Pitch-black emptiness and Mahasi Sayadaw technique

[kirk5a]

Though what I described to the teacher was in the context of vipassana practice, the experience of the rise and fall of what I was experiencing, particularly in terms of the "falling" away of experience. It was when the final bit experience seemingly fell away, nothing arising, leaving me in a with a period of just "being there" -- no arising of anything through the sense doors, no thought, no anything, just "being there."

The teacher said a bunch of stuff ending with: "You are now a stream-winner." My reply was: "No, I am not." I pointed out to him that this nothing more than an artifact of concentration and that I used to have the exactly same sort of experience when doing prayers as a Catholic as a kid.

Thanks for sharing that Tilt.

What about the Paṭisambhidāmagga definition that Geoff presented - do you think it's possible to do a self-evaluation according to that? If so, do you spend any time doing that evaluation? I'm not asking you to say whether you think you've reached stream entry or not, just wondering how you approach the matter. Don't consider it at all, or...?

[Akuma]

Has it ever occured to you that what you said here is both bone dry and really does not say anything? Give me the suttas that deal with real life.

There is, however, an easy answer to my question, even from an Abhidhamma point of view.

Sorry man I tend to assume that ppl look at Buddhism from the same meta-school perspective as me and tend to presuppose knowledge or critical inquiry that "believers" usually dont have.
In any case to answer that question, no of course Nirvana is not something "out there".

[kirk5a]

Buuuut, who can tell us whether we've reached stream-entry or not? Isn't it somewhat important to know?... Isn't there some clear canonical standard we can use for ourselves?

Of course there is. The canon tells us that it is the cutting off and full extinguishment (parinibbāna) of the first three fetters. The Paṭisambhidāmagga:

How is it that the discernment of contemplating what is cut off is gnosis of liberation (vimuttiñāṇa)?

By the stream-entry path the following imperfections are completely cut off in his own mind: (1) identity-view (sakkāyadiṭṭhi), (2) doubt (vicikicchā), (3) mistaken adherence to rules and duty (sīlabbataparāmāsa), (4) the underlying tendency of views (diṭṭhānusaya), (5) the underlying tendency of doubt (vicikicchānusaya). Mind is liberated, completely liberated from these five imperfections with their modes of obsession.

How is it that the discernment of the termination of occurrence in one who is fully aware is gnosis of full extinguishment (parinibbāna ñāṇa)?

Through the stream-entry path he terminates identity view, doubt, and mistaken adherence to rules and duty.... This discernment of the termination of occurrence in one who is fully aware is gnosis of full extinguishment....

He causes the cessation of identity view, doubt, and mistaken adherence to rules and duty through the stream-entry path.

All the best,

Geoff

Thanks Geoff. Is there more explanation of those 5 imperfections? How would one recognize their occurrence? What is, exactly, identity-view, doubt, mistaken adherence to rules and duty, the underlying tendency of views and the underlying tendency of doubt?

[kirk5a]

I asked earlier whether Ajahn Chah said more on the nature of stream-entry. I did find this story, retold by Ajahn Amaro.

"The newcomer proudly introduced himself as a stream-enterer (the first stage of Enlightenment in which one is free from the first three of the 10 fetters that bind one to the sensuous world). After replying “In the village I’m from, stream-enterer is another word for a mangy dog,” Ajahn Chah watched the new arrival stomp off in anger. “Well, so much for stream-entry,” he commented in so many words."
http://www.abhayagiri.org/main/article/1878/

My interpretation is that Ajahn Chah was testing the newcomer. And the test seemed to concern whether this person had really gotten past identity-view or not. If this person had, I suspect there would not have been the stomping off in anger. So Ajahn Chah concluded - nope. (I'm sure Ajahn Chah would have tried to help this person more if they had stuck around, but pride seems to have been more important than being open enough to hear what a teacher was saying. Too bad!)

The rest of that article is quite relevant to the question “How do you know when you are enlightened?”

[parth]

Kirk5a wrote :

My interpretation is that Ajahn Chah was testing the newcomer. And the test seemed to concern whether this person had really gotten past identity-view or not. If this person had, I suspect there would not have been the stomping off in anger. So Ajahn Chah concluded - nope. (I'm sure Ajahn Chah would have tried to help this person more if they had stuck around, but pride seems to have been more important than being open enough to hear what a teacher was saying. Too bad!)

At first stage, one does not get past ego and pride, what identity view means really is that one realises that this body and mind is not "I/ me" and apparantly in the stage beyond, there is no "I" so while the view goes away but ego and pride continue.

What Ajahn Chah was probably testing was humility and zest for learning.

Regards

Parth

[rowyourboat]

I think Ajhan Chah was testing whether this man could let go of him-self even for a little bit- and see the jibe with wisdom (that he should have gained)- clearly he couldn't.

There are loads of methods of evaluating whether a person is a stream entrant:

This sutta for example, and those suttas linked to underneath

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

with metta

Matheesha

[tiltbillings]

Has it ever occured to you that what you said here is both bone dry and really does not say anything? Give me the suttas that deal with real life.

There is, however, an easy answer to my question, even from an Abhidhamma point of view.

Sorry man I tend to assume that ppl look at Buddhism from the same meta-school perspective as me and tend to presuppose knowledge or critical inquiry that "believers" usually dont have.

Huh? Believers don't have?. I have not found the Sujin/Van Gorkom version of Buddhism particularly characteristic of critical inquiry.

In any case to answer that question, no of course Nirvana is not something "out there".

Does it "exist" outside the individual who has destroyed greed, hatred and delusion?

[tiltbillings]

Though what I described to the teacher was in the context of vipassana practice, the experience of the rise and fall of what I was experiencing, particularly in terms of the "falling" away of experience. It was when the final bit experience seemingly fell away, nothing arising, leaving me in a with a period of just "being there" -- no arising of anything through the sense doors, no thought, no anything, just "being there."

The teacher said a bunch of stuff ending with: "You are now a stream-winner." My reply was: "No, I am not." I pointed out to him that this nothing more than an artifact of concentration and that I used to have the exactly same sort of experience when doing prayers as a Catholic as a kid.

Thanks for sharing that Tilt.

What about the Paṭisambhidāmagga definition that Geoff presented - do you think it's possible to do a self-evaluation according to that? If so, do you spend any time doing that evaluation? I'm not asking you to say whether you think you've reached stream entry or not, just wondering how you approach the matter. Don't consider it at all, or...?

With any sort of evaluation, there is always the possibility of being wrong and being wrong with the unflagging certitude that one is right, which then makes one really, really wrong. Self-evaluate, but don't hang onto it. Continue with the practice.

Dhp 271-272. Not by rules and observances, not even by much learning, nor by gain of absorption, nor by a life of seclusion, nor by thinking, "I enjoy the bliss of renunciation, which is not experienced by the worldling" should you, O monks, rest content, until the utter destruction of cankers (Arahantship) is reached.

"Pitch-black emptiness" is just pitch-black emptiness. What matters is not experiencing pitch-black emptiness; rather, what matters is the ability to simply let go, of not investing oneself into one's experiences, seeing that the self is part of a process of rising and falling. There is nothing that can be forced here. It is a natural unfolding that arises from simply paying attention to what we are.

[kirk5a]

Fair enough, and nicely said Tilt. I can live with that.

[tiltbillings]

Fair enough, and nicely said Tilt. I can live with that.

Thank you. The interesting things is that I could be wrong about some of this, but I do not think I am wrong about the need to continue with the practice and to simply learn not to invest oneself into such ideas as being a stream-winner. Anyway, it has been a good discussion.

[Akuma]

Huh? Believers don't have?. I have not found the Sujin/Van Gorkom version of Buddhism particularly characteristic of critical inquiry.

I assume you are a Theravadin and you asked for a reference so I told you the one that sprung up.

Does it "exist" outside the individual who has destroyed greed, hatred and delusion?

Why should it?

[tiltbillings]

Huh? Believers don't have?. I have not found the Sujin/Van Gorkom version of Buddhism particularly characteristic of critical inquiry.

I assume you are a Theravadin and you asked for a reference so I told you the one that sprung up.

I assume I am a Theravadin as well, but the Sujin/Van Gorkom approach strikes me as rather peripheral, though some people find the Sujin/Van Gorkom approach of value.

Does it "exist" outside the individual who has destroyed greed, hatred and delusion?

Why should it?

But certainly seems to be talked about that way by some.

[Ñāṇa]

I asked earlier whether Ajahn Chah said more on the nature of stream-entry.

Ajahn Chah has also said the following on the subject of stream-entry. From Food for the Heart: "Not Sure!" -- The Standard of the Noble Ones:

The Buddha is still alive to this very day, go in and find him. Where is he? At aniccam, go in and find him there, go and bow to him: aniccam, uncertainty. You can stop right there for starters.

If the mind tries to tell you, ''I'm a sotāpanna now,'' go and bow to the sotāpanna. He'll tell you himself, ''It's all uncertain.'' If you meet a sakadāgāmī go and pay respects to him. When he sees you he'll simply say, ''Not a sure thing!'' If there is an anāgāmī go and bow to him. He'll tell you only one thing... ''Uncertain.'' If you meet even an arahant, go and bow to him, he'll tell you even more firmly, ''It's all even more uncertain!'' You'll hear the words of the Noble Ones... ''Everything is uncertain, don't cling to anything.''

And on the value of keeping anicca in mind at all times:

All the teachings in this world can be contained in this one teaching: aniccam. Think about it. I've searched for over forty years as a monk and this is all I could find. That and patient endurance. This is how to approach the Buddha's teaching... aniccam: it's all uncertain.

No matter how sure the mind wants to be, just tell it, ''Not sure!'' Whenever the mind wants to grab on to something as a sure thing, just say, ''It's not sure, it's transient.'' Just ram it down with this. Using the Dhamma of the Buddha it all comes down to this. It's not that it's merely a momentary phenomenon. Whether standing, walking, sitting or lying down, you see everything in that way. Whether liking arises or dislike arises you see it all in the same way. This is getting close to the Buddha, close to the Dhamma.

Now I feel that this is a more valuable way to practice. All my practice from the early days up to the present time has been like this. I didn't actually rely on the scriptures, but then I didn't disregard them either. I didn't rely on a teacher but then I didn't exactly ''go it alone.'' My practice was all ''neither this nor that.''

Even though this may seem like a simplified dhamma, it's actually the result of mature and profound practice. Often the Abhidhammapiṭaka treatises and the stage models of vipassanā ñāṇa-s -- which seem deep in their complexity -- don't accurately convey the pith wisdom of mature practice rooted in a life of simplicity, renunciation, and a calm & clear mind.

All the best,

Geoff

[tiltbillings]

the perception of impermanence should be cultivated for the removal of the conceit 'I am.' For when one perceives impermanence, Meghiya, the perception of not-self is established. When one perceives not-self one reaches the removal of the conceit 'I am,' which is called Nibbana here and now." Ud 37 (4.1)

[rowyourboat]

Stream entry or any other attainment is a tough call. For decades the Buddha was the only person who decided what degree of attainment a person had reached. Each time he visited a village where he had taught before, and if one of those disciples had died, Ven Ananda would ask him what the attainment of that person was. Then the Buddha would proclaim him/her as a stream entrant, sakadagamin etc. However he had so many disciples and Ven Ananda would ask so many times that the Buddha gave a sermon on the 'Mirror of the Dhamma' where one could decide for oneself whether they were a stream entrant or not. It is noteworthy that emptiness experiences are not included in these sermons. I think this is because of the confusion and misleading that can occur when we look/think of such experiences. The Buddha wisely avoided confusing his disciples. I think this type of thing (including the vipassana nanas) are not for students to decide but rather for instructors who have seen the same sequence of vipassana nanas arising and seen the nirodha experiences of their students at the culmination of their vipassana. These insights/experiences are difficult to 'diagnose' - it requires a theoretical framework, experience within oneself, and seeing it manifesting in students repeatedly and knowing what all the 'soft signs' (non-verbal communication) are before apprehending these states. It would be very difficult for a student to have this depth of knowledge and experience.

In any case Tilt is right. All we have to do is let go off all 'attainments' and focus on the task at hand- because they can be a genuine hindrance. Better to be heedful:
"This is how one dwells in heedlessness.

"And how does one dwell in heedfulness? When a monk dwells with restraint over the faculty of the eye, the mind is not stained with forms cognizable via the eye. When the mind is not stained, there is joy. There being joy, there is rapture. There being rapture, there is serenity. There being serenity, he dwells in ease. The mind of one at ease becomes centered. When the mind is centered, phenomena (dhammas) [and their characteristics] become manifest. When phenomena are manifest, one is classed simply as one who dwells in heedfulness."

With metta

Matheesha

[Freawaru]

Hello,

Rod Bucknell describe his experience:

The vipassana centre in Bangkok where I began my meditative training claimed to teach the system of practice developed by Mahasi Sayadaw of Myanma, often called Burmese satipatthana.

[...]

At the end of three weeks I was able to maintain uninterrupted mental one-pointedness for prolonged periods. During such periods nothing was present in consciousness but the meditation object, the sensations in the abdomen. The rest of the body, and the world outside it, had ceased to exist. I identified completely with the sensations: I was the sensations. Increasingly I experienced synaesthetic effects. For example, I often "saw" the pattern of sensations in the abdomen in various forms -- usually as an oscillating system of levers, or as a pulsating globe of light. On my teacher's advice I took this mental image as my new object of concentration. (The sitting practice had, by this stage, become the principal component of the meditative regime; mindful walking was now of secondary importance.) Then one day, as I was concentrating on my pulsating image, it suddenly disappeared, plunging me into a pitch-back emptiness. My teacher regarded this strange experience as an important meditative attainment, and told me to cultivate and prolong it. I followed his instruction for a time -- until I learned that the objective was to prolong the state of emptiness to twenty-four hours. The achievement of that feat would constitute successful completion of the meditation course.

At that point I decided it was time to leave the vipassana centre. I had begun to doubt the value of this state of mental emptiness, and of some of my other hard-won meditative skills as well. Thanking my teacher, I left Bangkok and moved to Chiangmai in the north of the country.

In Chiangmai I entered another vipassana centre, to find out if their methods were significantly different. There were differences in detail, but they amounted simply to different ways of inducing the same concentrated state.

It seems to be quite pointless state.

Not necessarily. Ajaan Fuang obviously had enough experience of it to be able to induce it whenever he wanted.

It does take concentration to reach it - though not quite as much as jhana. So one does practice concentration when attempting it. Rod Bucknell had relatively few problems to do mindfulness practice after experiencing it. To me this state feels like ... sidestepping (for lack of a better term)... absorption: there is concentration but simply not enough for one-pointedness and thus the mind enters it by sliding to the "side" instead of "going straight forward" into absorption.

But regarding mindfulness practice this state is not a problem either, IMO. One can still use this state for mindfulness practice. For example: as during it there are no tactile impression, no sounds, and so on, one can analyse this. With a little practice one can jump back and forth between access to the physical body senses and no access, observing the difference. How do those sensations of body, ear, etc arise when coming out of this state? How do the vanish when entering it? It is about learning to control the senses and knowing their patterns inside out.

[Alexei]

Just a couple of excerpts on the subject from Joseph Goldstein:

In the Burmese system, liberation involves transcending awareness. In dzogchen, liberation is recognizing that the nature of mind is awareness itself. These are two quite different ways of expressing things. I spent a month of that retreat trying to figure it out, trying to decide who was "right." I finally came to realize that I could understand both systems as skillful means rather than as statements of absolute truth.

Well, that was a huge relief. But, of course, then the question arises, "Well, skillful means for what?" What I've come to understand more deeply over the years-and what I think is supported by the teachings in all of the Buddhist traditions - is that the liberated mind is the mind that does not cling to anything. In one discourse the Buddha said, "Nothing whatsoever is to be clung to as I or mine. Whoever has realized this has realized all the teachings."

All the different methods and metaphysical systems can be seen as skillful means to accomplish the mind of no-clinging. This understanding really freed me from attachments to metaphysical models that I didn't even know I'd had. I'd been so completely immersed in the model of the Burmese teachings that when I came into contact with a different model, it became a huge conflict. I had just assumed that the particular way we speak of things was the truth, forgetting that the words were just skillful means for experiencing the mind that doesn't cling to anything. That's where the freedom is.

...

The path of awakening is extremely well mapped, and it's mapped in different ways by different traditions. At certain stages maps can be useful; they point out the way. But at other stages they can be a big hindrance, because we often get caught up in interpretation and judgment: "How far along am I?" "Am I there?" These thoughts simply strengthen the sense of self, while the whole path is about dissolving it. And particularly in our Western culture, which is so competitive and judgmental, instead of adding more fuel to the fire of self-judgment - "Oh, where am I? I'm not good enough" - we could see our entire spiritual journey as this wonderful flowering of understanding. We just keep going; we just keep watering the Bodhi tree of wisdom.

[starter]

As I understand, the Pitch-black emptiness is considered as the experience/taste of nibbana in Mahasi Sayadaw system of vipassana practice. Since nibbana is described as "This is peaceful. This is sublime..." (also consdier the descriptions about "body witness"), I assume one should maintain some sort of awareness in nibbana. I wonder if one still has clear awareness and comprehension in such pitch-black emptiness, and if it would fall into "wrong samadhi" described by Ajahn Chah:

"So, there can be right samadhi and wrong samadhi.

Wrong samadhi is where the mind enters calm and there's no awareness at all. One could sit for two hours or even all day but the mind doesn't know where it's been or what's happened. It doesn't know anything. There is calm, but that's all. It's like a well-sharpened knife which we don't bother to put to any use. This is a deluded type of calm, be¬cause there is not much self-awareness. The meditator may think he has reached the ultimate already, so he doesn't bother to look for anything else. Samadhi can be an enemy at this level. Wisdom cannot arise because there is no awareness of right and wrong.

With right samadhi, no matter what level of calm is reached, there is awareness. There is full mindfulness and clear comprehension. This is the samadhi which can give rise to wisdom, one cannot get lost in it. Practitioners should understand this well. You can't do without this awareness, it must be present from beginning to end. This kind of samadhi has no danger."

Buddhadasa bikkhu also commented that it's dangerous to become attached to any special state of mind ...

Metta to all,

Starter

[rowyourboat]

Hi starter,

We know that nibbana is an unconditioned (asankhata) state. We also know that states like samadhi and sati (and vinnana) are conditioned states. Therefore to characterise nibbana using conditioned states like these is not appropriate.

We know what an experience of conditioned dhammas are like (from when we meditate). We know what sati and samadhi feel like. Yet, how can we know what an unconditioned 'experience' feels like? To characterise it in terms of conditioned experience is not appropriate.

Therefore the 'experience' of the unconditioned is better explained in terms of 1) the absence of conditioned experience 2) as manifesting at the end of practice (ie after completion of panna portions of the path).

Taking 2) first- it would arise at the culimination of serious vipassana practice, after all the vipassana nana/visuddhi (or any other way of depicting this progression) have been sequentially completed. Therefore this would immediately rule out non- perceptive (asanna) samadhi states, which as Ajhan Chah states, are useless.

Finally taking 1), an absence of conditioned states would mean that we cannot experience this in terms of light, knowledge, awareness or bliss, except when describing it in a metaphorical way. The experience of it would be an absence of conditioned states. This then would also be the best way to describe it as well ( all those wonderful conditioned states having arisen before this experience is reached). So calling it a 'pitch black emptiness' is correct in that it doesn't speak of conditioned states, but incorrect in that it falls into the 'non-existence' trap. Maybe the best to leave it and simply call it an experience of nibbana- or from a more functional angle - the cessation of suffering. (including sankhara dukkha).

With metta


Matheesha

Edit- there is no further use of a nibbanic experience, as it is the 'fruit', the result of all those states we used before to get there.

[starter]

Hm, I happened to read the following which is relevant to this thread and would like to share with the friends:

"When I returned to practice in Ajahn Chah’s community following more than a year of silent Mahasi retreat, I recounted all of these experiences—dissolving my body into light, profound insights into emptiness, hours of vast stillness and freedom. Ajahn Chah understood and appreciated them from his own deep wisdom. Then he smiled and said, “Well, something else to let go of.”

-- Jack Kornfield "Enlightenments" (in this article he compares the different views / experiences of enlightenment in different traditions -- Mahasi Sayadaw vs. Ajahn Chah)

http://www.inquiringmind.com/Articles/Enlightenments.html

Metta to all,

Starter