This topic has probably been adressed here before, and I apologize if what I'm saying sounds trite! This post is motivated by noticing some imporant differences among my favorite prag-dharma teachers. For example "SE comes after the moment of cessation" vs Shinzen's claim that most awakenings occur gradually. Or "cessation is a gap in experience" (Daniel, Kenneth) vs "cessation can be experienced as PCE / CWO" (Culadasa, Burbea). I could go on. When I listen to some other teachers who I encounter for the first time (such as the TWIM guy on recent GV podcast), the differences become wild.

Pragmatic dharma can be perceived as an evolutionary step forward compared to traditionalist dharma: non-dogmatism, non-sectarianism, transparency, pluralism of goals, methods, and techniques... A pragmatic freedom from fixations on metaphysics, political ideologies, hierarchies, and personality cults. A more integral, meta-systemic perspective.

I wonder, however, whether there is a "next step" in the direction of deepening the postmodern/metamodern nature of pragmatic dharma. I speculate that this step may be made by opening to the view that the range of meditative possibilities of the neuroplastic human brain cannot be encompassed by any traditional or contemporary models, maps, paths, or levels; in contrast to the assumption that "either you have SE or you don't, and any other permanent shift in perception is less relevant". Just as there are numerous possible mental illnesses, there may be numerous possible types of desirable persistent meditative attainments, perhaps equally valuable (traditional ones, contemporary ones like actualist stuff, and maybe infinite possible attainments that are still undiscovered).

So, it's not just that "there are many paths to the top of the mountain," there are also many mountains one can climb. Not "one awakening with different flavors," but different dishes. I like the lesser-known term "plateau experiences" from Maslow, because it's very general and has no baggage (maybe it can be good for EPRC purposes?).

These different types of plateau experiences may not just depend on different types of practice, but also on individual neurological differences. That doesn't sound so strange when you remember that, for example, the same psychotropic medicine can be life-saving for one person or induce suicidal depression in another person.

Bottom line: when you listen to different teachers, the conceptions of awakening are so different that the "multiple mountains" theory seems more plausible than the "0.1% got it right and 99.9% got it wrong" theory. But that doesn't mean that all models and claims are true!

Any thoughts?

PS
I don't have any kind of attainment, so this is not motivated by a need to legitimize some personal BS experience as a new awakening

Griffin, I think I ultimately agree with your provisional hypothesis - there are many kinds of awakenings, and there are many ways to discover them all. The human mind, and the human brain, are the most complex things we know of. It makes sense that there are virtually endless combinations of experiences and methods leading to being awake, just as there are endless ways to learn, to grow, to become a fully functional adult.

Caveat: There are unquestionably similarities reported across many, many of the disciplines, practices, and religions claiming to provide doors to awakening that can't be ignored. Some of the practices are similar and the reports of the qualities of awakening are similar. Thus my qualified "I think I ultimately agree" statement above. In the end, there's no need for just one "WAY" or just one "MOUNTAIN."

There's a lot of room for "I don't know" in all of this.

There is no reason a person can't climb more than one mountain.

Shinzen has said awakening is multi-demensional. 

This article by Jack Kornfield discusses different types of awakening.

https://inquiringmind.com/article/2701_w_kornfield-enlightenments/



In this article Shinzen discusses gradual awakening:
https://www.lionsroar.com/on-enlightenment-an-interview-with-shinzen-young/

It's interesting to read threads in discussion forums where people describe what being awakened is like and seeing the different types of answers.

Jim Smith, what do YOU think about Griffin's issue? What has your own experience taught you about this stuff?

I quite like the way you've thought about this. Rob has some talks even discussing this in a lot of depth and detail - "questioning awakening" come to mind. 

Although I'm quite far from it in terms of meditative attainments, I've often wondered if Burbea's version of "cessation" is more akin to nirodha samapatti. If you read enough of his material, you get the sense that he's talking about the analog fading of perceptions much like what Daniel Ingram describes in MCTB for nirodha samapatti and elsewhere on this forum. His description of the state fits fruition, but the entry into the state and exit from it are much more like nirodha samapatti. Even his definition of stream-entry is basically around grokking the emptiness of all phenomena. The way a lot of practitioners who claim to be stream-entrants around here describe emptiness or experiences of emptiness is totally counter to how Burbea defines it, which not some void like the 7th jhana, but a property of phenomena. Abiding in emptiness would then be adopting the view that all phenomena are empty. Personally, I didn't start with Mahasi noting or even IMS based insight practice, the insight practice I do is largely couched in Burbea's framework so I don't even know if fruition occurs if you practice the way Burbea describes, but one of the endpoints of the investigation of emptiness (from Burbea's lens) appears to be the attainment of nirodha-samapatti. He'd probably argue that the next stop is his soulmaking dharma .

If this is the case, even if teachers are sometimes describing the same mountain (or if you like, a base camp on the way to the top for certain teachers), they come to vastly different conclusions about the path. Rob Burbea pooh-poohs the bare attention, or knowing exactly every sensation where it is (although he neglects the distinction that this bare-attention is devoid of a center-point which is how I think Daniel would describe 4th path) model of full awakening.

Burbea especially is very big on mystical experience, and some teachers are much less so. 

At the end of the day, I think for those of us who are farther behind on the meditative path have to take a little bit of what teachers say on faith, likely fabricate/unfabricate our experience somewhat based on what we read, and hopefully practice will lead us to freedom (or whatever our goals may be). 

I agree with both your hypothesis and the reasoning behind it. When I look at the reported day-to-day experiences and behaviors of people from different traditions I see a lot of variation.

I also see that some practices (paths) work well for some people and not for others. It would be nice if there were a way to identify which path would be most likely to produce desired results for any particular individual and circumstance. Stepping away from the theory that all practices lead to the same place would probably be helpful to that end. 

> Bottom line: when you listen to different teachers, the conceptions of awakening are so different that the "multiple mountains" theory seems more plausible than the "0.1% got it right and 99.9% got it wrong" theory. But that doesn't mean that all models and claims are true!

Instead of considering this concept through the "multiple mountains" theory, I prefer to contemplate it within the framework of a broader factor, that allows to group the different models, practices, traditions, etc. That factor is an axis that has "authenticity" as a goal at one end of the spectrum and "perfectionism" at the other. There may be certain overlaps between the two of them here and there, but at the core they are opposites. Or complementary opposites, if we put it in Taoist terms. I believe it's a dichotomy that we face over and over again along the way. Deep down, it is a very human dichotomy, which transcends the realm of meditation.

The idea of "one mountain" being opposed to "multiple mountains" brings to mind ideas about the ego, about atman and brahman; the oneness of god or sangha as opposed to everyone for themselves. In a sense each of us is nondually "the seer and the seen" and thus everything while at the same time we have this individual ego thing going on as the context for mutual relations amongst our species.


Be that as it may...


griffin said:


Pragmatic dharma can be perceived as an evolutionary step forward compared to traditionalist dharma: non-dogmatism, non-sectarianism, transparency, pluralism of goals, methods, and techniques... A pragmatic freedom from fixations on metaphysics, political ideologies, hierarchies, and personality cults. A more integral, meta-systemic perspective.

I wonder, however, whether there is a "next step" in the direction of deepening the postmodern/metamodern nature of pragmatic dharma.



———————
Or, not.


“Pragmatic dharma” is based on the teachings of the buddha, thus the term “dharma.”

Old wine in new bottles.


Postmoderns and meta moderns constantly rediscover the perennial philosophy. Many patent or copyright their rediscoveries and have every incentive to regard them as sufficiently different as to be "new." Wealth, fame, perks and the illusion of power are the devil in the details. Probably always were.



It is notable that coca cola acknowledges it is “a bottling company.” The beverages might as well be water. Safer to drink at the source but not an option for 99.9%, given coca cola bottling company’s dominance.  In maui they have been pouring bottled water on hot spots.




We may be dealing with attachment to methods and means here. There is nothing complicated about meditation. Nothing modern or ancient about it or its fruits. 


Pragmatically, we still turn to the buddha for enlightenment. We parse the pali. We search our own souls.

Griffin wrote:



Replying to that part, I wrote my thoughts (not my experiences):


Then I added some references that I thought were relevant to the subject for the edification of anyone interested.

My opinion is that the Buddha taught one mountain, you end suffering by letting go of attachments and aversions, you let go of attachments to self by recognizing self is not worth being attached to because wherever you look you can only find things that are not-self. You should practice mindfulness all day long and you should make the body, feelings, and mind tranquil before trying to attain insight. The seven factors of awakening include relaxation.

But what did the Buddha really teach? We don't have his words in the original language he spoke them. I think each person has to try to understand the sutras in terms of their own experiences because they don't make sense to me until I actually experience what they seem to be talking about.

And is the other 99.9% good or not? An improvement? Better but at something different? I don't reject other teachings just because I don't believe they come from the Buddha.

I think it is not good that so many people are not aware of what Shinzen says about gradual awakening and what Kornfield says about the gateless gate.

My own experience brought me to the view I quoted about Ajahn Chah because I have had many different types of experiences in meditation. They seemed to be changing brain function, turning on and off different regions. I didn't think changing the perception of self in the brain helped me let go of attachments and aversions, I do find that relaxation (activating the parasympathetic nervous system, deactivating the sympathetic nervous system) and mindfulness in meditation and dailylife (activating the experiential network in the brain and deactivating the default network) do help me let go of attachments and aversions. Those two changes in the nervous system seem to me to be very simple and very productive in ending suffering and you can experience them from the first time you meditate - if you practice like this - this - and - this. Insight adds to that over the longer term.

I also agree with Bhante Vimalaramsi where he includes relaxation in his meditation instructions and that awakening should include behavioral changes.

I think it's better to measure progress by what happens in daily life rather than what happens in meditation.

Well, it seems to me that in StF Rob describes cessation as an undescribable type of experience rather than as a gap or oblivion:

@jhanicceramic

Here are the excerpts from a sutta AN 10.7 that Burbea mentions; the topic seems to me to be nirodha samapatti, and it is referred that some kind of experience still remains in NS. In sutta 10.6 almost the same words are said by the Buddha.

I love those passages in StF (in addition to everything else, it's my most read meditation manual). They're so mysterious, so challenging to understand from the perspective of someone who hasn't even attained a stable 1st jhana. All of this is so mysterious and interesting! Reading this, Ingram's work, Culadasa's work makes me feel like a blind man groping in the dark, trying to understand what all these meditation masters are teaching.

At best, all I can do is consider the fact that each person experienced it differently and brought some of their preconceptions/past understanding in to then analyze what is really an indescribable experience. Is Burbea referring to the fact that the moments before and after a cessation are indescribable (the unbuilding and rebuilding of the house of perception) or the experience itself?

Any debate between people who haven't been there is likely not to result in anything more than an interesting discussion.

From MN 43:
The import distinction here is "faculties are exceptionally clear". This is the most enigmatic part of the sutta - are they referring to a gap in experience but a state of aliveness or is it that faculties, in their exceptionally clear state, cognize (or rather are released from cognizing) in some way.

So cool, so interesting, and gets me all jazzed up to practice.

Don't we already define permanent waking experience/consciousness attainment of 

as 4th Path?


In other words Sāriputta being an Arhat have each part of his brain activated just once because (knowingly or not! knowing how and why things are like they are is Buddha's business, not Arhat's) he conditioned his brain to have activity in parts of nervous system which handle faculties happen just once - once pulse.

One should know what 1th path is more or less about having already experienced these things and in normal waking experience. There is just difference between having such experience of unbinding at some time in some way and having this experience of unbinding locked in to the point nothing else ever happens and why we don't just have one path.

Whether some random seizure was SE or not... well, actually it is best to always assume it was A&P until one actually gets dharma experientially.

Yes, I love the mistery too

This thread may interest you.

I've seen that thread . Actually when I started digging into the way different teachers described cessation experiences, that was the first one I came across. Personally, I subscribe to the Burbea camp - his bar is incredibly high as nirodha samapatti is an attainment that within Ingram's model puts one at 3rd or 4th path. Ingram has described nirodha samapatti as a high meditative attainment but not something that one draws rich insight from, but I think that's because his book more or less pushes one to practice using bare attention and allow insights to arise on their own. Burbea takes a more intellectual approach which involves using insights as lenses, and then use reflection of what happened during meditation to grok the insight which a shift in approach I think. Or at least that's my interpretation.

Griffin, out of curiosity, how do you practice? I'm curious to meet others who may have taken Rob's practice approach all the way to his definition of stream entry but I suspect that number is likely very small relative to those who claim 4th path attainments through the Mahasi/noting methods. 

As an aside, I'll drop this Burbea quote from his talk "in praise of restlessness". I think it's directly relevant to this discussion:This talk is among many reasons I love Burbea - he critiques basically every angle of awakening. He critiques the mushroom culture that sometimes exists in the broader western dharma scene (broad generalization, but it's the 40+ dharma practitioners you run into at IMS or other sanghas) and also the striving culture found in pragmatic dharma. 

Also I can't help but notice the synchronicity of me contemplating this concept for the past few days, and this post showing up on dharmaoverground. Feels like kismet

Nice synchronicity! Burbea's quote seems very relevant here. By the way, in the interviews recently posted on YT, he mentioned that he "doesn't claim being an arahant or anything like that" IIRC, so I assume his definition of 4th path is probably different than some models around here.

I practice TMI (with various personal modifications, but being fanatically loyal to the overall map). Due to different inner and outer obstacles, I am not yet at higher stages, but when I get there, I will surely integrate some of Burbea's insight stuff : )

Many of the comments in this thread focus on which meditative experiences are indicative of attainments but another interesting "topography" question is what life is like after the mind has changed. In a sense, it matters less what the exact nature of meditative events are, if the long-term results of those events are greatly different for each individual. We don't talk much about off-cushion experiences here, because we are somewhat meditation-log centered but I do notice a very wide range of reported outcomes: from somewhat less clinging, to faster return to equanimity, to basic sanity, to the end of all worry and discontent, to the end of all suffering, to bliss and joy, to consistent nondual freedom. And while I put those in a kind of progressive list, I do not find that these stated results align greatly, or even at all, with the attainments claimed. These lasting changes to how life is experienced may be useful as signposts because they last much longer than meditative experiences and therefore can be examined more fully and without having to rely exclusively on memory. Also, for people planning their path, having an idea of the nature of the destination, rather than just the nature of the signposts can be helpful. For example, Angelo Dilullo is very big on talking about the phenomenology of off-cushion life, for himself and for all the people he interviews. I think that might serve as a model.

"Gap between experience, oblivion" 

I will add my (not) experience of cessation (path moment) and from what I can tell it is not an oblivion nor is it gap between experience. 

I can tell about it any number of things "afterwards" but nothing about it "while-cessation" , actually not even that. 

As a matter of assumptions I could say I was restarted. Or. Could say I never existed until now (after the cessation). Or I could say I can't tell what the heck happened and I'm not sure if even this afterwards is real or not. 

Did "it" even happen or am I just imagining? Can I trust this memory of mine??? Hm ...? 

But folks with more direct knowledge of the paths can recognise certain terrains in the matter of fact describing in day to day logs/reports. 

What is the focus right now? What the flavour? What the story? What the feeling tone? ... 

Its good we have such folks around here to give a helping hand when needed. 

For that I'm great full. 

Btw I did experience "gaps" between experience many a times. I don't call that cessation. Oblivion ... well if you are in there conscious of it I would consider 5th Jhana or other immaterial Jhana. 

p.s. reply written under influence of rose wine. Slainte!  

Hey... where'd he go?

You only need a definition of "awakened" if you think it is not a gradual process.

If you think it is gradual, then however you measure it (less suffering, feeling like you don't have a self, acting unselfishly, etc), wherever you are at, that is your level of attainment.

If it is really gradual, then milestones are arbitrary and therefore meaningless.  If you are ascending a stairway there are natural divisions, the steps, if you are going up a ramp, there aren't natural divisions.

As far as I can tell most people awaken gradually but don't beieve it is a gradual process. 

https://www.themindingcentre.org/dharmafarer/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/59.2a-Atthaka-Uposatha-S-1-a8.20.pdf

To the contrary, I know quite a few people who can legitimately claim to be "awake" and to a person they will tell you that they had a singular experience of awakening that occurred in one particular moment. Setting up the conditions for that moment typically takes a long time and a lot of practice, but there is a "thing" that happens to us that upsets the apple cart. There is way too much personal reporting of awakening experiences for anyone to deny this, Shinzen Young or no Shinzen Young.

If someone can report here that they awakened gradually, then please post that experience. Otherwise, the posted reports of momentary weakening events here on DhO and elsewhere hold sway, IMHO.

​​​​​​​

Here's an interesting story, of a (reported) full awakening happened at the end of an intense (business/family) week, yet she had been in a self-less compassion mode for years previous to that week. Worth to hear the whole interview, but you can skip to 27:00 where she describes her awakening.

Awakening Story: The Way of Compassion. An interview with Simcha Lev an Israeli filmmaker and mother of four who had one of the most radical awakenings I've ever heard of.  What's more fascinating is it seemed to have come right out of the blue. This woman exemplifies the way of compassion and opening to unfiltered reality through the heart! I think you're going to get a lot out of this!

I said most not all. 

And I should have said "awakened" according to the "mountain", the type of awakening, the Buddha was teaching about in the Pali canon.

People who awakened following a definition that involves a dramatic experience obviously would not believe they awakened gradually.

The people who have dramatic experiences beilelve they are awakened and write about them.

But the majority don't have dramatic experiences, don't know they are awkened or are unsure because the vocal minoroity have defined awakening as dramatic, and since they don't know or are unsure they are awakened, don't write about it. 

My opinion is based on 1) Shinzen's observation I linked to above, 2) the quote from the sturas I gave above, and considering that 3) the fact that there are so many definitions of awakening that the number of people awakened by the way it is defined in the Pali Canon is smaller than the total number of people who are awakened including those awakened by definitions that include a dramatic experience in their definition.

Examaples are in the link to shinzen and this article that mentions the gateless gate.

​​​​​​​Jim, there are very clear symptoms of being awake, whether one passes through momentarily or slowly, that are still definitive markers of the thing. Those markers have been described here and elsewhere repeatedly, so the notion that these people aren't aware of their awakening is kind of insulting to those folks.

Maybe you can find one of these people you're describing and invite them to post about it here? I'd love to hear their story!

It is not insulting if someone else has different definition of being awake.

This can be both because person didn't attain it but also because they did attain something more. Neither case is a good reason to get triggered. IMHO.
Therefore IMHO best not to use term "awakening" as shortcut. It would require being precise about definition and if that's the case why not use better more precise term to begin with?

BTW.
The specific brain change we call 4th path does indeed feel like sudden awakening.
Definitely sudden change and of magnitude which was not anticipated and which made all previous experiences seem more like poor mans approximations which they literally were.

Therefore on this one I do agree with you.
I might even add that people who insist on awakening being gradual might have just hung up their hat prematurely on these approximations.

That said I would advice anyone against using suddenness of change as indication any specific change is the fruit of 4th path. Technically its possible to approximate sudden awakening too. So much so that to say one is awake because of anything will always sound ignorant.

And the best advice I can give is just to never stop practice, never stop growing, never stop getting to the bottom of things. Then even if assumption was incorrect it won't matter. And it my understanding that it was what Buddha meant - not having some ascetic-like liberation even as price of enough effort. Anyways.

Wonders will never cease! ​​​


​​​​​​​Peace, Ni Nurta.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Back to the OP here, I do want to say that in my experience the fruits of vipassana practice and the paths model therein do seem to provide a different sort of result when compared to nodal awareness from the direct path methods of Mahayana Buddhism,

   Whether “awakening” happens gradually or suddenly is an old aporia in zen. It frames the platform sutra.


There's a old sufi story about three companions on the road, all hungry, who came upon a tree with a single fruit. They each wanted it and they decided they would sleep on the problem of who should eat the fruit, and in the morning compare their dreams, and give the fruit to the one with the most compelling dream. Next day one companion related his dream, he had been swept up to heaven and muhammed had told him that it was he who must be awarded the fruit. The second companion gave a similar account. The third companion said that in his dream, he had been directed by the lord to immedicately get up and eat the fruit, which he had done.


   In a sense we are all awake, all enlightened. Ask anyone if they are awake. Yes, of course.

   When are we awake? Right now. When were we not awake? If I am wakefulness itself, I have always been awake. I am mindfulness, awareness, consciousness. I am no one else. Sentient being. One with all sentient being in all times everywhere.


   I love your faith and your earnestness, jim. It comes down to “many are called but few are chosen.” And, “the last shall be first and the first shall be last.”


   Many have some sort of awakening. Often it occurs without preparation or training, to people very young. Many of these awakenings are transformative, a rebirth into light and virtue. It is generally after some sort of transformative experience that people begin to practice. Some awakenings are subtle, some thermonuclear. Churchill said, “Most people stumble across the truth at some point in their life but generally they just pick themselves up and get on with business as usual.”

   So we have the stars of the mindfulness universe, people who have awakened in a spectacular manner and have great gifts of communication. Buddha, jesus, muhammed, and many many others, the gospel according to blahblah6743. Even these paragons are not perfect exemplars. We need to make our own way.

   The great heroes of spirituality are mostly dead and it is their eulogies we get, the hagiography. Moderns with no apparent flaws are so rare that I personally try not to look too closely and take them at their word so long as it makes sufficient sense. And I go my own way. 

   But other than some inspiration and ideas, just more conditioning, it is up to us as individuals to make what spiritual progress we can. We can’t make lightning strike but we can become gradually better persons through practice. Even psychedelics are of no use after one has gotten the basic experience; there is nothing left to shake loose but still a lot of room for improvement. We want those short cuts, that instant gatification, that peak moment slash dopamine hit. It is the deep impression that keeps us slogging through the mud of those low times with some dignity and grace and usefulness to others that is the true gold, not a collection of greatest hits from yesteryear. Aka "insight." Give me bliss anytime. Not that insights aren't nice, "all you need is love" etc etc. But bathing in love is something else. A picture of the ocean may recall the ocean to those who have been there but it isn't the same as getting wet in the real ocean. And insights can be misleading. The truth must be used as a key to set you free. Once over the stream we can throw away the key. All becomes practice.

   Even gradual progress is incremental as we notice significant improvements at intervals. I am not “awaker” as such by practice  but I am less in my own way. Life is still unsatisfactory but my responses to this fact are more creative and progressive, less destructive, over time, mainly through applying patience and kindness. I was probably more awake during my “awakening” than I ever have been since but I really don’t remember. The highest enlightenment is unknown.

   Anyhows, I honor jim’s insistence on practice as the essence of enlightenment. Awakening is an event, enlightenment is forever. Awakening is form, enlightenment is emptiness. Awakening is time, enlightenment is infinity.


   So, wake up and practice. Every day.

When you hear dirty story
wash your ears.

When you see ugly stuff
wash your eyes.

When you get bad thoughts
wash your mind.

and

Keep your feet muddy.

​​​​​​​(Nanao Sakaki)

Do you have any good phenomenological descriptions of Mahayana's "non-duality"?

From my side I can say that what I call fruit of 4th path only has phenomenological descriptions (things I would myself pick up or confirm when pointed out) compatible with eg. Daniel's descriptions ONLY when I revert changes/attainments I did on different axis of development related to having synesthesia. Some phenomenological descriptions match nicely but some would even sound opposite - eg. I would not say "in the seeing only the seen" because that 4th path change made my all sense synesthesia works so amazingly well that it makes no sense... I mean by "only seen" I would not describe experiencing sun shining on skin (not even mine - pure experience without reference) or smell of the air just by interacting with visual stimuli (eg. video). As soon as all these effect are gone the only seen part of seeing is absolutely obvious - before 4th path there is something else there. I would call it not agency as much as "body image" which are the copies of experiences.

Regarding body image at "normal" 4th path it is as much gone as in mine but term like "body image" or descriptions like "I do not experience my body, only change of pressure as momentary touch sensations" even though it is referring to the same change as saying "in touching only the touch" - though again I have activity on all sense doors in touch so different phenomenological description comes to mind.

Which brings me to Mahayana... I never really read sensible phenomenological descriptions of Mahayana Arhats (or Bodhisattvas?). From bits and pieces of things I did read the image of mind which crystalizes does feel like it should be more or less the same as Theravada and pragmatic dharma. The latter having more beta brainwaves and actual monastic traditions develop less beta and more alpha - these monks kinda seem like less "awake" in conventional sense. 

Anyways, imho fruit 4th path is singular mountain to climb in landscape of many other mountains.
Just using phenomenological descriptions alone would make it seem like there are many different 4th path mountains and in reality mountains have sides to them and even at the top one usually looks in just one direction.

Ni Nurta --


​​​​​​​In my experience of it, briefly:

- No sense of self/other, no ownership
- Immediacy: all perception is NOW
- View of all of perception, all at once
- Timelessness
- Simplicity of experience: THIS is all there is
- Wide-angle perspective
- Wholeness: the view is not made of smaller pieces but appears as one thing, interconnected
- Stillness and silence, even amid chaos and cacophony

​​​​​​​

We seem to agree on this, too!

My experience is that there is congruence between Theravada/Vipassana/4th Path and non-dual/direct path/Mahayana experiences and fruits of the practices. I have no idea how to classify all the various fruits. I'm not that smart and, frankly, I'm not motivated to do that kind of mental processing anymore. I accept and celebrate the similarities and the differences.

ramakrishna, trans max muller

​​​​​​​
139. Two men went into a garden. The worldly-wise man no sooner entered the gate than he began to count the number of the mango-trees, how many mangoes each tree bore, and what might be the approximate price of the whole orchard. The other went to the owner, made his acquaintance, and quietly going under a mango-tree began to pluck the fruit and eat it with the owner's consent. Now who is the wiser of the two? Eat mangoes, it will satisfy your hunger. What is the good of counting the leaves and making vain calculations? The vain man of intellect is uselessly busy in finding out the 'why and wherefore' of creation, while the humble man of wisdom makes acquaintance with the Creator and  enjoys Supreme Bliss in this world.

I recall a conversation here about 10 years ago... the answer if I remember it right, the general concensus was "well, you get what you optimize for". People going for spaceous mind get... spaceous mind. People who go for sensate clairity get... sensate clairity. People who go for stoic non-reactivity get... stoic non-reactivity. etc. etc. So pick your gurus and practice frameworks wisely.

Sounds like anything goes, but as Griffin says: don't turn personal BS experience into a "new awakening".

If there is a core to awakening (the one mountain of the many mountains)... it seems like pretty much all awakened people are very clear on the actual nature of "their self/mind that was spiritual seeking". So there's that at a minimum. Hard to call it awakening without that. We awaken from a false belief about the self/mind. 

I tend to go with the developmental tipping point theory of awakening, so there is lots of room for refinement post awakening, but it's the kind of refinement that can only occur post awakening. The kind of refinement that occurs pre awakening has the nature of "the self/mind that was spiritual seeking" so to speak and it has a particular urgency/desperation that you can almost smell. But there's nothing wrong with the stink, It's okay to get a little rank when you are on an adventure. And it is an adventure.

One thing I learned about recently, somewhat related to this topic, because it may make us rethink "no-thoughts" models of awakening:

https://www.iflscience.com/people-with-no-internal-monologue-explain-what-its-like-in-their-head-57739

Maybe some people naturally have some kind of awakening-like mental attributes, but, having being born with them, take them for granted and don't put them in a spiritual context.

Depersonalization-derealization disorder also comes to mind, but in a different (psychopathological) context.

Yeah, there are lots of ways biological variations or disease or insanity can seem like awakening, at least according to some model of awakening.

And sociopathic gurus will always try to justify their failings/insanity as marks of their mega-enlightenment: I'm berating my student into awakening, I'm not an angry asshole. I'm sleeping around because I'm giving them tantric initiation, I'm not a sex addict. I'm free of emotions, I'm not emotionally repressed. I'm very strict because the student requires it, I'm not on a power trip. etc. etc. etc.

It's our own conscience that ultimately protects us from false paths and leads us on our own personal path. We need to be honest and responsible and not look for easy answers. Biological variations could be fairly permanent/hard-wired or it could be something that changes over time. Even though thoughts and emotions and other people make life difficult, awakening is not about crushing thoughts or stifiling emotions or social isolation. There are plenty of models of awakening that are basically excuses for indulging in your fantasies --- there will always be a tradition or teacher that will congratulate your biological variation and feed your delusions and sell you "the easy and fast way". 

So really the answer to the koan of "one mountain or many mountains?" is "all I know is my path is my path". I'm pretty sure you wouldn't get hit with the zen stick if you answered that way.   As long as it wasn't just talk. 

Fully own your practice and things will work out the way they should. You'll look back and see how it basically had to happen that way, success and mistakes included. You could even say that "the path" is making good mistakes. But if you mindlessly follow authorities or simplistically try to duplicate someone else, you will never reach the end of it.

We can't 100% know the right path until we start walking down it. Once we're on the path, then we get little hints/pointers along the way, and that's good enough. No need to figure everything out ahead of time.

I would struck you and hard at that.

"How to get struck less hard?" is your koan for today, if you are up to the challenge

Yours friendly Zen assistant,
Ni

ps. Give yourself virtual smack for having the question "why not how to not get struck at all?". We are teaching serious Zen here!

Your strike is like three tiny farts. poof poof poof 

Inner monologue - I think I have a hybrid of this. I don't experience a series of words forming sentences most of the time, and I certainly don't have another person's voice doing the narration. I do experience the appearance of a word or two, mostly as labels for an object I observe or as a name for an emotion I see arising or that someone else is expressing. I wondered if this hybrid (my term, obviously) is common, and the article Griffin posted said:

​​​​​​​

I like the many mountains hypothesis. The assumption being the mountains and valleys lie on a low rank manifold of a very high dimensional qualia space. The very fact that one talks about a mountain at all is an assumption that the actual experience can actually be shared amongst many people is already an assumption of a low rank manifold of shared qualia. Hence the single mountain is an assertion that the low rank manifold has only one global optimum which seems like an oversimplification of the actual high dimensional qualia space.

​​​​​​​From my own experience I've had different peak experiences based on different seed meditations e.g. starting from a pure land meditation, vs note gone vs contemplations on tarot vs meditations on bardo. So based on my own observations the space feels more like multi mountain 

Hector - could you please restate this in language I can understand? 

Thanks - I just want to understand your point.

It's the equivalent saying a single number like IQ is representative of intelligence when in actual fact intelligence is multi dimensional and dependent on who is doing the measurement.

​​​​​​​A more nuanced view would be it depends on who is measuring.

​​​​​​​For example a mountain can be parametrized as height = function(latitude, longitude) so the choice of parametrization for summit already projects something complex to a single number. This doesn't represent the mountain as an object so is already a reification and simplification. To define a summit you need to define a scalar that defines the measure over which you can take the maximum to find the summit which is already a reification of the Tao.

Thanks. That's helpful.

I think you're trying too hard now 

This is interesting because, if I remember, you described seeing simplified cartoon-like representations of things like airplanes and cars when you hear them (if it was someone else, forgive me). And that, apparently, is quite common, as is seeing mental images of food that one has eaten, etc., when remembering it. I never get anything like that. I don't have full-on aphantasia, but I'm quite far toward that end of the spectrum. On the other hand, I have lots of internal monologue, dialog, and even random voices in my head. It is possible, based on a rich dataset of two data points :-), that people who see more in their heads hear less, and vice-versa. It's also possible that different practices will effect people with strong internal visual activity differently from people with strong internal audio activity.

More generally, Griffin mentions that people may be born already having the operating modes that people hope to get through awakening. This being the case, and assuming, as you suggest, there are spectra for all of these, where you start out is bound to affect, not only what you set as a goal, but also what you count as a significant change. When I reached the stages where internal talk first went away, and later came back without identification, those were big deals for me. But a person who has never been bothered by internal talk might not even notice such changes.

​​​​​​​In a similar vein, someone who suffers from anxiety or depression, and finds a path that leads to the end of those states, might consider the new state to be a map marker, while someone who starts meditating without anxiety or depression might not even be looking at those issues in charting their course. 

Hector,
General idea seems understandable and what is meant by "low rank manifold" and "high dimensional qualia space" can be derived from the context in which it was used and name itself.

Could you however explain more exact meaning behind especially this low rank manifold. Why "low rank"? Maybe throw some interesting tidbits about this concept - model in which you do it would be the best up to you - as long as it is valid model and not specifically made to sound hard it should be good to get general idea what something is.

My understanding is "low rank" refers to limited number of parameters which can be and range in which they can be adjusted - where wider range here is the same as having higher number of possible configurations of parameters but not exactly the same.
High dimensional qualia - this would be all possible mind configurations with all possible ways signals within the brain can be configured.

Give me feedback if I decoded your message right and/or send correction vectors my way if I did not


Which path would you say you are at?

Fruit of 4th path as I started to call it seems to be about specific change related to... "have an ideas but more research is needed ^_^ - this will do for now" which is separate change from other changes - some of them are more or less related to it and if in some views there is relation it also seem to exist in other views. 

For example I have other attainment which is related to cessation of focus signals and seems to be much rarer but does happen to some degree to people as indicated by their phenomenological descriptions. Heck I think Daniel's kinda-AF-related-but-not-quite-or-at-all practices which led him to "other axis of development" effects went definitely in that direction but not quite what I am talking about and more like mountain or "band" in-between ;)

Then to phrase it in universally understood mountain language - there would be a whole range of mountains and (dharma) attainments would be to not as much climbing them but flatten them to the ground. And once we have nice space to make parking out of then it could be anything in there before - many mountains, one large mountain... maybe forest?... or lively city with people living their lives... and now it is just flat boring parking where the only activity per any space is cars quickly moving in and out and a lot of nothing happening waiting for something momentary to happen.


Being a big pile of rock and dirt mountain can be parametrized as how likely it is for any specific person to climb it versus failing/falling and harming him/herself in the process ;)

ps. Had to do some edits after posting

I think all perceptual changes are subject to change, cannot be owned and retained and therefore trying to own them and keep them is an exercise in futility and frustration. I think through perceptual exercises we can create vantage points of observation for seeing how the mind moves in response to phenomena. Through seeing this our mental models of who and what we are and what 'all this' is changes. It changes the way we relate to the world and to ourselves. I think this leads to a permanent change in affect. From a slight agitation which can only increase we enter into a slight relaxation that can only deepen.

This change in mental models and this move from agitation to relaxation is permanent and we get to keep this.

​​​​​​​This is the only real mountain, all other mountains are mole hills

Sorry didn't mean to be overly obscure, low rank manifold comes from linear algebra and just means you can describe the system with fewer variables than it has. Like the surface of a ball can be parametrized by two variables latitude and longitude and is a two dimensional manifold embedded in a three dimensional space. In functional neuroscience it just means assuming neurons are correlated so you can predict the behavior of a larger number with fewer factors.

​​​​​​​I'm not sure what path I am on (since I don't believe in attainments as a priviledged location) but the progress of insight loop is starting to feel familiar. I'm at the location where I am hypothesizing that humans might be connected and exploring if the collective unconscious is shared.

I don't think we disagree about the flattening the mountain to a parking lot. Height is just a value judgement. Flattening is just the low rank manifold assumption. You can now pick a different variable in your parking lot to mean height like 1 - distance from center of the parking lot to mean your local summit. I'm just asserting that flattening mountains to parking lots is an oversimplification and there might be many different mountains that might look symmetric. So another way to view the mountain is a spiky ball where all the summits are the same height and no summit is privileged over another or it depends on the viewer. You can do a handstand and suddenly an ocean trench is a summit, so it really depends on the view.

Hope this get included in the post compilation.

I am glad so many of you find this topic interesting, thanks for all the responses!

I would like to propose a parallel between this issue and stages of adult development outlined by Kegan, Wilber etc. Here I will use Kegan's stages:

STAGE 3: Socialized mind = Traditionalist dharma
- Fixation on dogma and authority, rejection of any new ideas

STAGE 4: Self-authoring mind = "One-mountain" pragmatic dharma
- Pragmatism within one model of spiritual development

STAGE 5: Self-transforming mind = Integral/metamodern pragmatic dharma
- Meta-systemic perspective open to many different spiritual paradigms and goals

​​​​​​​

Griffin, if you like that... I suspect you'll love this:  Stages Of Ego Development By Susan Cook-Greuter | Alex Hickman

Here's the fuller write-up: apacoaches.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Cook-Greuter-2007-Ego-Development-Nine-Levels-of-Increasing-Embrace.pdf

​​​​​​​Rock on!

Thanks!

Here is an interesting definition of enlightenment by Shinzen Young:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRtBa4nOO04

• Free to be inside your mind and body, like it was before,  but also free to move outside of your mind and body.  

• To inhabit, briefly, anyone's mind and body, to merge with them.  

• Or to embrace the entire universe.  

• Or to abide at the still point of the turning world,  beyond time and space,  the nothingness that precedes the Big Bang,  so to speak (metaphorically speaking).

  Being out of your body is one thing, and being out of your mind is another.

  John lennon said, "It's all in the mind, you know."

  The sufis might say, "be in your mind but not of it."

- uh oh  

I think it's safer and much more easer to work with the realm of sensation, feeling tones, mind states and really just note-notice them and carry on without much conceptual philosophical chatter which only adds to more confusion. 

of course I might be wrong in all I've commented in your post so ... take it with a handful of salt!  
​​​​​​​Best wishes Jim! 

After embracing the universe, laundry! 

At last someone who claims Enlightenment and yet knows a thing or two about what they are talking about

It sounds like Shinzen can at least found the right mountain range. Buddha peak seems to be still covered by thick clouds though.