Jim Smith's Log - Discussion
Jim Smith:
... But I am sure I can learn from other people on the forum so I would like to set it out here in case anyone has any advice or constructive comments to make.
...
I don't have the inclination to spend all day meditating, but I have an academic (intellectual) interest on what perfecting the "end of suffering" would mean, and how it is accomplished, and what is the relationship between western scientific concepts about the nervous system and eastern practices and theory. Because that kind of understanding can lead to changes in my own practice to make it more efficient.
...
I don't have the inclination to spend all day meditating, but I have an academic (intellectual) interest on what perfecting the "end of suffering" would mean, and how it is accomplished, and what is the relationship between western scientific concepts about the nervous system and eastern practices and theory. Because that kind of understanding can lead to changes in my own practice to make it more efficient.
I got a lot of benefit, not the end of suffering but surely a lot less suffering, from a 10 day retreat and then an hour twice a day for a year, then another 10-day retreat and more daily meditation. It feels to me like it was totally worth it.
It sounds like you are doing what I understand as 'absorption' practice, you lead your brain to a pleasant state then give it permission to dwell there. It keeps you 'off the street' and it feels good, but no-one around here will say that it ends suffering.
The popular MCTB recipe is vipassana, insight meditation, intense style! Instead of resting in a pleasant state, you develop acute awareness of everything going in inside mind/body, you see/hear/feel/learn that the untrained mind is stupid and is wasting your time and eventually it stops doing that. OK, that's kinda tongue in cheek, but that's how I'm rolling right now.
It's totally cook book, you need juuuuust enough theory to convince you to sit your ass off, any more theory than that might get counter productive.
matthew sexton:
It sounds like you are doing what I understand as 'absorption' practice, you lead your brain to a pleasant state then give it permission to dwell there. It keeps you 'off the street' and it feels good, but no-one around here will say that it ends suffering.
According to Buddha, pleasure born from seclusion is the path to awakening. See below.
Personally, I've been meditated regularly for most of my life, I've been on retreats, and I got a lot more out of my practice (much less "suffering" during times when I am not meditating) since I started doing this type of meditation. Practicing relaxation in mediation or with another technique strengthens the parasympathetic nervous system, it gives you the skill to stay relaxed during dail life. It is a skill that continues to develop as the parasympathetic nervous system gets stronger with 'exercise'. When you can produce happiness through meditation you realize it is impermanent and illusory, and you lose your attachment to it and other emotions, at the same time you develop the skill of being happy if you want to (as an antidote to dukkha). The practice helps you to get better and better at being relaxed and happy during daily life. So from my experience, I would say it is a practical technique that is highly effective at reducing suffering.
The popular MCTB recipe is vipassana, insight meditation, intense style! Instead of resting in a pleasant state, you develop acute awareness of everything going in inside mind/body, you see/hear/feel/learn that the untrained mind is stupid and is wasting your time and eventually it stops doing that. OK, that's kinda tongue in cheek, but that's how I'm rolling right now.
It's totally cook book, you need juuuuust enough theory to convince you to sit your ass off, any more theory than that might get counter productive.I don't think you can totally separate insight from concentration. You need some minimum concentration to do insight, and every wandering of the mind during concentration produces an iota of insight which adds up over time.
I didn't say much about it in the OP, but reading between the lines what I wrote about renuncination, insight is implicit. You see what causes you stress and it changes how you think about things. Renunciation = letting go of attachments.
You can't rest in a pleasant state unless you have reached perfection. There is always something that disturbs your peace but since you prefer a pleasant state, you see what is disturbing your peace and you figure out how to let go of it (get back to a peaceful state) during the meditation session and during daily life.
I should have said more about this in the OP it was an oversight on my part.
I think it is relevant that buddha said:
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036.than.html
"I thought: 'I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then — quite secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful mental qualities — I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. Could that be the path to Awakening?' Then following on that memory came the realization: 'That is the path to Awakening.' I thought: 'So why am I afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities?' I thought: 'I am no longer afraid of that pleasure that has nothing to do with sensuality, nothing to do with unskillful mental qualities, but that pleasure is not easy to achieve with a body so extremely emaciated. Suppose I were to take some solid food: some rice & porridge.' So I took some solid food: some rice & porridge.
According to Buddha, pleasure born from seclusion is the path to awakening.
I suspect that some people will get more out of my style than other practices where you have to meditate for hours a day and go on retreats. Because my style eases suffering somewhat you don't need will power, it's like aspirin, so the average person who starts the practice is more likely to keep it up.
I am really interested in a system for the average Joe who right now isn't meditating, or can't sit for more than a few minutes (they should be doing yoga or qigong), or is struggling to figure out what he is supposed to be seeing within but doesn't feel like he is getting a lot out of it. Look on reddit/meditation and you'll see there are a lot of people like this. (I realize I'm sort of in the wrong place to talk about this.)
matthew sexton:
The popular MCTB recipe is vipassana, insight meditation, intense style! Instead of resting in a pleasant state, you develop acute awareness of everything going in inside mind/body, you see/hear/feel/learn that the untrained mind is stupid and is wasting your time and eventually it stops doing that. OK, that's kinda tongue in cheek, but that's how I'm rolling right now.
It's totally cook book, you need juuuuust enough theory to convince you to sit your ass off, any more theory than that might get counter productive.I think there is legitimate room for different opinions on what is the best type of practice. Probably it depends on what works best for the individual.
I quoted Thich Nhat Hanh above, are you aware of Bhante Vimalaramsi? He started out studying the traditional methods in Asia, decided they weren't delivering what they were supposed to. He developed and now teaches a type of "smiling" meditation.
https://www.dhammasukha.org/ven-bhante-vimalaramsi.html
Bhante practiced Vipassana very intensely his first 20 years under an American teacher and in Burma, under U Pandita and U Janaka. Finally around 1990 he was told that he had achieved the endpoint of the practice, as it was taught by the Sayadaws, and now he should go teach. He didn't feel comfortable that he had really found the end of suffering. He felt he did not have the true personality change that awakening should bring, even after going through the 16 levels of Insight or knowledges, as outlined by Mahasi Sayadaw in Progress of Insight.
...
When Bhante began to do this, he discovered first hand, the interwoven nature of the Teachings. In each sutta he found the elements of the 4 Noble Truths, the 8-Fold Path, and the impersonal process of Dependent Origination. Dependent Origination or Paticcasamupada is the core of the Buddha's teachings. He realized that the word sutta literally meant "thread" and that the threads together, created a finely woven cloth, whereas, one single thread does not equal a cloth! Through his own objective first hand experience, the 8-Fold Path began to come alive. When he realized the secret of the teachings was on his doorstep he took the Majjhima Nikaya to a cave in Thailand and spent 3 months, living with a cobra as company, reading and then practicing just what the suttas said. In very little time, he said, he had gone deeper in his meditation, than ever before. What started as two weeks to study suttas turned into three months of deep practice. Out of this was born TWIM or Tranquil Wisdom Insight Meditation completely based on the suttas in the Majjhima Nikaya. He found the Jhanas had an entirely different explanation and experience. Nibbana was possible!
He teaches a form of meditation involving relaxation and smiling:
https://www.dhammasukha.org/the-6rs.html
The 6Rs are steps which evolve into one fluid motion becoming a new wholesome habitual tendency that relieves any dis-ease in mind and body. This cycle begins when mindfulness remembers the 6Rs which are:
1. Recognize
2. Release
3. Relax
4. Re-Smile
5. Return
6. Repeat
This is somewhat analogous to what I wrote above:
Jim Smith:
You can't rest in a pleasant state unless you have reached perfection. There is always something that disturbs your peace but since you prefer a pleasant state, you see what is disturbing your peace and you figure out how to let go of it (get back to a peaceful state) during the meditation session and during daily life.
Jim Smith:
What is the difference between meditation and ordinary consciousness?
Mindfulness and meditation are the same impersonal process of the mind producing thoughts emotions and impulses.
What am I?
This situation calls for two scoops of ice cream.
... and probably merits hot fudge and whipped cream on top.
The milestones are irrelevant, they are only useful for busybodies and climbers who want to keep a record of who is better than whom.
Jim, this view seems extreme to me. I had what you would probably describe as gradual awakening, but there were definite markers along my path that were very helpful to me. I think it's wiser to accept the utility of path markers and not be quite so dismissive.
YMMV, and you are certainly entitled to your opinion.
Chris Marti:
The milestones are irrelevant, they are only useful for busybodies and climbers who want to keep a record of who is better than whom.
Jim, this view seems extreme to me. I had what you would probably describe as gradual awakening, but there were definite markers along my path that were very helpful to me. I think it's wiser to accept the utility of path markers and not be quite so dismissive.
YMMV, and you are certainly entitled to your opinion.
When I say everyone has some amount of awakening and they can get more by practicing, and that the difference between two people on either side of the line (of a milestone) is insignificant I believe those views come directly from what Shinzen Young wrote about gradual awakening. By milestones I mean the four stages of awakeing starting with stream entry. I also get from what Shinzen wrote that there is a difference in having enlightenment and experiencing/exhibiting the effects of enlightenment vs. actually knowing something is significantly different and knowing that difference is due to some level of enlightenment. The former is the important part. Knowing you have enlightenment is something that is not really part of having enlightenment - it's a different kind of thing. Like if you are a nice person, you are a nice person even if you think you aren't. What you think about it is not part of it.
Is that the kind of thing you experienced? What were the markers you found helpful?
Chris Marti:
Is that the kind of thing you experienced? What were the markers you found helpful?
The four paths are the biggest part of it but there are a lot of signposts that were just as helpful for me. I worked for some time with a teacher and that person communicated all kinds of indicators to me that both spurred and assisted my practice. One example is the jhanas. They just showed up at one point and without knowing what they were and why they showed up when they did (generally speaking, of course) I might have ignored them or possibly become enamored or mired in them.
FYI - you seem kind of angry about immediate awakening. Am I right about that?
I did not have the jhanas in mind when when I wrote about milestones. And I don't disupute that certain experiences in meditation follow one another like the stages of vipassana when you follow that path. I have a lot of respect for the empirical experiences people report. But as far as I can tell absence of jhanas does not limit the level of enlightenment you can have so while I think they are helpful and maybe in some paths they can help lead one to a certain level of awakening, I don't consider them to be definitive for everyone. They are optional.
I am not aware of my aggregates being angry.
When I came to this forum, due to my limited background on the subject, I didn't know if anyone was enlightened except maybe Zen masters (and I had my doubts about some of them). Then I read what you and a few other wrote and I had to adjust to a new worldview. Then I found out Daniel thinks there is only one way to enlightenment and I had to adjust again. Then I read what Shinzen wrote about gradual enlightenment and the whole kit and kaboddle seemed to make sense to me and I am reacting with delayed astonishment as I adjust and think through the implications because it has such far reaching implications for my understanding of Buddhism and the culture of Buddhism in the modern world and how it relates to the history of the development of Buddhism from Buddha's time to the present. What I am astonished about is that I had to go digging in the documents section of a private facebook group to find this information that is so profound. I am astonished that it and the implications of it seem to be unknown outside that electronic document and Shinzen's mind.
Chris Marti:
The milestones are irrelevant, they are only useful for busybodies and climbers who want to keep a record of who is better than whom.
Jim, this view seems extreme to me. I had what you would probably describe as gradual awakening, but there were definite markers along my path that were very helpful to me. I think it's wiser to accept the utility of path markers and not be quite so dismissive.
YMMV, and you are certainly entitled to your opinion.
And I think that would be a misunderstanding of what Shinzen says. He has talked clearly about cessations, and even in one or a few of his talks on youtube, talks about it and says that "That is how you would get Stream Entry". What describes before that for instance, is that the mental image space itself collapses to a dimensionless point. When he says Absolute Rest, he means cessation. When he uses Gone with capital G, he means cessation.
And also in one of his videos he says that he often uses four paths model.
Siavash:
Chris Marti:
The milestones are irrelevant, they are only useful for busybodies and climbers who want to keep a record of who is better than whom.
Jim, this view seems extreme to me. I had what you would probably describe as gradual awakening, but there were definite markers along my path that were very helpful to me. I think it's wiser to accept the utility of path markers and not be quite so dismissive.
YMMV, and you are certainly entitled to your opinion.
And I think that would be a misunderstanding of what Shinzen says. He has talked clearly about cessations, and even in one or a few of his talks on youtube, talks about it and says that "That is how you would get Stream Entry". What describes before that for instance, is that the mental image space itself collapses to a dimensionless point. When he says Absolute Rest, he means cessation. When he uses Gone with capital G, he means cessation.
And also in one of his videos he says that he often uses four paths model.
I explained my view on that in another thread, Shinzen is conversant in the conventional view and can discuss it using the appropriate terms. But that conventional view is not complete. It seems to me that Shinzen's views on gradual enlightnement add to the conventional view and are fairly easy to understand and my interpretations are very straight forwared and directly implicit in what he wrote.
I'll link Shinzen's article again. If you can quote any part that contradicts what I have written it would be helpful or if there is anything I have written that you think is not really in there also let me know.
Here is that link again:
https://www.dharmaoverground.org/discussion/-/message_boards/message/15808951#_19_message_15808951
"However,for most people who’ve studied with me it doesn’t happen that way. Not suddenly. What does happen is that the person gradually works through the things that get in the way of enlightenment, but so gradually that they might not notice."
...
So what typically happens is that over a period of years, and indeed decades, within that person the craving, aversion and unconsciousness -‐the mula kleshas (the fundamental “impurities”), get worked through. Because it’s gradual, they may not realize how much they’ve changed. As the mula kleshas get worked through they suffer less and the fundamental alienation between inside and outsidediminishes. But because all this is happening gradually they’re acclimatizing as it’s occurring.
In acclimatizingthey may not realize how far they’ve come.
...
So what typically happens is that over a period of years, and indeed decades, within that person the craving, aversion and unconsciousness -‐the mula kleshas (the fundamental “impurities”), get worked through. Because it’s gradual, they may not realize how much they’ve changed. As the mula kleshas get worked through they suffer less and the fundamental alienation between inside and outsidediminishes. But because all this is happening gradually they’re acclimatizing as it’s occurring.
In acclimatizingthey may not realize how far they’ve come.
He says some people get enlightenment gradually without knowing it. That means someone can be enlightened without knowing it. I infer that knowing you are enlightened is not necessarily a part of being enlightened. And what he wrote means progress is continuous there are not necessarily any "aha" moments where before you were not at all enlightened and now you are definately enlightened. So I also infer that enlightenment is not like a thing you have or don't have but like a substance everyone has more or less of and you can increase your level of enlightenment in small amounts continuosuly as you contiunue to practice - that is what I understand gradual enlightenment to mean.
If you can increase your level of enlightenment in small amounts continuously as you continue to practice you don't need milestones like stream entry because they are arbitrary - with gradual enlightenment there is no practical difference between someone just before or just after stream entry. The only use would be to rank people according to who has a higher level of enlightenment.
If you can increase your level of enlightenment in small amounts continuously as you continue to practice you don't need milestones like stream entry because they are arbitrary - with gradual enlightenment there is no practical difference between someone just before or just after stream entry.
Does the frog eventually cook when the water eventually boils?
Jim, I think there is a multitude of paths to awakening. I've never heard of any two people having the same path. What if Zen is right, and Daniel Ingram is right, and the Sufis are right, and the Christain mystics are right, and Shinzen Young is right? What if we all just have different practices and different cultures and makeups, and a different set of experiences along the way?
Chris Marti:
If you can increase your level of enlightenment in small amounts continuously as you continue to practice you don't need milestones like stream entry because they are arbitrary - with gradual enlightenment there is no practical difference between someone just before or just after stream entry.
Does the frog eventually cook when the water eventually boils?
Jim, I think there is a multitude of paths to awakening. I've never heard of any two people having the same path. What if Zen is right, and Daniel Ingram is right, and the Sufis are right, and the Christain mystics are right, and Shinzen Young is right? What if we all just have different practices and different cultures and makeups, and a different set of experiences along the way?
As far as I can tell Daniel says his way is the only way so I don't agree with that part of his way, otherwise I don't dispute the path he teaches. But his exclusiveness is one reason I am pushing the gradual enlightenment thing here in these (his) forums. To help people understand that there there are other ways. I think Daniel is wrong and it is harmful to people following different paths who might come here for fellowship with other Buddhists and then be told their path is wrong.
Jim Smith:
Chris Marti:
If you can increase your level of enlightenment in small amounts continuously as you continue to practice you don't need milestones like stream entry because they are arbitrary - with gradual enlightenment there is no practical difference between someone just before or just after stream entry.
Does the frog eventually cook when the water eventually boils?
Jim, I think there is a multitude of paths to awakening. I've never heard of any two people having the same path. What if Zen is right, and Daniel Ingram is right, and the Sufis are right, and the Christain mystics are right, and Shinzen Young is right? What if we all just have different practices and different cultures and makeups, and a different set of experiences along the way?
As far as I can tell Daniel says his way is the only way so I don't agree with that part of his way, otherwise I don't dispute the path he teaches. But his exclusiveness is one reason I am pushing the gradual enlightenment thing here in these (his) forums. To help people understand that there there are other ways. I think Daniel is wrong and it is harmful to people following different paths who might come here for fellowship with other Buddhists and then be told their path is wrong.
Dear Jim,
You are misrepresenting both Shinzen and Daniel. I sincerely ask you, if you are quoting something from them, or saying something that presumably is representing their words and ideas, please include the actual and exact quotes from them, so that readers could read themeselves, and know for themeselves what Shinzen and Daniel have said.
Good luck and be well.
Siavash:
Jim Smith:
Chris Marti:
If you can increase your level of enlightenment in small amounts continuously as you continue to practice you don't need milestones like stream entry because they are arbitrary - with gradual enlightenment there is no practical difference between someone just before or just after stream entry.
Does the frog eventually cook when the water eventually boils?
Jim, I think there is a multitude of paths to awakening. I've never heard of any two people having the same path. What if Zen is right, and Daniel Ingram is right, and the Sufis are right, and the Christain mystics are right, and Shinzen Young is right? What if we all just have different practices and different cultures and makeups, and a different set of experiences along the way?
As far as I can tell Daniel says his way is the only way so I don't agree with that part of his way, otherwise I don't dispute the path he teaches. But his exclusiveness is one reason I am pushing the gradual enlightenment thing here in these (his) forums. To help people understand that there there are other ways. I think Daniel is wrong and it is harmful to people following different paths who might come here for fellowship with other Buddhists and then be told their path is wrong.
Dear Jim,
You are misrepresenting both Shinzen and Daniel. I sincerely ask you, if you are quoting something from them, or saying something that presumably is representing their words and ideas, please include the actual and exact quotes from them, so that readers could read themeselves, and know for themeselves what Shinzen and Daniel have said.
Good luck and be well.
There was another thread where someone claimed Daniel said in the other paths that don't have cessation they really do have cessation but they don't know it. That means you can't be enlightened without cessation. In a different thread when I asked about this someone brought up Shinzen as an example of someone who believes cessation is not necessary for enlightenment. That is how I found out about Shinzen in the first place.
There was a video where Daniel defined stream entry in terms of phenomenon that is specific to the stages of insight. The implication was obvious: paths that don't follow the stages of insight can't produce enlightenment.
Normally I would provide links to the other threads to back up my statements but the search capabilities of these forums, as far as I can tell, can only search titles not posts.
Jim Smith:
Chris Marti:
If you can increase your level of enlightenment in small amounts continuously as you continue to practice you don't need milestones like stream entry because they are arbitrary - with gradual enlightenment there is no practical difference between someone just before or just after stream entry.
Does the frog eventually cook when the water eventually boils?
Jim, I think there is a multitude of paths to awakening. I've never heard of any two people having the same path. What if Zen is right, and Daniel Ingram is right, and the Sufis are right, and the Christain mystics are right, and Shinzen Young is right? What if we all just have different practices and different cultures and makeups, and a different set of experiences along the way?
As far as I can tell Daniel says his way is the only way so I don't agree with that part of his way, otherwise I don't dispute the path he teaches. But his exclusiveness is one reason I am pushing the gradual enlightenment thing here in these (his) forums. To help people understand that there there are other ways. I think Daniel is wrong and it is harmful to people following different paths who might come here for fellowship with other Buddhists and then be told their path is wrong.
Whether or not cessations are seen as part of the path has nothing to do with whether awakening is sudden or gradual. With all due respect, you are mixing things up.
As for the milestones of four paths, that is gradual awakening. It's just that some think it is good to have a map of the terrain whereas others think it brings about performance anxiety and prestige. People are different, so to each their own. By all means, don't use the maps if you don't like them. Insisting that all of us who find them useful are just wanting to show off, or whatever it was you said, is unnecessary, don't you think?
Please don't go around saying that Daniel says that other paths are wrong. He does not say that. You saying that he says that may cause harm to people who take your word for it.
Jim Smith:
If there is an important first milestone along the path of awakening, I would suggest it be defined as the point where the results of practice become so self-evident that you no longer care about reaching any milestone, or care about validation from other people, because you have something so beneficial you stop looking for something in the future.
Nice
Yes, for me it certainly is the realization "when there is profound mindfulness "I" forget to suffer".
It's right here, right now. I can not be mindful in the past or future, but right here, now. As soon mindfulness of phenomena is not present there be self-validating spins leading to clinging.
There is no way around this but being awake to each presenting moment during the conscious hours.
It's not easy off the cushion but on cushion makes perfect off cushion the more we develop the muscle of attention.
On the subject of mice --
Our house is very old - 130 years. It was once a farmhouse but this is now a suburban area. There are lots of mice. We get them sometimes. They come in the early winter, mostly, when the weather gets cold, and we have several ways to deal with them. One is our cat, who likes to chase them outside and inside. He'll scare them off most of the time because he prowls the basement where they get in. Second, we do our best to block their access but they can get through openings that are the width of a pencil, so finding all those places in an old house is difficult. Third, we set mechanical traps if, and only if, they get upstairs. These are the old fashioned mousetraps that snap quickly and strongly, killing them instantly. We use peanut butter as the bait. We never use poisons or glue traps. Those are way too cruel.
Also - don't wait to deal with your mice. They breed fast. Really fast. Before you know it you'll have not a few, but many, then many, many, many. It's a geometric progression.
Lastly, I doubt that releasing mice outside is a death sentence unless you just like providing them with a very cosy existence inside your house. Outside is where 99% of the mice live, after all. They'll just have to navigate the wild, avoid the racoons, possums, coyotes, cats (mostly cats in my area) and birds of prey.
Our house is very old - 130 years. It was once a farmhouse but this is now a suburban area. There are lots of mice. We get them sometimes. They come in the early winter, mostly, when the weather gets cold, and we have several ways to deal with them. One is our cat, who likes to chase them outside and inside. He'll scare them off most of the time because he prowls the basement where they get in. Second, we do our best to block their access but they can get through openings that are the width of a pencil, so finding all those places in an old house is difficult. Third, we set mechanical traps if, and only if, they get upstairs. These are the old fashioned mousetraps that snap quickly and strongly, killing them instantly. We use peanut butter as the bait. We never use poisons or glue traps. Those are way too cruel.
Also - don't wait to deal with your mice. They breed fast. Really fast. Before you know it you'll have not a few, but many, then many, many, many. It's a geometric progression.
Lastly, I doubt that releasing mice outside is a death sentence unless you just like providing them with a very cosy existence inside your house. Outside is where 99% of the mice live, after all. They'll just have to navigate the wild, avoid the racoons, possums, coyotes, cats (mostly cats in my area) and birds of prey.
Jim Smith:
Meditation has helped me learn how to let go of my ego. (But I don't claim to have perfected it.)
The way I meditate is very relaxing.
After a lot of practice, relaxing now feels to me like letting go of unpleasant emotions because unpleasant emotions are the source of tension. You can't be angry and relaxed at the same time.
Most unpleasant emotions have at their root some sort of attachment to the self.
After a lot more practice, letting go of unpleasant emotions begins to feel like letting go of the ego. You recognize the egotisitical nature of unpleasant emotions and relaxing begins to feel like giving up the egotism. You realize that unpleasant emotions are selfish. Producing unpleasant emotions feels like a selfish act.
The ego is a creation of the mind. It is an opinion not something concrete. It is much nicer to be relaxed than to be upset by unpleasnt emotions in a pointless attempt to defend an imaginary thing. (I don't mean to imply that problems needing attention should be ignored - problems should be solved with reason and compassion not with egotistical tantrums.)
Trying to maintain a relaxed state during and after meditation feels like watching for the ego to arise and letting go of it before it can cause trouble.
Letting go of ego, feels to me like giving up my sense of self-importance. I recognize egocentric attachments are the cause of the unpleasant emotions that cause suffering for myself and for others. I can see how I produce them and can (sometimes) refrain from doing so by staying relaxed or relaxing.
The way I meditate is very relaxing.
After a lot of practice, relaxing now feels to me like letting go of unpleasant emotions because unpleasant emotions are the source of tension. You can't be angry and relaxed at the same time.
Most unpleasant emotions have at their root some sort of attachment to the self.
After a lot more practice, letting go of unpleasant emotions begins to feel like letting go of the ego. You recognize the egotisitical nature of unpleasant emotions and relaxing begins to feel like giving up the egotism. You realize that unpleasant emotions are selfish. Producing unpleasant emotions feels like a selfish act.
The ego is a creation of the mind. It is an opinion not something concrete. It is much nicer to be relaxed than to be upset by unpleasnt emotions in a pointless attempt to defend an imaginary thing. (I don't mean to imply that problems needing attention should be ignored - problems should be solved with reason and compassion not with egotistical tantrums.)
Trying to maintain a relaxed state during and after meditation feels like watching for the ego to arise and letting go of it before it can cause trouble.
Letting go of ego, feels to me like giving up my sense of self-importance. I recognize egocentric attachments are the cause of the unpleasant emotions that cause suffering for myself and for others. I can see how I produce them and can (sometimes) refrain from doing so by staying relaxed or relaxing.
Maybe this can help with all that self-validating chatter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0B_Jdu8k-OE
Hello Jim,
Thought I would say hello, and was intrigued to see what you were up to since you were quoting some Tibetan sources in another post.
It is hard for someone to feel like it is not "my" body. It is hard to for someone to feel like it is not "me" observing.
I agree! It will never be "you" that notices that you are not your body, or "you" observing it. This is one reason it is commonly said that "you" can't be enlightened - when it happens, NO-ONE and ( seemingly paradoxically) everything is enlightened. This is very clear once it is seen.
In my unsolicited experience it that is best to hold the idea of anatta and/or shunyata, of enlightenment, or even progress, lightly. Keep the intention to have insight certainly, but let go of the idea of progress and just practice diligently. Insight is like a wet bar of soap in the shower - the harder you grasp it the further from you it flies. This is how training happened in the various Dzogchen meditation centers I worked in, for what it is worth.
Thought I would say hello, and was intrigued to see what you were up to since you were quoting some Tibetan sources in another post.
Jim Smith:
It is hard for someone to feel like it is not "my" body. It is hard to for someone to feel like it is not "me" observing.
I agree! It will never be "you" that notices that you are not your body, or "you" observing it. This is one reason it is commonly said that "you" can't be enlightened - when it happens, NO-ONE and ( seemingly paradoxically) everything is enlightened. This is very clear once it is seen.
In my unsolicited experience it that is best to hold the idea of anatta and/or shunyata, of enlightenment, or even progress, lightly. Keep the intention to have insight certainly, but let go of the idea of progress and just practice diligently. Insight is like a wet bar of soap in the shower - the harder you grasp it the further from you it flies. This is how training happened in the various Dzogchen meditation centers I worked in, for what it is worth.
Stirling Campbell:
Hello Jim,
Thought I would say hello, and was intrigued to see what you were up to since you were quoting some Tibetan sources in another post.
It is hard for someone to feel like it is not "my" body. It is hard to for someone to feel like it is not "me" observing.
I agree! It will never be "you" that notices that you are not your body, or "you" observing it. This is one reason it is commonly said that "you" can't be enlightened - when it happens, NO-ONE and ( seemingly paradoxically) everything is enlightened. This is very clear once it is seen.
In my unsolicited experience it that is best to hold the idea of anatta and/or shunyata, of enlightenment, or even progress, lightly. Keep the intention to have insight certainly, but let go of the idea of progress and just practice diligently. Insight is like a wet bar of soap in the shower - the harder you grasp it the further from you it flies. This is how training happened in the various Dzogchen meditation centers I worked in, for what it is worth.
Thought I would say hello, and was intrigued to see what you were up to since you were quoting some Tibetan sources in another post.
Jim Smith:
It is hard for someone to feel like it is not "my" body. It is hard to for someone to feel like it is not "me" observing.
I agree! It will never be "you" that notices that you are not your body, or "you" observing it. This is one reason it is commonly said that "you" can't be enlightened - when it happens, NO-ONE and ( seemingly paradoxically) everything is enlightened. This is very clear once it is seen.
In my unsolicited experience it that is best to hold the idea of anatta and/or shunyata, of enlightenment, or even progress, lightly. Keep the intention to have insight certainly, but let go of the idea of progress and just practice diligently. Insight is like a wet bar of soap in the shower - the harder you grasp it the further from you it flies. This is how training happened in the various Dzogchen meditation centers I worked in, for what it is worth.
Hi Stirling.
Thanks for dropping by.
It seems to me that the thought/feeling "I want to understand anatta" that someone may have when looking for "what am I" or trying to understand what is anatta, is an obstacle because there is the "I" right there in that thougth/feeling. You can't experience anatta if you are thinking "I want... ". When you let go of (ie. stop thinking) "I want something" (awakeing or anatta) and just experience each perception (sights etc, thoughts etc) as they arise in consciousness without making any assumptions about self, letting go of any thoughts about self or not-self*, letting go of any thoughts about a watcher or no-watcher* (ie. not constructing a self in that moment), I think a student is getting closer. Noticing the difference between observing with the feeling "I want to understand", or "is there a watcher?", and just observing, is ... uh ... educational. It eventually helps you to recognize the subtle, non-explicit, implicit, "I", "me" or "mine" that may arise in thoughts and emotions etc.
*Hiding within the thought "there is no self", there is a self. Within the thought "there is no watcher" a watcher is lurking.
Telling someone to "observe the activity of the mind and try to find a self and you'll see that you can't find one" I think is not helpful because it instructs them to perpetuate the error - in order to look for a self, you have to think of a self, you have to make a self (an illusion of a self).
I think it would be more helpful to tell someone to observe the activity of the mind without thinking about or making asusmptions about self, or a watcher, or anatta, or awakening, or practice, or meditation, or mindfulness, or the path, or dharma, or Buddha, or attaiing anything from meditation and mindfulness - just observe with a clear mind.
"emotional pain but you don't take it so seriously, you don't act defensively, or insulted, angrily, if someone says something nasty to you. You are not attached to self. "
If Im to see someone beating or abusing in anyway someone I dont even know I would very likely feel defensive for the victims sake and get involved and likley even feel angy to a cretain exptent and would act on it even if this will involve fist fight.
I wonder if Im doing something wrong in this instance as I would feel emotinal pain for the victim mostly but likely for the attacker as well. Stil, life goes on and being involved in life is part of it all.
I mean seeing attachment and knowing it does not mean not acting on it if it means benefiting another being. Or?
All this stuff is a huge grey zone as I see it. There are no definitive answers to this.
All we can do is "know thy self" = meditation = direct clear comprehanding of arisen phenomena.
But then again I do not aspire to become a Monk Bum, bum!
If Im to see someone beating or abusing in anyway someone I dont even know I would very likely feel defensive for the victims sake and get involved and likley even feel angy to a cretain exptent and would act on it even if this will involve fist fight.
I wonder if Im doing something wrong in this instance as I would feel emotinal pain for the victim mostly but likely for the attacker as well. Stil, life goes on and being involved in life is part of it all.
I mean seeing attachment and knowing it does not mean not acting on it if it means benefiting another being. Or?
All this stuff is a huge grey zone as I see it. There are no definitive answers to this.
All we can do is "know thy self" = meditation = direct clear comprehanding of arisen phenomena.
But then again I do not aspire to become a Monk
Bum, bum!