works for any time that you feel your mindfulness slipping and the mind beginning to wander. Simply by applying attention to the breath (as though, and in the same way, one would during a meditation sitting) can bring back that experience of passaddhi, rendering the mind at ease and in peace. You may even sense the sensation of pressure in the brow (or temples) as a "sign" (nimitta) that your concentration and mindfulness have returned.

Stuart Charles Law:

I still have not quite figured out what passaddhi is. If it is "profound inner peace" that would be why it's so unfamiliar, as peace has alluded this 60 year bag of bones, and profound ... well. Requiring noticeably less sleep!!!

If you read any of the Pali dictionaries, you'll find that it's been defined as: "calmness" or "tranquility," "repose" or "serenity." And those are all good definitions as far as they go. My own personal definition is the one I quoted to you, or a "profound inner peace." When compared with the "monkey mind" of discursive thought that so many Westerners are familiar with, this inner peace does indeed seem to be "profound."

And, yes, needing less sleep is a by-product of spending time in samadhi. Many meditators, myself included, have experienced this phenomenon. It's been said that for every hour spent in samadhi, you can subtract needing an hour of sleep. Pretty nice tradeoff, wouldn't you say!

RE: What next?

Ian And — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 18:24:32 GMT

QWERT Y:

MY QUESTION

So anyway, I write this post in the hopes that some of you can provide me with suggestions, encouragement, or whatever. . . . What should I be doing? Should I continue with concentration? (my original plan had been to reach 4th Jhana and then begin insight from there) Any tips on daily mindfulness? Any general tips? Anything at all?

Perhaps you missed this thread posted as a sticky on the "Recent Posts" tab?

QWERT Y:

Oh and also! The last week has really messed with my schooling. I'm in university and after the 3 characteristics last week I really just lost most of my motivation and spent a lot of time that I should have spent studying meditating or reading the DhO. So if anyone has any tips on that that'd be awesome

Ditto to what Laurel had to say: "Just don't give way to the temptation to think that abandoning it is the right choice because practice is more important. Maintaining your daily life is part of the practice."

RE: Practice log of Stuart Charles Law

Ian And — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:59:32 GMT

Stuart Charles Law:

This afternoon after three hours sitting so far for the day (in 1 hour lots) i was looking out from my rear balcony when i slipped mentally side ways and was suddenly viewing the world as if through the eyes of one in a Day Dream and this has persisted for some 2.5 to 3 hours now.

Can anyone answer... Is it possible to be awake and functioning --- then slip into something i would describe as light to medium level access concentration. All this whilst walking, making a cup of tea, general pottering about but all in an altered frame of mind.

Any explanations ...

Depending on whose instruction you've been following (as well as certain other factors involving ideas that you have accepted as being "true"), what you experienced is not an uncommon occurrence. Various types of seeming "altered" states can pop up over the course of one's practice, providing some meaning and encouragement to the practice. Just simply observe them, but do not become attached to them.

Are you familiar with the Pali term passaddhi? This term refers to the experience of calmness or a "profound inner peace" that generally can accompany a good meditation session. In particular this can occur after a meditative session wherein the peace acquired during the meditation period carries on afterwards. In general, this is considered a good sign.

If it "feels" like an altered frame of mind, this could just be the way you're mind is perceiving this experience.

Way back when, when I first experienced this phenomenon, it would last for about 45 minutes to an hour before gradually fading away. That was during a time when I was meditating about 2 to 3 hours a day three times a day on a private retreat. As time and my practice progressed, the time duration of this "calmness" that followed sitting meditation gradually grew longer and longer, expanding to about 3 hours between sits such that it eventually encompassed the entire day. This coincided with the development of mindfulness (sati) which became easier and easier to maintain throughout the day.

Your description of it being like a "light to medium level access concentration" is what makes me view what you've described in this way. I never used to think of the passaddhi I developed as being like "access concentration," but I wouldn't rule out that description, either. If you can connect this phenomenon with an increase in mindfulness, I think you're onto something.

RE: Moving Forward, Practice Options?

Ian And — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:24:02 GMT

What is this "TWIM folks" that you refer to?

RE: Samadhi!!!!! ....or just access concentration

Ian And — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 06:13:50 GMT

Stuart Charles Law:

Very quickly, as has happened once quite a while back, i was into the "Beautiful Breath" .... Well before the first bell, so i would say 7 to 10 minutes into my sit i was in a place of delicious concentration very easy to be in, and any time it felt, or was under attack it was just a matter of going back to the breath and resharpening the thing ... so all in all a nice place to be and easy to maintain.

Not aware of time until the last ten minutes, but prior to that it was a place of great contentment and i felt a SOLID AS A ROCK or that was the image i felt in my mind ... this feels soooo tight.

Access concentration... After listening to a Dharma talk by Leigh Brasington called instructions for Jhana 1 ... i maybe think that what i had was most likely a very pleasant 50 minutes of access concentration. It was so hard to leave, the only reason that i finished at the 1 hour mark was so as to enjoy my achievement with myself. Silly reason i know but go figure.

Nope. You were in samadhi. Way past access concentration. Your description of it confirms it (for me, at least).

RE: About Third Jhana

Ian And — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 00:10:45 GMT

Bagpuss The Gnome:

It's interesting what you say about elation not needing to be constant. Mine does seem to be however. There's a kind of exhilaration in 1st/2nd which tails off in 3rd. Deeper into 3rd and it gets really still. The pleasure in the body can get really intense (as it just did 1/2hr ago!) but the mind remains really, really still. Quite unmoved. The word unimpressed springs to mind.

Yes, some people experience a longer duration of piti (I've had that experience once or twice, but never liked it, as it can sometimes get out of control if you incline into it, and that's not the purpose for experiencing it if your goal it to descend into fourth dhyana). Many times it was difficult for me to even recognize its arising, which was fine, although the question would arise in my mind as to whether I was practicing correctly, giving rise to doubt about the quality of the dhyana; however the experience of sukkha was more refined and enjoyable for me, so I looked forward to arriving there rather than having to deal overly much with piti.

Bagpuss The Gnome:

I've also found that in the early stages (and sometimes later) of my jhana practice when the mind may be a little scattered still, just watching the mind quietens it down.

Yes. That "watching the mind" is called sati or mindfulness. Mindfulness is always good! It helps to stabilize the dhyana state. Give it some "grounding," if you understand what I mean.

Bagpuss The Gnome:

I still can't switch jhanas at will though. I have found it is best to let the jhana "play out" but to watch for the "cues" of imminent change.

That comes with time and practice as your mindfulness (sati) and concentration (samadhi) begin to palpably develop. One day, after you've figured out how to enter dhyana at will, going up and down through the dhyanas will be a matter of just placing the mind there and "doing it," (if that's what you wish).

Bagpuss The Gnome:

Im still working on 4th. Sometimes it comes, often it doesn't.

It's just a matter of time and practice and the development of control of the mind. With more practice, comes more concentration and control. Don't be frightened if you suddenly lose contact with the dhyana factors as they arise as your meditation experience matures. This happened to me, and I questioned whether or not I was in dhyana. But then as mindfulness and my common sense came back into play, I realized that the practice can change over time, and that one's experience of the practice can change also. I was able to get to fourth dhyana rather quickly upon sitting to meditate. For a long time there for a while, I thought it was supposed to be slower than that. That's when I began writing about developing the ability of concentration in order to facilitate insight practice. Insight practice is where it's really at when using dhyana to help build that ability of samadhi (concentration).

Bagpuss The Gnome:

Added: Why the use of the sanskrit term dhyana?

Sometimes people get in a mindset of glamorizing attainments such as jhana and fabricate an idea in their mind of what the word means when they see it written out. In other words, they mentally latch onto a glorified idea/image of what it means to be in "jhana," and by throwing in a different spelling, sometimes it helps to break into (break apart) that mindset to hopefully help them to see that term in a different light than the one they may have been used to viewing it as.

Aside from that, this is how the word is written in the discourses. It's the original word as used in the Pali canon AFAIK. And is the word that Gotama (presumably) used when describing this meditative state since he used many of the words that were already extant at that time (words like kkhandas, kaama, samadhi, and atta — as in anatta — among others were all used by the Bhramanical institutions of his day, and in turn also by Gotama).

RE: About Third Jhana

Ian And — Tue, 04 Dec 2012 18:51:25 GMT

Bagpuss The Gnome:

I'm a little confused over third jhana. Mostly my understanding of "rapture" and "pleasure" as in this description:

"And furthermore, with the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the pleasure divested of rapture, so that there is nothing of his entire body unpervaded with pleasure divested of rapture.

My confusion is that I thought the tingly/energy/vibratory thing was rapture. And in the standard descriptions, rapture fades in the 3rd. I have tried to subdue this feeling in favour of the joy/pleasure but it just won't do it.

My conclusion would be that I've misunderstood "rapture" and "pleasure" in this context. What do you think?

Fitter Stoke: "I take rapture to mean the excitement and energy of the first two. By contrast, the 3rd one is cooler and calmer."

Fitter Stoke has it pretty close. Especially with his second comment. The classic third samatha dhyana is calmer, less excited, heading toward even calmer, mindful, and equanimous waters in the fourth dhyana. By the time one reaches a solid fourth dhyana, one should be impressed by the absolute smoothness and unruffledness of the experience. It could almost be mistaken for nibbana! Almost! . . . But not quite. Nibbana, true nibbana, has more to do with the elimination of sources of enturbulence than it does with the quiet, rock solid solitude of the fourth samatha dhyana.

But what really needs to happen here is an increase in discernment of one's own experience of this process. What I mean by this is that dhyana (as it is described in the suttas and by many practitioners) is a matter of individual perception, and how well a person can translate the meaning of another person's description based upon their own first hand experience of it. Many times, perceptions get mixed up in the process of the translation of ideas about what to look for. Looking for vibrations and tingling sensations can be misleading for many.

The first step is: get a good definition of the term "rapture" in mind before you begin thinking that you have attained to it. If you can align "rapture" (elation, my word choice) up with an experience that you have had, then you can begin to understand what those who are using this word mean by their use of it in their descriptions.

The dictionary can give us a clue where to begin: "rapture - the state of being carried away with joy, love etc.; ecstasy. 2. an expression of great joy, pleasure etc. 3. a carrying away or being carried away in body or spirit: now rare except in theological usage. -- vt. -tured, -turing [Now rare] to enrapture, fill with ecstasy." But now a new problem arises: what is ecstasy? And is the dictionary definition the same as what is meant by those who practice deep meditation calming exercises such as dhyana? Here is where perception can become mislead.

What about the definition of my word choice, "elation": "elation - a feeling of exultant joy or pride; high spirits." The word "exultant" transmits the idea of a momentary uptick spike (to my way of thinking and viewing of this word in relation to how it can be applied to descriptions of dhyana factors). That moment may last a second or two, or it may last for several seconds, depending upon the mindset of the person experiencing it. The idea here of a quick burst of joy or pleasure or satisfaction is what I am aiming here to communicate. In other words, "rapture" or "elation" can be experienced relatively quickly; or it may linger for a few seconds as one transitions into the deeper calm and satisfaction of the third dhyana. In the third samatha dhyana, one should be clearly aware, experience equanimity, and be mindful. This is the unmistakable quality of the third dhyana.

If one understands that the purpose of practicing samatha techniques is to calm the mind, then, dealing with these sometimes conflicting definitions of terminology can be cleared up with some simple references to similes from ordinary daily life. One that I particularly like and respond to is the idea of being lost and thirsty in a desert and seeking respite and sustenance. If you can put yourself in that mental framework for a few moments, then imagine how you might respond to finding an oasis in the middle of the Sahara, with palm trees and a pool of water and then examine the emotional response you had at just that moment when you realized that your thirst would shortly be quenched upon reaching that oasis, then perhaps you can experience an example of rapture or elation in that moment of recognition!

That momentary uptick spike of emotion on recognition of the oasis is elation (or rapture, depending on your choice of wording). Now, translate that experience as the definition of the word "rapture" back to your effort to attain the third dhyana, and perhaps now it is becoming more clear what you have come through and are aiming at.

So, when you are confident that you are in the second dhyana (feeling piti-rapture and sukha-pleasure), keep seeking more mental and emotional calmness by allowing the rapture-piti to subside. Focus on the calmness and slightness of the breath at the anapana spot as the breath becomes more and more shallow until it almost fades from recognition. Once you reach this point, you should be in third heading toward fourth dhyana.

Now, go back up to the second paragraph here and re-read the description of the fourth dhyana. That's what you're aiming for.