This isn't an anti-noting thread, I'm sure noting works, but like a scientist I'm trying to understand the WHY, and not simply the pragmatic question (does it work?).

1.Why does sitting on a cushion, noting your experiences lead to the stages of insight?
2. How does labeling sound, feeling, thought, etc..lead to a cessation experience?
3. How does understanding the three characteristics lead to the end of desire? For example, how does noting that all physical sensations are impermanent lead to the pacifying of sexual desire or desire for pleasant experiences or any of the other desires that are said to inevitably lead to suffering?
4.How does noting lead to a non-dual realization?

howdy,
how is perhaps too big a question to answer directly.  the fact that many people here have learned through experience that our minds have an almost unbelieveable ability to comprehend the process of how this experience of our world is stitched together.  when we first start deepening our ability to 'see' into the nature of experience on a level and with a speed that was previously incomprehensible we start dropping other of our learned limits and focus ever deeper on the common attributes of all experience.

these characteristics, seen clearly, and understood as an aspect of everything then vanish.  seeing this is a convincing experience that erases some very basic illusions about the continuity of reality and of ourselves.

noting works as do other techniques.

the labeling helps objectify our experience and stops the habitual tendency of our minds to proliferate and elaborate, helping us to stay at the level of current experience.

you ask about desire specifically. at some point one realizes that we are mostly desirous of concepts and not the underlying objects.  the more clearly one sees reality the less one is tied to those concepts and the more willing one is to let go of those attachments.

understanding non-duality is a result of seeing how the illusion of a seperate self is upheld via illusion and quick tricks of the mind.

Noting has two parts to it....noticing the sensation as it happens then labeling(note) the sensation. The labeling is a hack mearly to keep the mind on target and not get distracted into thoughts. Use this yogi tool when you're not concentrated enough to keep on the noticing without finding yourself making stories about the sensations. Anytime you can drop the labeling and notice precisely the sensations as they happen...do so. Anytime you as getting lost in thought....apply labeling.

What are the stages of insite? Strata within the mind...different subprocess that make up the way the different parts of how the brain operates. They mostly operate without any visability until you start seeing the various strata. Then you understand thier aspects. You are digging into the preconscious and effects of the subconcious portions of the mind.
Labeling is a means of keeping the mind on the task of noticing/meditation. The noticing is the part that leads to cessation.
You notice the sensations that make up reality. They start out as permanent and self. There are subconscious processes running that overlays each sensation with identification as yours. This overlay process is continiously identifying the sensations as 'mine mine mine'....this is the permanence that needs to to be seen thru. This is the confusion. Once the overlay is 'seen thru', cessation happens, the overlay shuts down for those particular sensations and then and only then are the sensations impermanent and not self.  The overlay also creates a specific dukkha/stress. This gets deleted too.
The whole desire thing, you mean clinging?....if the sensations are no longer "you" then  tell me how much of the desire/clinging can still exist.
As you delete the overlay processes for each grouping of sensation types, the mind gets quieter and quieter.   The part of the brain that creates  the "subject" of the duality between subject/object starts to get very quiet. At a certain point the consciousness shifts to the part that knows each sensation as it arises without the additional processing of the creation of a subject to interperate it.
Nondual abides.

(Disclaimer: This is a psychological interpretation with use of analogies to explain Buddhist concepts. Buddhism does not really have the ideas of sub/preconscious. The concepts are somewhat speculative in nature athough this is mostly how I have expereinced awakening so far and are subject to impermenece, no-self and dukkha. No known Buddhas were harmed in the creation of this model.)
Good luck,
~D

For me, noting creates a feeling of separation from an experience. The Buddha's classic breakdown is like this:

Monks, is form constant or inconstant?
- Inconstant.
Is this changability stressful?
- Yes.
Then, is it appropriate to take ownership of those inconstant, stressful things?
- No.

So, noting is looking at each sensation and creating a separation from it, letting go of it and allowing it to exist outside of what you consider to be "you." What this does, IME, is drop the need to change the experience and instead point to the non-judgemental awareness of the experience. The Buddha says to treat the five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, intention, and consciousness) as "a cancer, an emptiness, a disease, an arrow, not mine, not my self."

You don't have to note something with a mental label to let go of it, but labeling things gives the mind something to "do" when it feels stuck or confused. Often times the thing that you feel is blocking your progress is actually the thing you're failing to let go of. For example, recently I've had to deal with a difficult coworker. I was getting upset about the fact that I couldn't let go of the things she was saying, so I tried noting the sensations and thoughts that were running through my head. I realized that the thing I wasn't letting go of was the desire not to be bothered. It actually had nothing to do with the remarks themselves.

So noting is a simple way to "catch" things and make sure there is nothing being held on to. The reason this leads to the end of desire is because, once you let go of a sensation/intention/perception/feeling/ect, it self-liberates - which is to say, it stops being a problem all by itself. The Buddha points out that the cause of stress is desire. The aggregates themselves aren't a problem, the problem is created by clinging to them. This can happen either by trying to change them (trying to feel better by persuing sense pleasures) or by trying to make them stay the same (holding on to a feeling as you notice it slipping away, or defending your beliefs/ideas/possessions/sense-of-self in the face of change or ridicule).

So that's my answer to #3. I think questions 1, 2, and 4 don't apply to my own experience so someone else can probably answer those better.

EDIT: I should mention that, IME, this process of letting go and allowing things to move on their own is only half the solution.  The other half is concentration.  Aggregates can be calmed through concentration, and this makes it much easier to separate from them.

EDIT2: DW's breakdown is good, I think.  You must not need a cessation to have a non-dual experience, since I can understand well enough abiding in that part of the mind that just lets everything happen.  When this happens, even things that "should" be stressful are not - like angry coworkers.

Noting will not lead to enlightenment, anymore than typing on a keyboard will lead to enlightenment, or walking, for example. It is a training crutch that forces the practitioner to REMEMBER to develop awareness,

The strength behind the noting technique is its intention, which is investigative (one of the four legs of power, vimamsa). The entrance to noting (when noting begins proper) is after the Mind & Body nana, when the practitioner objectifies "himself", or what he is unconsciously aware of.

An example: practitioner is noting sounds he hears, he gets bored, he notes the boredom, he he still feels bored

That below-surface-level awareness of boredom, is what he was unconscious of, once he turns the light back on himself, noting begins. Kind of like in The Secret of the Golden Flower.

Vipassana proper begins when the practitioner is able to notice vibrations, and finally stream-entry is when the practitioner automatically notices vibrations, regardless of level of effort.

See the Cakkhu Sutta.

I actually don't believe that seeing vibrations, proper, is possible until stream-entry. But whatevs. As one continues to refine up the ladder, the noting and investigation becomes more refined.

I apologize for any intentional and unintentional misrepresentation of facts I may have given in the above discourse.

Cheers.

This always felt fairly intuitive to me, but I'm glad you're stating it plainly. Thanks!

There's some nice basic instructions given by Sayadaw U Thuzana (from the Mahasi Sayadaw lineage), where he says, "...if making mental notes interfere with your practice, you don't have to make them. Just be mindful of the falling and rising movement of the abdomen" (here -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Et5LUWYXHY). The whole talk is worth listening to if you have any question about how to use these techniques.

edited: for readability

Noting is not my thing in practice, but I think I understand why/how it works in principle. I think the two key factors are disentanglement and disidentification. Noting helps people tease apart dense clusters of complex phenomena into their constituent parts. Consistent mental labeling using some kind of classifcation schema is just an aid to finer discernment and disentanglement. And if it's practiced with anatta in mind -- everything you can observe is not me, not mine, not self -- this process of disentangling also leads to disidentification, or shifts in identity.

good explanation John,

nice to meet another wild card  

i note, but for the reverse reasons, to stop dissociating from what is me and is my shite disidentifying from it's own conditioning, so as to wake up this brain's intelligence and delete its shifty ass   

In round after round of rebirth ;-)



Tried that once or twice. Invested much energy in the interplay of mostly intrapsychic 'entities', with hardly any net effect on reality.

The aim is good. But you've seen it: without some kind of liberating insight into the nature of self and world, trying to work on oneself at that level (or at the level of emotions) is like trying to wrestle one's own shadow into submission. For most people, I think the only good that comes out of that is a hard won understanding, eventually at an organic level, that what one is doing / has been doing is futile, and why. But that only happens after falling for the same shit over and over again... and that can take a long time.

You've mentioned that you're coming from a different starting place from most people, so maybe you're not so prone to chasing yourself around in a mirror maze, or trying to throttle your own shadow, or trying to manipulate your own feelings all the time, or trying to hoist yourself into the air by your shoelaces... I dunno. But that's how it seems to go for most people.

You can count me out of that particular round of rebirth, but I'm still curious as to how you're going about it. I know you've resisted calls for a practice log, but if you're really doing something right that other people are still struggling with, it couldn't hurt to explain the hows as well as the whats, surely? Or is it more a case of you're sure about the whats now, but still working on the hows?

Always liked your approach; check everything out. but my character is minimalist. choosy about what gets stored these impressionable memory files. only ever wanted to be fully here, down to earth as possible. that never dies so there's been no rebirths (resurrecting beliefs) for me.   

the hows are too idiosyncratic to share. as for the latest what's happening? i only used to feel awkward, now i actually am   

the melodramas i once got a kick out of (my own and humanity's) aren't as funny now, but what people take serious is ;)  

not convinced the actual world is completely invisible until one has no psychological overlay (subjective point of view) or that the psyche (emotional qualia) is rotten to the core, so many genuinely caring people. maybe Richard had to believe that and dissociate from feelings to that extreme, but i don't have PTSD.
 
his trip has been food for thought though, but it is his trip. from my own experience and observations he is right as far as humans having made subjective reality primary and the actual world secondary. its done a lot of damage and caused a lot of suffering. we only have to look at the ancient races to see the nonsense neurotic emotional subjectivity still conjurs up.  

never could discern whether the image in the mirror is only familiar because of a lifetime of seeing it or whether there really is a familiar inner 'me' looking out through its eyes and identifying as it's owner who gets to leave the building haha. never had that sense of self (probably too preocupied drawing as a kid to form one) so the feeling of being a dissociated parasitic entity (lol) he's such a drama queen, temporarily inhabiting this body doesnt arise. no belief i ever checked out convinced me this consciousness would not go down with this ship. never felt other than the body. finding others like this in a world of spiritualists is what attracted me to actualism. 

i figure mental awareness naturally forms a subjective view point but needn't feel like a disembodied entity. it's ability to fabricate might do it though. either way the line between whats a subjective overlay and what is pure sensate awareness can be difficult to discern given the tendency to 'passionately believe' fabrications. all i know is when believing and imagining is minimal, body-mind has less stress and less accidents. so this awareness remains on the surface of the eyeballs [so to speak] as much as possible. 

there is still greater pleasure in the presence of those known longest, than occassional aquaintances, but love and sentiment has transformed into a stronger sensible consideration for all now. a lot of commonsense and calm is simply maturity and mellowing with age. 

went through a stage when special friendships had a favoritism to them. prefer easy unpretentious relating with everyone now. enjoy people more than ever (almost as much as nature! lol) they seem to sense this no strings friendliness and lean into me when we talk with a sparkle in their eyes enjoying the closeness we share without a special friendship. life is so easy now, everything is examined and enjoyed from a more inclusive perspective (our environmental dependence, how animals sense) not just a human psychological perspective. can discern sensate facts better, predict events easier, see instinctual behaviour. solutions are more obvious.  

able to access grief memories to empathise with someone grieving, even shed a tear with them but its a rejoicing rather than self inflicted suffering (sorrow) that we can care this much. would have to be pretty traumatised to want to dissociate from that.

nevertheless i'm not prone to niceties with people examining the human condition it just mollycoddles the emotional insecurities we should have knocked off by now. confidence in our fellowship regard is long overdue in these circles. suspecting its not here just perpetuates conflict. unlike Richard, being mindful of the feelings and insecurites of those not understanding these things yet, remains.    

for all his talk of dissociation he did that number on himself. but he is a seer (of the human condition) shame about the disability. great insights, wrong personality to share it. we really do not see ourselves well and some can see but cannot delete.  

Jack Black's movie Bernie depicts what a momentary compulsion of the instinctual passions can do when a well meaning person finds themselves unappreciated. variations in personality seems to aid in species survival. some are naturally explorative some cautious, some empathic, some not etc. the human mind nurtures those natural traits into personal identity. having that identity stroked by a manipulative personality makes one vulnerable to being controlled. having it insulted is probably behind the many mutinys, if you get my drift.  

facination in everything actual (sensate) just keeps getting stronger. offloading possessions by the day. will be a nomad before years end, for as long as poss. life has been fabulous. time now to roam 24/7 and share this appreciation even more.  

How is it that noting leads us to understand the how the illusion of a seperate self is upheld by these quick tricks of the mind?

This is what I am confused about. how does the act of labeling lead to cessation?

Keep in mind I have never experienced cessation, and I could be wrong about what cessation is, but am I right in thinking cessation is a momentary complete loss of conscious experience? How can noting cause a loss of conscious experience?

hi jp,
noting is the method but as was pointed out higher in the thread at some point noting is usually dropped as the mind is on autopilot noticing and dropping, staying present, not forming judgements, being with what is.  at some point one realizes that one is stressing about the ownership of certain sensations, actions, movements of the mind etc and is elevating their status artificially.  dropping that prejudice opens teh door to non dual experience. 

so noting gets you to the point where you no longer need that support, at least in my case.

Jinxed:

It doesn't. It is a common misunderstanding that the goal of insight practice is to end desire. The goal of insight practice is to end one particular desire: that for refuge in a permanent, separate, controlling self. 

Please take time to read pages 57-59 from the draft MCTB2, where Daniel teaches the Four Noble Truths. The Second Noble Truth in that section is one of my favorite passages in the entire book--very, very heavy stuff and exceedingly subtle teaching. He distinguishes between regular attraction, aversion, and ignorance, and fundamental attraction, aversion, and ignorance. Insight practice is focused on the fundamental desire for a self and the ultimate aspect of suffering-desire, which is compassion. It is really important to avoid seeking to simply end all desire via practice--that leads to a neurotic renunciate practitioner bent on practicing repression. Ending sexual desire is not the point and likely not even a secondary means to the point.

http://integrateddaniel.info/mctb2-draft/

One other correction I wish to offer to some implications up this thread is that the Three Characteristics end when they are seen through. Not true. The only one that ends is Suffering. The other Two Characteristics totally don't end and are what is meant by the awkward phrase "ultimate reality"--awkward because it is funny to think of utimate as being empty of inherent self-existence and totally emphemeral. Ultimate reality is the Three Characteristics minus the one that is Suffering.

Jenny

Jenny,

I read those pages in MTCB 2, and I don't find them to be very clear. Mainly the passages about "desiring for refuge in a separate, permanent, self'. We desire that? If we do, it certainly isn't at a conscious level. No one blows out the candles on their birthday saying "I hope I get a separate, permanent self." People never even question the existence or non-existence of such a self, so without any awareness of it I don't see how we can 'desire' it, or seek refuge in it if we are using desire in the normal sense of the world.

I think examples would be needed to make those paragraphs more palatable. 

I think that for those who are ready to read, understand, and base practice on them, those words are perfect as is. I don't understand what you mean by adding an "example" of our need to shore up a "self." The examples would be every though, word, and deed--so no specific examples, as this is the basis for every single thing that we do. You are either ready to understand this, or you are not. I would suggest that you read the whole book, from the start, if you are truly open to understanding; however, I won't be recommending that Daniel change anything about that Second Noble Truth section; it is the most profound teaching on that doctrine that I've ever read or heard anywhere.

Jinxed P, 

"desiring for refuge in a separate, permanent, self"

We desire that?

Excellent question, one that needs to be investigated, by each mind, for themselves.  I am investigating now.  It seems that this is sometimes a subtle desire, kind of running in the background, generally unnoticed.

The subtle desire for becoming , for existing, wanting to exist.

Sometimes though, this desire is not so subtle, 

For example, when falling, the mind might crave wildly, "I wish I had not tripped, I don't want to die!!!  Ahhhhh!!!!"

For example, in a near miss automobile mishap, the Mind " Oh Crap! We're gonna die!"  

Or subtley, when the breath is inhaled, the body and mind relaxes, Ahhhhh!!!!  Life, existence

Or subtley, when the breath has exhaled, the body and mind tenses, Arrrrrrr!!! Death, need air, non existence.

But, mostly, it is subtle and unnoticed, I would probably had not noticed this phenomenon, except it was mentioned in this thread, haha...

Barring, extreme situations, accidents and whatnot

Psi

To all, 

Oh, and it may be noted that even in the extreme moments one could have enough mindfuness to be aware of just the sensations as they arise, not respond so instinctlvely, and still make wise decisions and quick actions to avoid bodily damage as best as possible, and to avoid collision with other vehicles.

Just a preempt to any arguments and misunderstandings that may arise between Mindfulness and Mindlessness.
 
Also, to add, the point of stillness between breaths Shuniya, the ego is also still, point zero.  To hold that moment and to carry it along, kind of an open occulty thing, but of great benefit.  Ah, the mind has wandered off course, so sorry.

Psi

Desiring refuge in a permanent, separate self is the basis for everything we do? All our thoughts, words and deeds? Ok please complete the following sentence for me..

"Desiring refuge in a permanent self is actually the basis for why we pee because.."

Help me understand that, because it doesn't make sense to me. And I'm not just being difficult, I open to hearing the argument and I have read the book, or at least most of it.

Also, good non-fiction writing is making complex subjects CLEAR AS DAY to those who are not experts in the subject. If you have to say things like "you are either ready to understand this or not", than you quite simply aren't doing a good job of it. Especially a concept that seems foreign and questionable. It seems like you are letting your ego as editor get in the way of some constructive criticism.

First of all, no one really knows the answers to which you seek, especially limited to non pragmatic approaches.


You mention conscious experience....what is that? what creates that? how is it created...then what created that answer?

Oh, and you keep using the word noting as if you didn't bother to read my post....
Good luck with your Arrow,
~D

Hi Jinxed P.,

I'll give this one a go...."Desiring refuge in a permanent self is actually the basis for why we pee because....."

The act of peeing is often motivated by aversion...not wanting to be with the unpleasant sensation of preasure in the bladder.  The aversion to this sensate experience results in the becoming of the illusory separate self of "the one who acts to rid the Self of the unpleasant sensation."  Consciousness identifies with the desire to be without the sensation and creates a subject ( e.g.  the separate Self who desires to be rid of the unpleasant sensation of the pressure in the bladder) and object (e.g. the sensations of the bladder) which is a misunderstanding of the sensate phenomena.  The desire is to create a permanent separate self, free from unpleasant pressure in the bladder, although despite temporary gratification of the illusory separate self, the preasure of the bladder eventually returns,and the illusory permanent separate self, identified with pleasant sensations without unpleasantness,  dies/falls away, and a new illusion of pemanent separate self is born/arises and creates the subject/object split until the three characteristics of the sensate experience are penentrated and understood experiencially.


Also the statement "you are either ready to understand this or you are not" is important for the below reasons.

When it comes to insight into the nature of phenomena, this is experiencial or visceral/sensate insight as apposed to intellectual insight.  The non-dual insights of emptiness, annata, egolessness, no separate permanent selfness can not be understood completely through concepts or symbolic language.  It is necessary to penetrate these insights experiencially to fully understand.  I challenge your notion that you understand any non fiction writer's writings to be "clear as day" because you cannot fully know, with certainty, the sensate experience (e.g. the writer's visceral understanding of the content they are writing about) behind the symbolic conceptual language the non fiction writer is using.  Their defintions of the symbolic language they are using may not match with your definitions.  Language and concepts are, in a sense, a discociation from direct, experiencial knowledge of phenomenalogical experience. 

I hope this helps.

Metta,

Drew

that infers that all creatures who are averse to pressure in the bladder are ridding the (S)elf of the unpleasant sensations when they pee?  i don't think so

here's what motivates urination

good fiction can also be used/is being used to make our senseless complex social structures CLEAR AS DAY ;) 

Sorry for using the word noting insteand of noticing. How does noticing lead to cessation? I take it you will say no one knows, and I do love the parable of the poisoned arrow.

Drew,

Thanks for that post. That is the type of response that I am looking for. A couple of clarifying questions though..

1. The basis for why we pee isn't the self, I mean enlightened people still pee. Why do they pee? Only Kim Jong Un apparently doesn't need to pee. As I understand your description the act of peeing causes the creation of the self, the self that doesn't want to experience unpleasant sensations and wants to get rid of them? Although I'm a little confused as to how this is different for the enlightened person. Do they not want to get rid of the unpleasant sensations of a full bladder?

How does anything lead to anything? What is knowing? Who is knowing? How does knowing happen?

Have you noticed that answers just lead to more questions?

Is there a point or objective to all this questioning? Lets say you get all the answers to all your questions....what then?

~D

Jinxed, 

Ha! I enjoyed the movie reference .  I think you are pointing to the practical/conventional importance of the becoming process in some ways.  Hunger is similar.  The difference for a fully enlightened person, I suspect,  is in the relationship to the sensate experience. They still pee as its necessary for survival, but they do so with a deep understanding of the sensate experience, without greed (craving pleasant sensation), hatred (aversion to unpleasant sensation), and delusion/ignorance of the nature of the sensate experience. No longer clinging to the misunderstanding of a separate, permanent, observer self controling the process. Seeing that the peeing process is the perfect unfolding of sensate phenomena without a need for a Self doing it. 

This is just one take on this stuff and I suspect other folks here can add to and elaborate based on their experiences and understandings of these concepts. Although, again, keep up the good practice and you will experience for yourself the answers to these questions or maybe give up the search for answers and be at peace. 

metta,

Drew

then we'll drop the intellectualising and get back to what actually matters deleting the shite that doesn't make us harmless.  at this rate it may take another coupla millennia

Perhaps reflecting on the fact that many people have trained to obtain the insight in these matters for years before they were able to percieve the truth in them is a pointer towards the fact that they are difficult if not impossible to explain in a language of concepts.

The understanding that needs to happen is one of experiece instead of conceptual understanding. Noting, the stages of insight are but tools one can utilize to gain that experience. For those on the path of insight though. I am told that the stages are experienced almost without fail by those doing the practise. So far all evidence (hearsay) points to the idea that the practise of noting, vipassana meditation for prolonged periods of time does give rise to these stages of insight.

With Love
Eelco

"3. How does understanding the three characteristics lead to the end of desire? For example, how does noting that all physical sensations are impermanent lead to the pacifying of sexual desire or desire for pleasant experiences or any of the other desires that are said to inevitably lead to suffering?"

According to MCTB, it doesn't but according to Mahasi it does? I'm confused O.o 


(Yes, this post is, for now, slightly anti-noting, but please change my mind, aversion is a poison.)

2. How does labeling sound, feeling, thought, etc..lead to a cessation experience?

a)Labeling has to have a higher purpose, table means something in your mind and that is why you are able to notice it. If you eventually get the meaning then label disappears. Label is already there, its One, because you attach the same label to everywhere, everything. And its already attached.
b)When we notice that we are walking towards something, we come aware doing it and then stop it.

First variant is nonmoving/nonactive mental disposition cessation and other is moving/active mental disposition cessation.
Also cessation is cessation of mindstream and for a moment we are free to decide, but that decision is biased by nonactive mental dispositions.

In order to label you must have a moment of cessation. That means we do have cessations all the time but we don't notice them, we have to see this cessation what it looks like and then realise that it can be widened/poked etc and we can sink into it or abide in it,imho that is the meaning of 6th power of closing off the outflows.

3. How does understanding the three characteristics lead to the end of desire? For example, how does noting that all physical sensations are impermanent lead to the pacifying of sexual desire or desire for pleasant experiences or any of the other desires that are said to inevitably lead to suffering?

You know that physical sensations are impermanet, so you will then stop abusing them and slowly you will climb on jhanas. When you can close the outflows, energy rises and higher you get the less desire there is but at the beginning it seems its opposite that desire is building up but its requiered energy to push higher, once you have pushed higher you are safe for a while. When you see the desire and why its there and know that it is also impermanent then this transition goes smoother.

I currently have no idea how one could destroy all desire. There is a choice: gather or spend. Overall energy level is rising, so its good to know how far you must go in order to have a quality increase. I guess one needs to detroy the Maya and its monsters who desires the generative force, this is also the cause of suffering, because these beings work on lots of levels and know how to inflict pain.

generative force or life-giving energy. Its seem to know where to go, so if you look at a desireable(attachment, nonactive label) object then it wants to go there..