hi john,
J C:
So I gather, from your comment, that you are experiencing Pure Consciousness Experience PCE full time?
yes.
J C:
Can you explain how that could be possible? The reason I ask, is because with the episode I described, it would have been impossible to function in every-day life in that rarified state.
i remember a time when i wondered similar.. but upon looking into the matter directly, i found that my concerns were unwarranted. upon investigation, the notion that i would have difficulty functioning in a pce during every-day life came from a deeply-ingrained assumption that if 'i' weren't there to make things function properly, they would somehow cease to and i - as this flesh-and-blood body - would be dysfunctional. it seemed to me that i would be either low-functioning and dim-witted or completely delusional and off my rocker, cut off from 'everyone else'.. i cannot emphasise enough how real these fears felt. yet even then, what i had to gain seemed more important than what i had to lose, and i dared venture forth anyway despite the trepidation. as 'i' (and my feelings) slipped away, i let my life live itself. in doing so, 'my' previous concerns were revealed to be completely unfounded; i had, and have, no trouble at all managing, and managing well, in my day-to-day affairs.
it turns out that the various functions which make day-to-day living possible and easy are largely autonomic; and where they are not, thought takes care of them. for example, the function by which i am able to attribute name to things turns on by itself whenever it is needed (no intervention is necessary). if there is uncertainty or hesitation, then thought comes into play - memories are recollected, associations are recalled, and ta-da! the name arrives.. and does nothing to diminish the infinitude that all this is happening in by default.
i was able to discover this because i dared dream it possible to live like this full-time.
J C:
Secondly, I would like to explain the methodology I employ for this purpose, my sadhana, and hope perhaps you would say whether your sadhana is pure straight ahead Buddhist meditation or not.
my sadhana was, by the end, not at all buddhist meditation, whether pure straight ahead or otherwise. i employed methods advocated by richard (over at
his website) and developed some modifications of my own. i explained the method to a practitioner here enquiring about it some weeks ago by way of flowchart; here is that chart again, along with another one which explicates a potentially vague part of the first:
chartchart 2J C:
I am a total pragmatist and quite frankly, am doing mantra yoga and a few esoteric yogic techniques and have been for about ten years. There has been a steady deepening of meditative states possible, and after recently coming across "Practicing the Jhanas" and Path of Serenity and Insight, realized that I have been traveling the same experiential sequence quite naturally, due to my particular contemplative yogic practices. I have also been doing Vipassana meditation for about 11 years with numerous Vipassana retreats throughout the year. There is a steady evolution that has happened to me. In reading posts on this website, it seems to me that this approach is pretty "dry" to my way of thinking, and the suffering is great on what yogis like myself might call the path of Jnana. The Path of Heart Centered practices that I know are a smoother ride. However I have the greatest respect for you Jnana yogis. I don't hear much talk about the powerful arising of overwhelming Love and Compassion from you practitioners here though, but rather a more attainment oriented focus. Which seems a bit "dry" to my way of thinking. Hope that assessment is not accurate, but frankly, that's a conclusion I needed to share with you. I am sure this will raise some hackles.
having not been a jnana yogi for a long time now, i will pass over commenting on the differences between what you regard as 'the path of Jnana' and 'he Path of Heart Centered practices'.
personally speaking, i don't write about the arising (whether powerful or otherwise) of Love and Compassion because i do not experience them, either overwhelmingly or otherwise, at all. i no longer experience their genesis because i am no longer possessed of their substrate; their source - the much-vaunted Source which inspires mysticism - is literally nowhere to be found here in my experience. that most basic, illusory phenomenon has been completely extirpated from the way this flesh-and-blood body experiences; no feeling of being, nor any feelings (whether compounded in form, or as elementary affects) ever arise here, for they are wholly dependent on that (now extinct) illusory phenomenon's movements. in the absence of the illusion, the absence of its movements; in the absence of its movements, the absence of feelings; in the absence of feelings, the absence of any feelings, no matter how transcendent and sublime. though i can remember, cognitively, what Love and Compassion are, what i experience, directly and uninterruptedly, is the sensate clarity, tranquility, and benignity that the universe experiencing itself as a self-aware human actually is.. in a word: perfection.
EDITED TO INCLUDE: however, i do write about vipassana/insight practice, as well as the samatha jhanas, because i have both practised them and have instructed others in their practice with significant benefit. while my own aim (and where i would wish others also aim) was (and is), ultimately, toward an end which is different from the ideal of enlightenment, i cannot deny that insight practice has been immensely helpful in arriving at that end (and so may be helpful to others who wish to seek it).
the word 'dry' has many definitions;
the dictionary i consulted listed twenty-two, and of those i found six which i considered might suit your meaning. instead of replying to all those possibilities directly, it seems more expedient to ask you which, of the following definitions, you meant by your characterisation of the discussion you've read on the dharma overground as 'dry':
15. Having no adornment or coloration; plain: the dry facts.
16. Devoid of bias or personal concern: presented a dry critique.
17. a. Lacking tenderness, warmth, or involvement; severe: The actor gave a dry reading of the lines. b. Matter-of-fact or indifferent in manner: rattled off the facts in a dry mechanical tone.
18. Wearisome; dull: a dry lecture filled with trivial details.
19. Humorous or sarcastic in a shrewd, impersonal way: dry wit.
[...]
21. Unproductive of the expected results: a mind dry of new ideas.
EDIT: so which do you mean?
tarin