I went to visit Trent for a weekend. It definitely cleared a few things up. Here are my notes in case my experiences are useful to others, and in case others have comments that can clarify some of my reasoning. It might be a bit haphazard and repetitive... i've thought about these things from a few different angles.
Just to be clear,
these are my own words + thought processes written out as I've thunk em, unless otherwise noted specifically in the post. So I look forward to any comments or clarifications people might have, or if some of the reasoning seems weird then ask questions so that I can improve upon it and maybe discover something new in the process.
---
What is naivete?Naivete is something like it being OK to "not know" for a while. this manifests in two ways i can currently identify. one is sensually, in not knowing what you're seeing. you're literally seeing and sensing everything for the first time, as there's no other moment you can sense in. when you feel a twig - you're literally feeling it for the first time. getting into that groove is helpful for PCEing.
the other is affectively, or: All those concerns, worries, fears, anxieties? it's OK for them to not be there for a while. a metaphor: the psyche is a plane. the self finds something it doesn't like and digs a furrow.. and keeps going over it back&forth, making it deeper and deeper. eventually you have tons of furrows, tons of issues that prevent you from being happy&harmless (smooth). yet all those furrows aren't really there, it's just the shape the self is taking. so one can be naive like treating that plane as flat, smooth, unperturbed.. and from there, wandering off into a PCE and having the whole thing vanish entirely (albeit temporarily, until AF). knowing that it will all disappear anyway might be good way of allowing yourself to treat them as inconsequential.
I couldn't get myself to do that though (and still haven't fully, yet), but the biggest reason was that 'I' would buy into each feeling.. and indeed as long as a feeling is being bought into it will continue to be there - when it's finally seen for what it is, it dissipates (why attentiveness is so important). So for each feeling I'd have to figure out "a way around it", almost I felt like I was tricking myself into "figuring out why it's ok to not feel it" - namely, starting from an assumption that the feeling is valid, and trying to figure out why it isn't. I felt like 'I' was trying to convince 'my' self, to win 'it' over w/ arguments. I wasn't, really.. when i did figure out an issue, it was not tricking myself, but for good, and then it finally vanished, but it didn't "feel right". and that came from a lack of understanding of intuition.
What is intuition?One understanding really makes it all much simpler:
"the self is what it doesn't want to be".
What does that realization mean, really? Well, notice how a belief kind of dulls your thinking? it causes you to go through all these irrational hoops to keep it alive.. and when you finally see through it, that's just what it is - a seeing through it, a seeing it for what it is - additional knowledge which, when comprehended (literally "completely grasped" by your mind), shows the belief is no longer necessary.
So, a feeling-being with many beliefs will have a really stunted intellect, as many chains of reasoning and logic will be reacted to by the self before they are further processed. There does seem to be a general correlation with "self-awareness" vs. "iq" (using both terms very roughly, hence the quotes). generally, it seems someone completely led by their impulses and emotions won't really think about what they're doing.. yet more "intellectual" types who focus, have logical ways of dealing with their own problems, even teach themselves how to learn (find effective study methods, etc) seem to be more "intelligent" in a way. i should say "less limited by their self".. as you remove more limitations the intellect operates more freely.
Ok, so self -> less knowing, roughly, since less room to think about stuff. What does the self actually want to do? What is
intuition, really? (the feeling, as opposed to "intuition" the sudden flash of understanding - not felt, but known - like you know what 10*10 is). It's the feeling that you know or that you don't know. It's the self's attempt to figure things out.. it really loves knowing (e.g. satisfaction, conviction (imagine an angry priest preaching), pride), and it really hates not knowing (e.g. fear). it's tough to face your fears cause your intuition tells you to not go there - there's scary stuff there, who knows what it is? best to stay where it is safe. and that's also why it's so easy to cling to beliefs - you feel them to be right, and you don't want to question that cause what if you're wrong? gah! that's just scary.
so 'intuition' tries its best to know.. yet that intuition is the very thing that is preventing the knowing! the self really doesn't want to know.. yet
it itself is the not-knowing! it fears not-knowing if it's gone.. yet the flesh&blood body avec intellect already knows, and the self comes and arrogates that knowing and makes itself seem important via intuition. Isn't that so
ridiculous?!? I actually just burst out laughing as I realized that, and i definitely felt a physical shift in my head as the understanding clicked.
intellect vs. intuition'i' had a suspicion that without 'my' self, 'i' would just be subject to some other feeling-intuition, "the intellect", one that 'i' won't have control over, this time. what if that intuition gets "stuck" into a set "belief" that is "wrong"? there won't be "me" to ferret it out! well, the intellect can't refuse to look at facts.. that's simply not one of its faculties, that denial being a faculty of the self. it's actually
the intuition itself that refuses to look at facts, that gets "stuck"! notice a pattern yet? it really doesn't want that to happen.. yet it is the happening of that.
AF is counter-intuitiveAfter all that, i think i understand what is meant by AF being counter-intuitive. you literally have to go against the intuition that feels it knows, and go to actual knowing.
"that feels so wrong, though!" it really does. here's the kicker - the self doesn't actually know anything. how can the self possibly feel a fear? the body has to have already comprehended the potential for danger. that knowing of the potential for danger was taken by the self and manifested into fear. with the fear gone, that's all that goes - the fear. the knowing will still happen, and of its own accord, just like before. it
feels like you are losing knowledge, but you're really not - hence counter-intuitive.
intuition feels like a guiding light, looking around at what is right and wrong, figuring life out, learning how to survive and live well, etc. without intuition, you feel like you'll be in a dark room with no where to go. however, it's more like the intellect is the guiding light, and intuition is a big opaque obscuration which has little holes in it that move around to guide the intellect in a way it feels is right. with it gone, that light will shine fully, with nothing in the way.
so that's what intuition is, as i understand it.. the self taking what is already known and attaching feelings of knowing and not-knowing to it.. and viciously resisting any attempt at understanding. some examples:
- caring: when you feel like you should care, or feel like you don't.. that's a feeling. the understanding that caring may or may not be appropriate is already there.
- being ashamed: this is also why you should feel excited at the chance of feeling foolish/ashamed. the self might feel foolish as a belief is seen through - "how could i possibly have missed that?" but that's wonderful! note how the foolishness is completely overtaken by the relief at having taken care of that.
what seems more of a problem to me is feeling ashamed.. as i touch upon some beliefs, i get a sense of shame like "oh no I can't be thinking that! that's wrong! that's counter-AF!" and that has stopped a more thorough investigation there. but really that means that's exactly what i should investigate! and once it's done with, how free i will feel.
the self is not perfect - important here is realizing that the self can never be perfect. things can only be not-perfect as a result of the self. so of course as you go along you will feel ashamed/silly as you discover more and more.. but that's great! the whole process is a rational way of proving that the self is wrong and therefore eliminating it, bit by bit. maybe one can set that motivation up into a positive feedback loop - even being eager to feel foolish as you know the relaxation that will result. (hey, there's a happier inevitability than "Dark Night follows A&P like thunder follows lightning" =).
inevitability helps. if you know you'll get AF, anyway.. you know that whether the self likes it or not, whatever belief it currently has will go away.
- fear &c: one can apply similar reasoning with any feeling. for example, fear is trepidation about the future. but the comprehension of an unknown is already done, as the fear has arisen. there's no further understanding to be gotten from the fear.. and in fact, further understanding is prevented as one is scared instead of reasoning rationally. not only that but it also:
1) doesn't change the outcome for the better. imagine two scenarios. in the first, someone is afraid of event X happening, afraid, afraid, then X happens, then terror/horror/relief even, whatever. in scenario two, happy&harmless, happy&harmless, then X happens, then..? i don't know! whatever is appropriate
2) might make the outcome more likely. think of stories where someone has desperately tried to avoid a situation but their actions only precipitated it.
3) "sucks, and sucks big-time at that"!
enlightenment is intuitivealso this is a good place to draw a distinction with Enlightenment.. Enlightenment seems to be really full-on intuition. consider how literally intuitive and feeling-filled the jhanas are, if you've practiced them. you feel your way into them the first time, get a sense of them, know how to find your way back, they fill you with bliss, you can literally mold them with your mind!
Enlightenment feels good, seems right, no?
Daniel Ingram:
Bill Hamilton had a lot of great one-liners, but my favorite concerned insight practices and their fruits, of which he said, “Highly recommended, can’t tell you why.” That is probably the safest and most accurate advertisement for enlightenment that I have ever heard. There was a famous old dead enlightened guy (whose name ironically eludes me at the moment), who was known to have said, “I have gained absolutely nothing through complete and unexcelled enlightenment.” [Though MCTB doesn't say it, this quote is attributed to the Buddha.] (
link)
Jhananda:
Often it is heard that one should avoid the ecstasies of the absorption states, because one might become “addicted” or “side tracked.”... Every day I am just more happy, more content and fulfilled than I can ever recall being. If that is an addiction to being a “bliss bunny,” I’ll take it over an anxiety disorder, depression or dependence on stimulants and depressants. (
link)
He doesn't question whether it's an addiction, but since it feels so good and he feels happy and fulfilled and is better than at least some alternatives, he assumes it isn't. (not to dig on his way of life; just pointing out his reasoning is intuitive.)
i don't think you'll ever hear an AF person say that they can't explain why their state is better than before [1]. yet i've had some trouble showing that my enlightened state is unequivocally better than others.. so far it's just served as a good impetus to continue, which is good i suppose, but not the end goal. but perhaps richard is right when he says AF is 180-degrees opposite from enlightenment. also might explain why so many realized folk found
this thread useful. (not to say stream-entry et. al. aren't useful.. don't know enough about that to say one way or another.)
What about sincerity?Sincerity is necessary as a precursor to any of this, simply to admit that something is wrong. this is what i needed when starting to feel ashamed at a belief being potentially 'wrong'. if i just admitted to myself (as i have by now) that that issue was a problem, then i could start looking at it. simple!
also this is useful for being OK with whatever faults you have. that sense of shame only arose cause i wasn't OK with me having that belief. being OK doesn't mean letting it be.. it means not beating yourself up over it. accepting it feels good when you do, and then a few moments later you'll find yourself just dealing with the belief, directly. it's kind of like "oh it seems i actually did believe this!" definitely a necessary first step.
you also must be sincere when you are naive.. and the reason it's OK is cause of how messed up and unhelpful intuition really is, as i described above.
pure intent vs. being driventhis one i'm only starting to fully get a grip on, now...
there has been, for a while now, this kind of drive in the background. i identify it most readily as a spot of focus or attention somewhere in my head which kind of pushes at some knot there. constantly pushing.. constantly trying to figure out what is wrong so that i can continue on the path. this caused me trouble before with enlightenment,
here. Dan's advice was spot on. but why? i couldn't see why. surely i need to want it.. i even read up on the AF site about pure intent and they said "you must want this more than you've wanted anything else." i didn't really understand what they meant...
there were hints that the drive wasn't good, though. first, the people saying it wasn't.. second, feeling ashamed at certain flaws.. it was like "oh no, if i'm feeling that i must not be on the path.. ah ill deal with it later, lemme try to PCE first!" third, feeling ashamed at not being attentive.. like "oh i wasn't attentive to the senses for the past X minutes, crap im wasting time". luckily that wasn't my full-on mentality the entire way but it showed here+there. i didn't really notice how much more relaxing it was when i wasn't focused on that.
and the crux is, of course, belief in the drive.. "without this drive, how will i progress on the path? how will 'i' know that something is wrong?" does this sound familiar, yet? maybe like intuition? same story, here. when something actually
is wrong, 'i' notice and address it.. and it's intellect that supplies the processing power and the processing necessary to realize that. the self is just a superfluity on top of that. and when nothing is actually wrong (like no belief in the forefront).. well, 'i' felt something must have been wrong cause hey it wasn't a PCE, yet! so 'i' was looking, ever vigilant.. but the actualist method is not to ask "What is wrong with the moment that is now preventing me from a PCE?" it is to ask "How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?" and that's the point.. now "How am I feeling this moment of being alive?" it's meant as an appeal to the intellect and not the feelings.
also might be good to look at every day life. while pondering what i would ever do without my precious drive, i got up from my seat in the airport, took my things with me, walked to a map, looked up the food places nearby, stopped by and made purchases at two of them, went to the bathroom, then arrived back at my seat. i hardly thought about all that as my mind was occupied with wondering about the drive.. yet there i was doing all those complicated things without an incessant drive to do it.. just an understanding that i'm hungry and won't be able to eat well on the plane (or at the airport - salad from starbucks, meh - but i digress).
how do i know i can get rid of the drive? how do i know i can be harmless+care-free and it'll be OK? how will anything get done?! by now i realize how nice it is to be rid of beliefs, how nice it is to feel happy, harmless, careless... i have my goal in mind, i know how to go about it. if something comes up, then without this drive, the intellect will simply notice it and proceed from there, effortlessly without shame or rush. i think that knowing is
pure intent, an orientation towards the goal (EDIT: i
fleshed this out more).
Restlessnessthe drive also causes restlessness. lots of it.. like the one i experienced when arriving as i checked my email and all the comics and started typing this post (a long one, eh?) so i've got to work on it.
restlessness while in solitude is actually a good indicator that something is wrong. there's no external factors, so nothing really needs your attention, so.. why are you fretting? it's a good time to sit down, relax, "observe the stillness" as Trent put it (or was it the silence? it was very quiet there). i just did it now and there was definitely an underlying factor which i was simply overlooking via being restless. i did it a few hours ago and there was another factor there, too. hey the rest of the path should be easy - if restless, calm down and see why. rinse & repeat!
---
well that's me, fleshing out these thoughts as i write them. any questions/comments are welcome!
[1] for the theory that Buddha may have been AF, considering his quote: maybe he was being coy for whatever reason. i can't find the sutta, and out-of-context he could be saying anything. maybe he was being literal and by 'I' he meant the self or the Self. That s/Self would literally have gained nothing as it disappeared. maybe he was being literal and by 'I' he meant the flesh&blood body - the flesh&blood body has always been here, having a blast, as Richard puts it, so that too, I suppose, wouldn't have 'gained' anything - actually it would have 'lost' a whole bunch. in any case one 'gains' nothing by AF, in a literal sense, as the self simply vanishes. or maybe AF isn't Buddha's Enlightenment. but in any case, observe the distinction between his quote and Bill Hamilton's.
EDIT: 4:30PM talked about restlessness more
EDIT: 4:31PM split off restlessness into new section
EDIT: 4:31PM checked my email
EDIT: 4:31PM re-arranged restlessness section a bit
EDIT: 4:32PM restlessness restlessnessrestlessnessrestlessnessrestlessness
EDIT: 6:27PM updated to show this is my own reasoning
EDIT: 6:44PM-7:00PM expanded the enlightenment section a bit