Bruno Loff:
Dreaming during a fresh insight stage will greatly emphasize the qualities of that stage.
Are you able to break into equanimity? For me the transition is often preceded by crying. Pain takes me to the point I break, and then I cry, and then it is more balanced.
Yeah, I can get into equanimity. Although I can reach equanimity, it seems to be at the farthest end of my typical progress, and thus, I spend more time in dark night stuff and less in equanimity. It is indeed reachable though, and when I'm doing vipassana, I try to get there if I have enough time and energy to do so. I've been working on using meditation that heavily favors concentration practice, and this seems to be supportive to digesting insight better and being more stable while looking into unstable strata of mind. I've cried before, on transitioning from dukkha nanas to equanimity, but rarely. There's definitely that feeling though, which I tend to associate with desire for deliverance, I think. After I do the whole surrender thing, then re-observation seems to happen in a lucid but intense way, slowly giving way to equanimity, if I'm... equanimious enough.
CCC... I really do thank you for your support. I've known you to give some excellent advice, but I will be completely honest in saying that I think you're approaching this the wrong way. Of course, this is just my opinion, but let me explain why I think such a thing.
It's possible to hate yourself so much that good advice gets dismissed, and bad advice gets absorbed.
There's an easy fix, but you don't want to hear it.
What is the easy fix? What is the practice, and what result can I expect from it?
1st off- You claim that within my words, I imply that I hate myself. While I'm certainly not fond of my confusion, my suffering, and the pain of my struggles, I never said anything about hating the one who is experiencing it. Rather than claiming that I hate myself, you should explain why you think I hate myself. Is it because I'm explaining suffering I'm encountering? Are you implying that I'm entertaining the suffering? Are you implying that I'm taking the suffering as self, or that I'm blaming myself for the suffering? I think that meditators who've had considerable experience with vipassana would tell you that the point is to bring up suffering you were unaware of, come to terms with it through equanimity, see the cause, and repeat until the cause is removed. I think that it's possible you are reading my experience of "comprehension of suffering" as authoring of suffering, harboring of suffering, and/or reinforcement of suffering.
Next- What good advice did I dismiss, and what bad advice did I absorb? You need to make this clear because it's entirely possible for me to have misinterpreted what this meant. I wonder if you're referring to the article you posted, coming from the zen perspective of "you are already enlightened"? If you're wondering why I wasn't fond of this advice, it's because I've tried to use that perspective, yet still have experienced suffering. As someone stated in that thread, the "you are already perfect and enlightened" perspective doesn't make sense to anyone who hasn't already experienced rigpa, stream entry, cessation, etc..
Even Buddha pointed towards the moon, aware that it took a process to come to see the moon for one's self. I'm not arguing the authority based on a particular teacher, but rather, the ultimately true fact that from the perspective of pre-path, pre-stream entry, pre-rigpa, path, stream, rigpa are not clear, and the conscious mechanisms that keep suffering happening are still temporarily in play.
You want the advice that causes more harm, and you lap it.
You're in a a bad place.
Thank you. I can assure you, the intent of my vipassana pursuit, in it's entirety, consists of learning to stop doing the things that cause harm. If you're harming yourself and unaware that you're doing so, it can be painful to discover that such a harming process is going on. Wouldn't you agree, that even the process of coming to terms with your faults can be painful in and of itself? Consider a patient going to a psychiatrist for therapy. The patient tells himself he is strong, that he is okay, that he is not in pain, and may be able to hold himself together. However, when he goes to therapy, the psychiatrist pries, revealing harmful processes that exist, and the patient starts bawling, mid therapy. He cries his eyes out, disgusted with those processes going on, fearful of letting go of it, and terrified that he won't be able to overcome the said destructive process. Would the psychiatrist see this breakdown, and conclude, "This breakdown is a negative thing, and you shouldn't come to therapy since obviously therapy makes you break down"? No, he would be glad that the feelings have gotten out, and that the processes by which the pain comes about are made clear. He would encourage the introspection, emphasizing the usefulness of the revealed processes, not discourage the pain in that moment of therapy, emphasizing the uselessness and faultiness of the pain itself. I'm glad I can feel the pain of a hot stove, because if I didn't have the pain, I'd have no way of realizing there was a process going on that was damaging.
Indeed, the very coming to terms with the process by which we perpetuate suffering is painful. It's actually a good place though, an advantageous place to be, since when the cause of the pain is made clear, one can work towards understanding and removing the cause.
Lastly, let me just tell you this: it feels bad to get a response like that! Though we may not agree on the mechanics of all of this, I'm willing to discuss what these differences are, and stick to the relevant, pragmatic discussion, which is the reason we're all here: what is the nature of this pain we feel, where does it come from, and how does one go about putting an end to it? There are many people here who are confused, and this is arguably to be expected, given the vast array of traditions abound, and the fact that many of them contradict each other, disagree with each other. To be honest, I believe that very few people are here to establish which tradition is correct. Most people are likely here because they're simply experiencing pain and want to have a sincere, compassionate discussion about how best to deal with that pain. Making a statement such as, "you're in a bad place" is not informative, not helpful to practice, and certainly doesn't make me feel good.

I implore you to think pragmatism, not because it is the "right" mode of discussion, but because it's more useful for understanding and helping each other. I, and many others, will be more receptive if you say...
"This situation X is a bad place, and these reasons Y are why you are in it. Doing Z will get you out of that bad place".
I'm actually still completely receptive of your advice; we just haven't come to an understanding because I'm looking for things that I can do to lead to being in a "good place", not a conceptual understanding explaining why I'm already in a good place. The place I'm in doesn't feel good, and a conceptual model of enlightenment claiming that I'm already there, as much as I wish it helped, doesn't help.
I'm serious here, you need help, you're reaching out, you need help from qualified psychiatrists and counselors, NOT internet Dhamma practitioners.
Thank you for your advice, James. You've also been known to provide excellent, relevant quotes from suttas, etc.. However, you've also been known to lie about attainments and admit to being selfish and shameless, and as much as I don't like to "hold things against people", these things do have a long-lasting effect on credibility, and WILL, most likely, influence the ability of others to trust your words and your advice. It's just what people do in order to seek out what is likely to be most helpful and relevant to themselves, and to decide on whether or not other's advice is grounded in compassion, rather than selfish thoughts and emotions.
"You're reaching out" - We must come to a consensus on what this means. I'm sharing my experiences of vipassana practice, expressing my thoughts and feelings, and encouraging a discussion of how these experiences work, how best to go about practicing, and similar experiences. In case you are assuming so, I am NOT making a claim that I can't do this on my own, that I'm unable to help myself, or that I'm looking for someone else to intercede and fix my problems. Please explain what you meant, for clarity of discussion and mutual understanding.
A similar thing happened to me, I was involved in all sorts of things and I had a nervous breakdown whilst in college, I finally confessed to my Mom that I couldn't hold it together anymore. I was also off my meds at the time.
I'm sorry about your situation! I wish your pains and sufferings decrease, rather than increase. I hope the path you are working on is helping you get to a better place and remaining there. Through any disagreement we may have, I do sincerely wish for your happiness and well-being. We both see the other's suffering and wish that suffering were not so.
There are definitely similarities between our situations. One is that we're both in college. Another is that during that college experience, we both experienced some form of suffering. However, past that, it's a good idea to look at the differences. I've never been medically diagnosed with any mental or emotional conditions/illnesses, and thus, I've never been on any kind of medications. While it's always possible that I'm unaware of it, I've never seen any strong evidence that I have any such condition. Because of these differences, it is unwise to assume that we are experiencing entirely the same thing, and that what worked for you will work for me. It's a common error seen in the world: people assume their problem is the next persons problem. Doctors realize though, that each disease and sickness requires an individual diagnosis, and an individual prescription. I am implying that you should not be assuming that we are going through quite the same thing, as much as it may appear to be the case. There is a further implication, that we are likely better off treating our problems in different ways.
Consider this: people who live happy, considerably peaceful lives have decided to take up vipassana in the past. Despite this peace, stability, and happiness previously in life, many of these people become dissatisfied with the mental processes going on. This dissatisfaction has been strong in many people's cases, and has been described as miserable, fearful, and disgusting, which are ways in which I describe my experience in dark night. The implication of this is that, regardless of why it happens, doing vipassana is widely regarded as a process which is more than likely to bring about feelings of dissolution, fear, misery, disgust, and desire to find a way to suffer less.
To CCC and James, the essence of my message is that I believe that the dark night can reveal or maybe even produce all kinds of suffering, and that this is only natural, as vipassana is one-third about seeing the inherent suffering in all sensations of the unenlightened being. To express even an intense degree of grief and be faulted for 1. doing so, and 2. not conforming to your particular paradigms of how enlightenment stuff works is 1. a further cause of pain, and 2. not helpful in changing the situation.
Reduced further, I'll make a simple, rough-around-the-edges claim: you are, to some extent, mistaking the comprehension of suffering on the path to enlightenment as the creation and perpetuation of suffering, and furthermore, placing responsibility of that suffering on me. In the conventional sense, this doesn't do me any good since it isn't advice on how to change the situation. In the wisdom sense, there isn't any me, and these experience are part of what it takes to realize that and cultivate a more equanimious mind.
I'm entirely open to debate on anything I just said. I'm entirely open to the notion that I'm simply wrong in any of my views, practices, paradigms, conceptions, and beliefs. However, I'm NOT open to criticism of that wrongness. I'm NOT open to criticism of the fact that I am open about the suffering I experience, and the extent to which I experience and understand it. If you wish to disagree or point out faults, these things will be much appreciated and useful for all of us:
1. Establish your view on the model/concept/thing of question
2. Establish your understanding of my view of that thing
3. Offer explanation of why your view/practice is correct or useful
4. Offer explanation of why my view/practice is incorrect or useless/not very useful
It isn't that I want to be rigid or make conversation conform to some set of standards, and of course, anyone is free to use any mode of discourse they see fit. I'm just pointing out the fact that at times, we feel that others misunderstand our words, or that others don't want to listen. I'm suggesting that we are all wanting to listen, but that when there are misunderstandings, it is better to compassionately seek to clarify these things and at least come to a consensus on where our disagreement stems.
Once again, I'm still entirely grateful for the help that you all have offered. I've sought to make my points clear and I promise that I'm seeking to absorb ALL advice. However, I emphasize that the pragmatic approach isn't about what is good or bad advice. The pragmatic approach is about determining what advice and discussion leads to clarity, understanding, and concepts that can be used and found to be of benefit.
I would love to hear some more voices on this discussion, as the dharma overground is filled with "dark night yogis" who are receiving advice that they may not understand, advice that may not lead to improved practice, and advice that can be harmful, painful, and discouraging.