Noah D:
Prag dharm has the striving element. When people get together to discuss it, that is inevitably present at one point or another. Typically, members of the "mushroom culture" dismiss mapping, striving & the technical approach entirely, as missing the point. That is a mistake. Mapping is only a problem when it interferes with actual practice. If one is following instructions on the cushion (or off the cushion if that's your thing), than mapping is not occuring at that time. The practice time is what makes the difference. These observations are all based on direct experiences.
So this striving, comparing mind inevitably shows itself when people gather for prag dharm. It is typically present alongside comraderie, warmth, cheerleading, peer coaching, academic curiosity & lots of other great ingredients. What I've come to see is that the antidote for striving is not overemphasizing individual practice sessions, weeks or months. The following ideas, including the one I just mentioned, come from dharma friends, not from me. But I am adding in my own understanding to this.
snip
This brings the question to mind: what about the rates of progress? Some are making it faster than others. This is where "right view" comes into play. Karma is a thing, people are in there various positions with their characteristics. If there is a true, heartfelt rejection of one's position, that will tend to interfere with the application of a meditation technique (not in all cases).
snip
Otherwise, you do get "mushroom culture" or some vague, new-agey shit if you get a bunch of people in a room all spouting their own philosophy without actually describing their experience within individual meditation sessions over time. However, the language people use to describe their direct experience might not be straight out of a Mahasi monastery. It might be relational, intuitive, devotional, technical, mappy, energetic, etc. All of those are valid in my opinion.
To conclude - applying the mindset of practice seasons & not of practice weather, is one possible antidote to the sense of jealousy or inadequecy that can arise when folks get together to discuss hardcore meditation. Just wanted to throw that out there.
aloha noah,
I haven't checked out your pragmatic dharma sessions; you guys may play too rough for this child. I haven't taken a psychedelic in 40 years but I suspect I would be 'grandfathered in' to the ""mushroom culture"".
You first opine that people should not emphasize their practice sessions over time, and then you say that they should.
You ask about "rates of progess" and note that "some are making it faster than others." In the old days the masters spoke of "striving" in the sense of striving against one's own doubts. Now it seems many meditaters compare their results to those of others, and consider this competition "striving" in a positive sense. In this competition, I imagine that some gain personal satisfaction, while others feel depressed, like they are losers. My brother when a youth went to the dog track and won $800, when this was a lot of money. For the next couple of years he lost thousands trying to recoup that initial feeling of delight, of being a winner.
When I enter the 1st or 2nd jhanas (all I will admit to), I feel great, I'm pleased and happy, but when it dissipates I don't regret it; it comes and goes in formal meditation and nothing I do will affect it. Meditate more, perhaps; but frankly it is not all that special, compared to the natural paradise I live in. The non-jhana portions of my meditation are just fine. I'm not competing with my former self, not striving to *be* something I am not. (According to the ttc, the greatest of diseases is wanting others to see you as more than you are.)
I see a lot of jealousy and inadequacy causing real pathologies in people conditioned to think they can earn enlightenment through specific efforts. In my view, the dhamma cannot be adapted to western-style competiton (though it is evident indian, tibetan, chinese and japanese practicioners all competed heavily and also suffered from it - too much testosterone, I expect). I find myself emphasizing that "consciously doing the best you can" is all that can reasonably be required of anyone, and that any attempt to "give 110%" can only cause frustration. and unnecessary setbacks. Sometimes very little progress is made; sometimes we go backwards for a time. Any amount of anxiety or grief over a lack of progress is too much, and only makes it harder to get back on track, on the Way. All that is not utterly futile is to pick ourselves back up and press on in as close to conscious awareness as we can muster. Comparing our progress to that of others can only lead to aggression, deception and bad feelings. And worse, to the saddest sort of psychic self-mutilation and self-cauterization. Without careful guidance, specific instructions can lead to dismal results in those encoraged to expect complete mastery and the end of all unhappiness in short order, like baking a cake. (Such instructions might be better offered to a smaller group than the general public. The continuous feedback could help greatly.)
The other comment in that significant paragraph was that a "heart-felt rejection of one's position" can tend to "interfere with the application of a meditation technique." People are attached to their positions, and this is where tact and skillful means come in. It often occurs that people are entrenched in "positions" that are stale if not actually rotten. Sticking to a technique in order to attain enlightenment is like polishing a tile thinking it will one day be a mirror. Even so, if someone is happy with their practice and they are shaken from their simple delight in it by authoratative mumbo jumbo, it is a pity and a shame. (Some people unconsciously know that they are in a rut and need to become more humble to break through, but will resent this being pointed out. Again, tact and skullful means tend to avoid outright confrontation, where everyone bleeds. It's a fine line. Razor's edge.
In the end, the only *real* technique is the practice of the brahmaviharas in real life. The "real" (political, practical, socially active) practice is anarchic revolution, leading to a god-centered theocracy. The buddhas need no precepts, they neither keep them nor break them. Where there is no greed and aggression there is no fight and no blame. To practice in this "real" political sense is to "dare not to be ahead of others." To accept being insignificant. To speak little and say much. It is not the words we can say, the ideas we can generate, the attempts we make to teach and to lead others - it is not the "content" but the "medium" that "is the message." We need to concern ourselves with being the best person we can and give over trying to change the world - other beings - to suit us. "If you wear shoe leather, the whole earth is covered in leather." The attempts people make to teach each other are so ubiquitous that even casual observations made by casual observers are taken for "teachings" and revered or resented by turns. We read teachings that are all so directed as instructions that we tend to become instructional also when we parrot them, assuming for ourselves a status ("teacher") that can feel quite pleasant to the ego. Problems (attachments) arise when our words have been set in stone but our minds change and grow, so that we feel compelled to defend our former words despite the irresistable tendency of our minds to move on and find new words. If we can see people caught up in these difficulties with compassion, sometimes we may be able to help. At least we are assisted in recognizing these tendencies in our own practice.
As long as each of us represents a unique view and thinks that their practice is the "one way" that will lead to enlightenment, we have the tower of babel, each speaking their own language only to their own partisans. Heraclitus says, "Listening to the Logos and not to me, it is wise to agree that all things are One." In the delusion of ego, each wants to teach the other, for praise and gain. The teachers claim if you follow their rules, you will attain; if you do not attain, you are to blame for not having worked hard enough, since the rules are perfect because I created them. The newbies see with open, innocent eyes. That is why I say the two cannot be distinguished: if anything the newbies are the more advanced. So heraclitus says, don't listen to me, the man like yourselves conditioned to speak thusly; listen to the Logos, the tao, the nature of everything hidden in all things, and know yourself to be one with all, not less and not more, not independent and not dependent, indistinguishable from Us.
terry
(tao te ching, trans gia fu feng)
Thirty-two
The Tao is forever undefined.
Small though it is in the unformed state, it cannot be grasped.
If kings and lords could harness it,
The ten thousand things would come together
And gentle rain fall.
Men would need no more instruction and all things would take their course.
Once the whole is divided, the parts need names.
There are already enough names.
One must know when to stop.
Knowing when to stop averts trouble.
Tao in the world is like a river flowing home to the sea.
Sixty-seven
Everyone under heaven says that my Tao is great and beyond compare.
Because it is great, it seems different.
If it were not different, it would have vanished long ago.
I have three treasures which I hold and keep.
The first is mercy; the second is economy;
The third is daring not to be ahead of others.
From mercy comes courage; from economy comes generosity;
From humility comes leadership.
Nowadays men shun mercy, but try to be brave;
They abandon economy, but try to be generous;
They do not believe in humility, but always try to be first.
This is certain death.
Mercy brings victory in battle and strength in defense.
It is the means by which heaven saves and guards.