Discussion Forum Discussion Forum

Dealing with the Dark Night

What the dark night actually consists of......

Hi, I appreciated Daniel's discussion about the dark night. However, I find that my capacity to cope with things is enhanced by an understanding of what they actuallyt are, even if this has no apparent practicall application. And so I would like to as what the dark night actually is. Is it that because we are practicing, the ego structure breaks down and that unleashes havoc or is it that because we are practising, pockets of negative karma are released into consciousness so that we hvae to experience that or a bit of both?

Regards

RE: What the dark night actually consists of......
Answer
11/28/11 8:33 AM as a reply to Graham Linker.
The mind observes the process of craving, which is responsible for the sense of 'I', in great detail...and, since craving is suffering, and the sense of 'I' is suffering, the experience sucks.

With strong vipassana skills, one can see that the sense of 'I' (experienced during the phase of the attention wave during which sensory experience is fading out) is greatly exaggerated in the Dark Night, and that this is in fact the main characteristic of the Dark Night, and that this is the thing that makes it suck.

This is not to say that other explanations are wrong, just that this one is accurate at the pure experiential level. It also happens to be practical to confirm it for oneself.

What can be learned from the Dark Night: suffering is caused by craving (the second noble truth).

RE: What the dark night actually consists of......
Answer
11/28/11 9:12 AM as a reply to Graham Linker.
This post by Culadasa does a great job of explaining it. Relevant excerpts below (emphasis mine).

Culadasa:
1. Whether or not the Insight Knowledges occur in the same order depends very much upon the method of practice.
They occur in the order given in the Vissudhimagga and in Mahasi's Progress of Insight if a) one is practicing "vipassana (Insight) before samatha (tranquility)" (cf. the Yuganaddha Sutta, AN 4.170), and if b) one is using a method that is designed to make Insight into anicca (impermanence) the first to arise while Insight into anatta (emptiness of Self) is left to the very end.
[For those who might be puzzled about the Samatha that follows what they may have thought of as a "pure" Vipassana practice, please note that the Knowledge of Equanimity Towards Formations is Samatha.]
...
With regard to b):
Knowledge of Dissolution followed by the Dukkha Knowledges is an order that is quite specific to a practice geared towards anicca as the first Insight. Knowledge of Dissolution is the entry into actual Insight with Insight into anicca being the first, and Insight into dukkha being the second. Practices oriented towards a different "entry" into Insight will, of course, not follow this order at all.

2. Insight into Dukkha is a miserable experience if a) one launches into Insight without the "lubricating moisture", i.e. piti (joy), passadhi (tranquility), and upekha (equanimity) of Samatha; and if b) Insights into anicca, sunyatta, and dukkha precede insight into anatta. Deepening Insight into impermanence by someone who still has a strong intuitive sense of being a real, separate Self can be a terrifyingly miserable experience. A "Self" in a world of impermanent and empty "things" to which that Self tries to cling is the very definition of dukkha.

With regard to a):
A mind imbued with piti, passadhi, and equanimity can navigate this voyage of discovery with far more... well..., joy, tranquility and equanimity to mitigate the fear misery and disgust of confronting the reality of the way things are.

And with regard to b):
Of course, to the degree to which the emptiness of Self has been both intellectually realized and intuitively assimilated, to that degree one is effectively immunized against the experience of dukkha during the process of further deepening of Insight into the nature of dukkha.

So to restate your question, "Who in their right mind would follow a method that broaches Insight without first cultivating Samatha, or plunge into the Knowledge of Dissolution and Insight into Impermanence without first properly addressing the issue of emptiness with regard to the perceived Self?"

Here are a few answers that come immediately to mind:
With regard to why someone would not first cultivate Samatha;
- Someone might be unaware that there is any other approach.
- Someone might have been taught that Samatha practices are useless or difficult or dangerous or are to be avoided for some other reason or combination of reasons. eg. "Concentration practices are a waste of time. The only real Buddhist meditation is Vipassana."
- Someone might have been unsuccessful in Samatha practice due to lack of proper instruction, and so has abandoned it in frustration.
- Someone might have practiced Samatha incorrectly in a way that has led to dullness, and so has abandoned the practice as fruitless.

With regard to why someone would pursue Insight into anicca before anatta;
- Anyone who is resistant to and cannot accept the idea that what the Buddha meant by anatta is that there really is not, never has been, and never will be a separate Self other than these conditioned, impermanent, suffering aggregates. This is part of what makes anatta so much more inaccessible than anicca. There are countless Buddhists, Western and Eastern alike, who think, "Buddha just meant that the Self was not in the aggregates, not that there is no Self at all." They feel like they are a Self, and they fully expect to have the mystery of the doctrine of anatta solved and their "True" Self revealed through the practice. You know the one they are thinking of: the Self who has lived countless previous lives, the one that accumulates merit and kamma, the one that is going to be reborn in the future. These are the closet "eternalists".
- Anyone who craves non-existence, who embraces the Dhamma as the path to an ultimate end to the endless cycle of suffering and rebirth, but who can only conceive of liberation in terms of oblivion. The rebirth they wish to escape is, of course, that of a Self that for them does exist, although admittedly in a mysteriously relative and mind-dependent way, but a Self that is all too painfully and undeniably real none-the-less. Since this Self exists in some mysteriously mind-dependent way, it is the mind that must put an end to it. Insights into impermanence and suffering are seen as the path by which the Self will be destroyed and become a No-Self that will not be reborn. These are the closet "anihilationists".
- Anyone who is aware that Insight into anicca is in fact much more readily attained than Insight into anatta. This is quite true and is perhaps the best of all possible reasons for seeking Insight into Impermanence.


I almost feel that post should be stickied...

RE: What the dark night actually consists of......
Answer
11/28/11 12:13 PM as a reply to Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem.
So in practical terms, what kind of Samatha/Vipassana mix does Culadasa advocate? As I understand lots of people do some Samatha before each Vipassana session and still go through the dark night, so that's not it. Does he want a few years of Samatha before starting Vipassana? Full mastery over the jhanas or something like that?

RE: What the dark night actually consists of......
Answer
11/28/11 12:49 PM as a reply to N A.
N A:
So in practical terms, what kind of Samatha/Vipassana mix does Culadasa advocate? As I understand lots of people do some Samatha before each Vipassana session and still go through the dark night, so that's not it. Does he want a few years of Samatha before starting Vipassana? Full mastery over the jhanas or something like that?


I'm not certain. He didn't state his opinion in that piece I linked, and I haven't read anything about him advocating one particular approach over another... perhaps someone else can chime in.