I thought I would post this thread to perhaps give people a better feel for Tibetan Buddhism, and how it relates to the Theravadan approach most commonly seen in this community. I hope that by doing this I can show people who perhaps have interest in the Tibetan Buddhist school, but are unsure about what it entails, what the bones of it are essentially. Most importantly, my purpose is to say where I see that MCTB 4th path fits into the Tibetan system, and provide knowledge of a clearly delineated path which can be followed after 4th path. After I reached 4th path I was extremely confused as to what to do. Really, the answer is quite simple, just keep meditating, but having a clear path to follow was very helpful. If people have differing opinions on what I say below, I would be happy to talk to about it.


So first we have the Hinayana: The first 3 paths of MCTB are within the Hinayana path, but the 4th path is the entrance into the Mahayana. 4th path is the first true glimpse, or stable attainment of emptiness. In the Tibetan model, 4th path corresponds to the first of four attainments mentioned in the Heart Sutra.

A note: I think that one consciously needs to apply the most effort in the Hinayana path as opposed to the latter two. I have heard the effort required to attain enlightenment referred to as super-human effort, and this incredible effort must be present throughout the entire journey. As well, devotion is often mentioned as a factor which must be present all along the journey, and is composed of three parts: Aspiration to achieve the goal, Inspiration taken from the examples of masters, and Certainty in the truth of the dharma, based on personal experience. I think the Hinayana requires the greatest conscious effort because the first real glimpse of certainty, or emptiness has yet to arise. What I'm trying to say is that in the Hinayana you must press on relentlessly if you want to experience results.


Mahayana: The Mahayana path is broken into four attainments, the last being the entrance into Vajrayana. These four attainments are outlined in the Heart Sutra:
1) Form does not differ from Emptiness
2) Emptiness does not differ from Form.
3) Form is Emptiness
4) Emptiness is Form

Some details on these paths:
1) Form is seen to be negated by emptiness. While the 3 MCTB paths prior to 4th path provide increased clarity, and a clearing out of mental clutter, 4th path is a glimpse of the infinite beyond conceptual thought. This attainment almost has a crude feel, you have form, a thought, and then that form is negated by emptiness. Thoughts are perceived as solid phenomena in relation to emptiness. Personally I found this extremely irritating, and mentally jarring, because while my mind still strove to find stability, nothing could remain. The habit of grasping was extremely strong, but every grasped thing was forcefully negated before my eyes.

2) Emptiness itself is now perceived to have a subtle solidity or form to it. It is still totally empty in the sense that it negates all form, but there is now more of a fluid feel to it, which removes somewhat jarring contrast experienced between form and emptiness in attainment 1.

3) All form is now perceived to be emptiness. The world takes on somewhat of a bland, uniform appearance, clearly empty, upon seeing, of any ascribable form. However this stage still has the subtle frustration which is present in 1 and 2, which comes from fighting the recognition of emptiness, and truly hoping to find stable solidity in form.

4) The fourth stage is the entrance into the Vajrayana, and the entrance into Nirvana, or a state which is at peace. When the 4th attainment dawns, the world regains its form, yet is still totally empty. However neither of these things are a big deal, most noticeably there is now an underlying sense of peace ever present.

Note: Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism by Chogyam Trungpa contains very detailed, helpful descriptions of the stages of the Mahayana path, which I was very grateful to have (the whole book is awesome). The Mahayana path is the Bodhisattva path, and developing compassion toward others is necessary to move though the Mahayana. The Lojong teachings, which are comprised of the mind training slogans, are extremely helpful for developing compassion. Also, I would like to say that I found the Mahayana to be very much composed of beginning to make the journey from the mind to the heart, from rigid fixed conceptual thinking into a more open awareness.

Vajrayana: For the purposes of this model, in order to keep things straightforward, and due to my lack of knowledge, I am not including the Varjrayana practices of guru yoga, which I understand to include visualizing one self as a deity in various ways. For this model, what the Vajrayana entails is the practices of Mahamudra, or Dzogchen, depending on which school of Tibetan Buddhism you are affiliated with, or which practice you are more attracted to. Personally I practiced Mahamudra, partially because I took refuge in the Kagyu lineage, but also because of the two, I was much more drawn to it.

The journey of Mahamudra is broken into four yogas, or paths, each of which has several stages. For a very detailed description of these stages I would recommend Mind at Ease by Traleg Kyabgon. The book I primarily studied on the practice of Mahamudra was Confusion Arises as Wisdom by Ringu Tulku, which has very straightforward, clear, non-technical instructions. I am very grateful to have found this book!

The fruition of Mahamudra is the recognition of the nature of mind, seeing at once the unsolid, fundamentally changing nature of reality, and the great unchanging essence, or emptiness, which underlies everything. Mahamudra means "great symbol"; Chogyam Trungpa said, "Mahamudra is the great symbol which stands for itself". In seeing the true nature of one thought, you understand the true nature of all thoughts. In one glimpse of Mahamudra, you know the true nature of all phenomena. That true nature is utterly indescribable and all pervading. It is your innate capacity to recognize it.


I hope that this has helped, or at least been interesting. One thing I would say in connection with maps of the spiritual path is that I have found them to be extremely helpful in my own journey. To be able to recognize where you are, and read about the next stage seems to make the next stage easier to attain, perhaps because such information gives you a better, if subtle sense of what to let go of, or investigate, so to speak. The flip side of the maps is that not following the path in a logical order, or attempting to practice above your capacity will likely do you no good, or potentially harm. So be sure to be honest with yourself about where you are at, and to practice at that level! In the end, you are essentially just meditating the entire time, so being honest with yourself about where you are really means not getting too delusionally full of your self. Personally I have wrongly believed I was enlightened probably about 8 times, so these things happen, haha.

Cheers,
Tim

Thanks, Tim. Very interesting. It's nice to see some new perspective here. Do you have any thoughts on how Tummo practice relates to these stages? I do it - as a beginner - because it feels good, but I can't see how it relates to jhanas or nyanas.

Thanks!

The book recommendations are interesting.

You could turn it all around and fit the whole thing into the Theravadan model:



A&P -> Dissolution



Nibbida nana



Equanimity



SE

Fractal models anyone?

Another approach to this is to recognize that 4th MCTB path is by no means the terminus of the Theravada path. It doesn't even count as 2nd path in their system. And rather than switching to something "better" like Mahayana or Dzogchen, one could choose to follow the Theravada path as far as it will go.

However, if one chooses to follow this latter path, it's best to know the purpose of that path and where that path will lead, which seems to be something very different from where Vajrayana goes. Some of their principles are 180 degrees opposed.

Nicely done, DSP!

Not only fractals going inward but fractals going outward, too! I present: the Superyana path.

The culmination of Vajrayana is merely the entrance to Superyana.



This recognition of the true nature of mind and thoughts and all phenomena is just the first step of Superyana. You must then move on to recognizing the true nature of non-phenomena, which is hard to describe but is essentially done by a non-local awareness occurring during moments of no-awareness-at-all. Once the moments of no-awareness-at-all are recognized (non-locally of course), that is the second step.

Further cultivating this insight you come to recognize that phenomena *is* non-phenomena - there is no fundamental difference between the two. This is the third step and deepening this recognition can take several lifetimes.

This enlightenment stuff is not mathematical though so the third step is not reflexive. Thus the fourth step is then realizing that non-phenomena *is* phenomena, the thing goes both ways. Thus there is no longer any difference - and this is ongoing experience - between phenomena and non-phenomena. Not only are the aggregates inconsequential (Hinaya) which was long ago realized, but so too is emptiness (Mahayana), and the true nature of the mind (Vajrayana), but also with whether anything is being experienced or not-experienced at all (Superyana). It's like being a plant except you don't even have to grow or absorb sunlight. Whatever occurs in any of the uncountable finite universes, planes, and dimensions, you remain at peace. Only this is true peace - Supernirvana - and although it can take a few thousand lifetimes it's well-worth it in the end.

Or it actually consists of another form of shamatha and vipassana/vipasyana based on the four foundations of mindfulness as taught in Theravada.

http://www.byomakusuma.org/Teachings/VajrayanaVipassyana.aspx

Dogmatic superyana fool, I won't even explain the überyana as it is far too complicated.

überyana is the layman's actualyana.

HAHAHA!

Uberyana fails to even realize the true essence of non-phenomena (step #2). Actualyana does not understand that the only peace to be had is by being like a plant that has sprouted, grown, withered away, died, then turned into dust and recombinated into millions of particles that spread first across the earth, then across the solar system once this star explodes, eventually pervading all aspects of the universe, yet without any of the following:

• experience of phenomena
• experience of non-phenomena
• experience of both phenomena and non-phenomena
• experience of neither phenomena nor non-phenomena
• non-experience of phenomena
• non-experience of non-phenomena
• non-experience of both phenomena and non-phenomena
• non-experience of neither phenomena nor non-phenomena
• both experience and non-experience of phenomena
• both experience and non-experience of non-phenomena
• both experience and non-experience of both phenomena and non-phenomena
• both experience and non-experience of neither phenomena nor non-phenomena
• neither experience nor non-experience of phenomena
• neither experience nor non-experience of non-phenomena
• neither experience nor non-experience of both phenomena and non-phenomena
• neither experience nor non-experience of neither phenomena nor non-phenomena

Anyone who clings to any of the above 16 items (which form a hexadecalemma, four times as superior as the simple-minded tetralemma) does not understand the depth and beauty of Superyana.

Some Guy – I don’t know very much about Tummo. I know it does fall into the Vajrayana category of practice and the intended result is the recognition of the nature of mind, but clearly it’s also good way to generate body heat. So if you’re just doing it to generate heat I wouldn’t really worry about where it fits in.

Richard Zen – Cheers man!

Dauphin Supple Chirp – I strongly disagree. I do not think you can just put it all into the Theravadan Model as you have done. (I am assuming based on your post that Theravada model for you is the same as MCTB.)

When I talk about the 4 paths of the Mahayana I am talking about separate attainments. The nanas of MCTB: A+P, Dissolution, …Equanimity are NOT attainments. They are steps in a cycle you just naturally go though. By attainment I am talking about PERMENANT shifts in Consciousness. Would you consider the separate paths of MCTB (1, 2, 3, and 4) something you could just arbitrarily compare to the nana cycling? No, I think not. Cycles occur within a stage of attainment, attainments are the progressive stages themselves.

However, in the way that Fitter Stoke suggests, definitely these stages could be seen in a Theravadan Model as a continuation after 4th path. This is entirely different from what you are suggesting.

Fitter Stoke – That is a very good clarification that the Tibetan path is not superior. I do not doubt that teachers in the Theravada tradition are as highly realized as Tibetan teachers. About what you said “180 degrees in the opposite direction”, that sounds interesting, could you elaborate? Personally I find it hard to believe the two schools could go in opposite directions. I don’t think that the technique practiced is going to fundamentally change the experience of realization, as our true nature is simply what it is, regardless of what religion, or what branch of a religion we are practicing.

To clarify, in my post I am not saying that at the apex of the Theravada tradition it is necessary to switch to the Mahayana. I am simply providing context for the paths outlined in MCTB in regards to Tibetan Buddhism.

Beo – haha, when I read your first post I thought you were serious, and I was all interested, like “mm, where can I find more information on this”. I’m guessing now though you’re just f—king with me, ha. Jokes aside, I would appreciate it if this thread stayed more or less on topic.

I concede that Actualyana found temporary peace in those states, though even then, it and its poor cousin Uberyana have some useful devices. That cannot be said for Superyana however, as it's driving momentum falls upon itself if considered against Noyana. Consider this, Superyana's inherent truths are absurdities through Noyana's lens. The accruing merit of a weak Noyana practitioner is a thousand galaxies more than an accomplished Superyana worker, for an even at times failing Noyana meditator, the truer legality of his existence breaks through the demerits of Superyana behavior. Superyana's flaws are inherent and obvious to all. It's name bears its delusion, for the consideration of the existence of a Subyana (AKA Greenyana) reveals its untrue laws, with respect to it's true opposition - Uberyana.
Making the case for the greater effectiveness of Noyana is tricky. This can be calmly resolved by its more stringent rejections of: neither experience nor non-experience of both phenomena and non-phenomena, neither experience nor non-experience of neither phenomena nor non-phenomena.
It is more stringent for there is more down the line, unlike the minds of your gross Superyana practitioners.

The Noyana meditator will find to arise and happily dismiss: The perception, or the consideration of, the experience (disregarding overlap) of the formation that regards the arising layer of material in the face of neither experience nor non-experience of neither phenomena nor non-phenomena, with focus on the permanence of the impermanence of permanence. It sometimes crops up when investigating the 69th Jhana in it's open eye variation. This does not relate to Jhana 69d, which encase you haven't memorized the Atlantean canon (highly recommended), involves a solar eclipse.

I think many people would agree that MCTB 4th path is not the end of the Path. But don't you think the traditional outcomes described by Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana are all different? I can see how MCTB 4th could be a sort of base-camp from which to undertake the socio-emotional transformations recommended by the three yanas. But each yana definitely seems to posit a different such transformation, with different outcomes in terms of the function of the body/speech/mind complex of the higher level realizer and possibly the fundamental realization as well.

For instance, the traditional goals of Theravada and Vajrayana do seem 180 in the opposite direction to me. The standard outcomes, socio-emotionally, seem totally different; the Theravada goal looks a lot like a Peaceful Deity in the vajryana system-- thorough, unshakeable realization of emptiness plus zero reactive emotions via the systematic deconstruction of the elements of reactive emotions and the cutting off of the basic elements which allow those emotions to form.

Meanwhile the vajrayana goal looks like a totally normal householder who is also a mahasidha... like Marpa for example.

Apologies..

Haha sure thing. Though I did do it not only joking but also to bring up a point. What if there was a thing called Superyana, just as I described, with various practices proscribed more or less along the same lines, and it had quite a few people practicing it? That is, what if it passed a few simple barriers to legitimization? If you tried to make sense of it via meditating on those things, do ya think you'd experience something/make some sort of 'sense' from it, especially if your intent was very strong? At what point are we just making stuff up and then communally agreeing that that is some sort of reality or truth when the only reason that reality or truth exists is because everyone is agreeing on it? Of course, we wouldn't be able to make stuff up if there wasn't some sort of capacity to do so already in place...

I'm not sure I fully understand your objection, but it seems to revolve around permanence. Someone who experiences A&P may not have permanently shifted in consciousness, but it could feel that way for the rest of this life, so how exactly do we determine whether a shift is permanent? It's true the nanas are sort of like "modes of observation" through which the meditator will cycle, but we come away with insights. If we simplify—possibly oversimplify—the insight one gets from A&P, it would be something like the understanding that experience consists of a succession of events. Once you know this, you will always remember it, and your perspective on everything will have changed. SE (again simplified) comes with the insight that any real thing that could possibly have been you is fundamentally the same as any other (not-you) part of reality. Both these insights you probably remember until you die, so how do we truly know that the former is impermanent, but the latter is permanent?

What you say makes sense to me intellectually, but experientially the difference is very clear.

In short, a&p 'awakening' added a memory to my repertoire of memories, SE subtracted a whole chunk of ways of being that had been covering up the authentic nature of life.

I'll remember them both until I don't... but even when I am not consciously remembering SE those ways of being are not operative. The only 'change' from a&p was the addition of that memory which was not always present, and the periodic dipping back into that a&p awakening with less intensity.

That is a very good point. I think I'm a little blind to the issue because my main reason for practicing in the first place is the eradication of greed and hatred, and during the few moments that I still experience greed or hatred, it seems like no progress has been made at all. Now that you point it out, though, it does seem like the A&P insight was just something "nice to know," whereas SE totally eradicated certain types of trains of thought, just not greed or hatred, let alone restlessness.

Check out the writings of David Chapman, especially his blog Approaching Aro. He discusses this subject a lot, at great length.

See this thread.

D

Fitter Stoke - I think I see now a bit more clearly where you were coming from in your first post. When I talked about Hinayana in the map, and correlated it with the paths described in MCTB, I was referring to the Hinayana path in Tibetan Buddhism, not equating the term Hinayana with Theravada.

. Jake . - To clarify, I am talking about the Hinayana, Mayahana, and Vajrayana as they exist as a three path system within Tibetan Buddhism. In this way, one would begin with the Hinayana, having accomplished that practice the Mahayana, and having accomplished that practice the Vajrayana. An analogy would be a single ladder, going to one single place, but split into three separate parts.

I can’t really debate where the Theravadan result comes into this because I know very little about the Theravada system. It seems similar to the Hinayana path, but at the same time clearly more, or farther.

If you compare different schools of Buddhism, I imagine each would have its own language to talk about or view the path and the results, which might account for some of the discrepancies.

Like you said, if the Tibetan view of the result is that of the mahasiddi householder, perhaps that view could be simply a function of the personalities of different people who founded certain lineages, and also somewhat of a reflection of cultural ideals/ideas.

I see it more as a linear path in terms of the development of wisdom and compassion. At the same time, true Buddha hood is far beyond me, so I’m just speaking from my limited experience, obviously. I would say it’s hard to know how much these things (ideals, models..) hold up until you have gone to where they describe, so to know the truth in the differences between the result of different schools may be far beyond us.

Is there a particular thing on that site that stands out as being diametrically opposed to what's taught in Theravada? I ask, partly because I'm doing all this Theravada practice to be able to go back to Vajrayana practice and do the practices (specifically of Nyingma) successfully, or at least more successfully than in my first stab at them, and partly because Aro is a pretty controversial group within Nyingma.

Right, that's what I thought you meant. But that said, the different major sects and subsects of Tibetan Buddhism use these kinds of terms and concepts in very different ways indeed as you allude to as well. The way you are outlining things reminds me a bit of how Chogyam Trungpa relates the three yanas (in some of his writings anyhow). It sounds very Sarma in general, and I think you mentioned Kagyu as your primary affinity so I guess that makes sense.

I guess I was pointing to something more technical to do with the underlying principles of different yanas being very different. This seems to be more emphasized in certain kinds of Nyingma and Bonpo subcultures in my experience where the systems are categorized 'Sutra, Tantra and Dzogchen'. In these sorts of maps each system is said to be very different indeed, with distinct principles (renunciation, transformation, self-liberation), and different methods and lifestyles based on those principles. (Historically of course, in earlier times the Sutric monastic paths and the Dzogchen/Tantric paths were actually separate, socio-culturally speaking. This persisted in Tibet for centuries while in India they became hybridized and Tantra was integrated within some monastic Mahayana systems in a toned down, more symbolic way; then this hybrid came to Tibet and re-encountered the earlier more separated systems).

To take just one emotion as example, anger: the Sutra path of renunciation recommends removing anger and its seeds either cold or via replacing them with their opposite, compassion. This is a deconditioning-reconditioning process where certain mind-movements are literally renounced. The lifestyle that best supports this is one where many of the common triggers of anger are removed (the monastic). And so on. The Tantric view is that anger is a dualistic distortion of a wisdom-quality of the nature of mind and recommends transforming the anger into its corresponding wisdom by reconnecting that mind-movement to its nature. You can't do that if anger doesn't arise anymore. The lifestyle that supports this is sometimes a rather intensified, ritualized version of everyday life. Every aspect of life and all mind movements and sense experiences can be connected to their nature through understanding and applying the principle of transformation and this is contained in a ritual/symbolic practice structure. Dzogchen sees anger and other mind movements as already perfect energy of the nature of mind, which have no inherent power to drive behavior or condition experience, without need to undergo any process either of renunciation or transformation to see them in that context of their natural state. No particular lifestyle supports or contradicts this approach if this principle is understood and implemented.

In the systems I'm familiar with, it is assumed not that one will progress through the approaches in a linear fashion but rather through familiarizing oneself with each approach and then also familiarizing oneself with one's actual temperament, personality, circumstances, etc-- all one's limits and tendencies and patterns, one gets better and better at the non-linear implementation of whatever approach is best for oneself in a given moment depending on one's conditions. But of course this meta-approach to the various systems of renunciation, transformation and self-liberation is that of one of the systems-- dzogchen, lol

So anyhow I 'm certainly not debating anything, just sharing a bit of my perspective, because I found the title of your OP really intriguing and thought it could start an interesting conversation here as long as folks didn't come to the thread in order to use overt and/or covert group dynamics bullshit to de-legitimize the conversation through subtle or not so subtle mockery, dismissal, reductionism or whatever. Since the thread seemed to veer back from that precipice I figure I may as well continue with the conversation. Thanks for your clarifying response!

And to tie what I wrote here back into the topic of the OP, to me what is described as MCTB 4th or in fact any of the MCTB Paths makes a great platform for practicing Sutra, Tantra or Dzogchen to their unique fruitions. But that requires some choice about how one wants to live life, how one wants to be, which principles one resonates most with and so on. In terms of perhaps more what you had in mind, I would guess that MCTB 4th describes the result of hinayana as it is often described in the more linear Tibetan systems, liberation from the tendency to seek a reference point (centerpoint) to define the 'subject' in the field of experience without any major change in the content of emotional life. Mahayana and Vajrayana in this view would then go on in a linear fashion from there to work with those emotions. The thing about those more linear systems though is that the tantric stuff is often in a mahayana context; the differences between sutra, tantra and essence level teachings can get pretty blurred when they are all stuffed into a mahayana context.

Hey Jake, sorry it's taken me a while to get back to you.



To this I would say, personally I largely take the supposed ideals as a sort of north star, this shining example far in the distance, which when followed will take you north (where you want to go in this case), but you will doubtfully ever get to the star itself. If you do suppose that the three schools follow each other in a somewhat linear manner, Hinayana first, then Mahayana, then Vajrayana, it seems very unlikely that the goal of completely eliminating (renouncing) certain negative emotions in the Hinayana is feasible given that the higher level path of tantra works with these same emotions.

I think a good example of this was a quote I read by the Dalai Lama where he said something like, " you take the boddhisatva vow to put the enlightenment of all beings before your own, but by the merit you create in doing so, and living this way, you go on to attain enlightenment anyways."



This makes a lot of sense, and I definitely got the sense this is how Trungpa was taught in some writing I read by him. Perhaps while it is the case that a practitioner is taught man techniques, it is assumed that as they progress in skill they will focus progressively in specific areas, thus moving up the three ladders so to speak?



Based on my own development, I see 4th path as the result of the Hinayana, and in other words the first glimpse of egolessness. From here, given that the heart sutra seems to deal with the four progressive stages of emptiness, it would make sense that you then follow those. What I'm getting at is that I don't really see different practices altering the progression of development. So someone who has completed 4th path and is now trying to practice dzogchen, I would say has completed 4th path, which is awesome, but you have to put that in a broader perspective which is that 4th path is merely the first glimpse of egolessness, so while it's a huge step there is still much to come, and it's still extremely possible to attempt to practice above your level of understanding.

This may or may not be off subject and of value. But, a practice I do with when anger arises. I observe it and try to understand it as based ultimately on healthy compassion towards myself and go on to penetrate it. I also try to stay circumspect. Like when some one is rude to me and the anger mind state arises, I think to myself. "Well, it is understandable that my 5 aggregates would react with anger. A threat is recognized. These 5 aggregates have been conditioned to protect these 5 ags. This is a reasonable. I have compassion for myself. Yes, I may not like the anger arising. But, this is just part of it." I think to myself: "May I be happy my this apparently offensive person be happy as well." Then I think "Yes, there is suffering and tension here. There is little I can do about it." Then I pretty well let it go. Also, sometimes I'll think of how my ability to apprehend what is going on is very limited and that it's a very narrow view that I have and that I can allow myself to not take my own judgements so seriously. Moreover, I go on to note the impermanence and how the whole situation is just causal and not mine.

Hey T DC, can you share what this statement means/meant to you experientially? I am curious what 4th path and 'the first glimpse of egolessness' mean to you phenomenologically.

For me, my experience of what I have assumed is 4th path, was the first real glimpse of something beyond conceptual thought. In seeing this, it was thereby clear that thoughts were not real in the way I had understood them before, as some sort of solid truth. Instead, thoughts would occur, which had the same feel of solidity as before, but I understood that while there were thoughts, there was at the same time existing a completely foreign element which negated the idea that thoughts were the all that could be, or be experienced, and so that all my ideas, just all my thoughts about everything were false essentially, that they were not solid, and did not hold up.

It was like, if you imagine thoughts as strips of paper, before 4th path the paper strips of thoughts are flowing across your mind joined end to end. It's like you are inside a tent, the ceiling is completely continuous, and you cannot see outside. There is no understanding of anything beside thought. Then when 4th path occurs, a gap forms between the ends of each thought strip, so you now have a non-conceptual understanding of something indescribable beyond thought. Thoughts can no longer be taken as real in the same way, because they are seen in relation to emptiness, or non-conceptuality.

You can't just stay comfortably in your small little tent anymore, now you have the constant knowledge that there is a limitless expanse beyond your clung to thought territory.

Cool, this certainly makes sense in relation to 'first glimpse of egolessness', I appreciate it. Also this is a good articulation of an existential insight-- something that changes one's way of being, rather than the content of one's thoughts. So what was your experience of stream entry and the other paths like? What was the existential insight of stream entry?