Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

The cultivation of calm or tranquility and the development of concentration
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by tiltbillings »

thereductor wrote:. . .

Anyway, sorry for turning this into a meta discussion, as I'd much rather it be a metta discussion.
I understand your point, but if want to have a further "meta-discussion," please start a new thread.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Reductor
Posts: 1382
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:52 am
Location: Alberta, Canada

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by Reductor »

tiltbillings wrote:
thereductor wrote:. . .

Anyway, sorry for turning this into a meta discussion, as I'd much rather it be a metta discussion.
I understand you point, but if want to have a further "meta-discussion," please start a new thread.
Nah. Meta threads are among the most volatile. :tongue:

Thanks for hearing me out Tilt.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by tiltbillings »

thereductor wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
thereductor wrote:. . .

Anyway, sorry for turning this into a meta discussion, as I'd much rather it be a metta discussion.
I understand you point, but if want to have a further "meta-discussion," please start a new thread.
Nah. Meta threads are among the most volatile. :tongue:

Thanks for hearing me out Tilt.
Not a problem. I always stand to be corrected.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Freawaru
Posts: 489
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:26 pm

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by Freawaru »

Hi IanAnd,

thank you very much for the description of your experiences. They are very helpful to me. I guess lately I have spend a bit too much time with the Pure Insight Path, trying to understand some things. But in the end I am not a suddha-vipassana-yanika but a samatha-yanika and there are some experiences and insights on the Pure Insight Path I never had and will never have due to this fact. So it feels good to know there are others, whose experiences are more similar to mine. Maybe you can relate at least to some of them.

Like you I started with Hindu meditation (it was hatha yoga, though) more than 30 years ago. It was during my early teens and my practice duration was one to two hours every day. Guess, I was some kind of addicted to it. But it was so much fun and it was so fascinating to look into oneself, one's mind and body - go where one had not been before, if you know what I mean.

Concentration is like a muscle, the more one trains it the stronger it becomes. But when one lessens the training the muscles will become weaker, too. So at that time I spend much time on workout of this muscle - the pleasant sideeffect of increase of general concentration during every day life was only stimulating. However, after some time my mind spontaneously entered states of concentration I didn't know what to make of. I don't know for sure if one of them was, f.e. the infinite space jhana but some descriptions I find on jhana are close. In my experience (and it looks like we differ here) during this state of concentration there were no body sensations (no sounds, no tactile impressions, no smells, etc) nor thoughts, images and so on. The impression of, say, infinite space dominated the mind completely, suppressing everything else.

But then again there was something else, something new. For the first time I knew what was going on in my mind the moment it did. When the state broke and I was "Freawaru" again (and not infinite space) I could only see it in retrospect. And I realised that in general I could only see my mind and body in retrospect, too. I didn't like that. So, while I felt a bit scared of the states of concentration because I had never heard about them and didn't know what they were, I liked that Knowing. Sometimes on this forum the question arises "what is the difference between mindfulness and Insight?" - maybe it is more difficult to see for a suddha-vipassana-yanika but for me it is obvious: during these kind of states mindfulness was present. There was the ability to see the mind in the present, like an eye that was open or a light that shone. But that itself is not identical to Insight. Mindfulness is like a kind of tool and one has to use that tool to gain Insight. Insight requires not only mindfulness but also will, investigation, analysis, memory and a number of other faculties. And I couldn't access them during the states of concentration as they were suppressed. At least at first. Later there was something new and strange: there was will, investigation, analysis, memory and so on, but they were quite different than those of the Freawaru personality. I still don't know what to make of this.

And luckily I didn't have to. One day I returned from such a state of concentration and mindfulness didn't cease. I still knew what was going on in my mind (and also body, a new idea for me at that time) the moment it was going on. I stopped my practice of these states then: you might say I got what I wanted from them: mindfulness. For some years the states would still happen on their own now and then but without practice it became lesser and lesser.

Presently, I don't practice states of absorption. I limit myself to Insight (the reason why I investigated the Pure Insight Path). My main practice is to investigate the mind during every day activity like Bhate G suggests here:
You can be mindful while solving problems in intensive calculus. You can be mindful in the middle of a football scrimmage. You can even be mindful in the midst of a raging fury.
http://www.vipassana.com/meditation/min ... ish_16.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


However, even during these non-jhanic state I observe a change regarding the senses. Like you said when one is absorbed in a good book (or calculus, etc) the other senses lessen. So I investigate how they lessen, even become so suppressed that they are absent, and how they "return". Some time ago I tried anapana sati (the version of concentrating on one's tactile impression of the nostrils) and even though I stopped at access concentration (using the definition given here http://www.leighb.com/jhana2a.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;), analysing it I found out that I didn't experience any sounds or smells during this state (tactile impressions were still there, though).

I know there are several definitions of jhana and maybe my experiences of complete absence of the senses was not jhana but I think in the end this does not really matter. What matters - in my opinion - is that through them I gained that tool called mindfulness. Like you. :smile:
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Ian,

I don't really have much to offer to the conversation other than thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences.

My meditation practices has lapsed over recent weeks, and reading this has encouraged me to try to get back on the bandwagon.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
IanAnd
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:19 am
Location: the deserts of Arizona

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by IanAnd »

thereductor wrote: Hey Ian, thanks . . .

Before I go on, I would like to address another part of your posts above. Namely about the unnecessary hostility expressed in that other thread toward Nibs, Clayton and others. My only valid complaint is that they lecture the Theravada from a markedly different perspective.
I agree with your thoughts regarding the second highlighted passage. And I saw nothing untoward in any of the questions you were asking Nibs to respond to.

With regard to the first passage, what may have seemed like "lecturing" (in Nib's case in particular) may be a valid point. But I saw no evidence on Clayton's part at any attempt to lecture. He was simply presenting some information in a respectful manner; yet the beating that he took at the hands of some members here was uncalled for, and was, in part, a catalyst for the reason I decided to compose and post this thread, in order to help perhaps clear the air and to further explore people's differing perceptions and opinions of subtle experiences like absorption.
thereductor wrote: . . . I do think we need to talk about what we experience, but not in a manor that devalues the doctrine. For me it is paramount that I always relate what I experience back to the suttas, and acknowledge [when] my understanding is incomplete.
I think that that is a fair assessment of the practice of many of the members here who appreciate the discourses for the information they provide on practice. That is certainly the way in which I have used the discourses.
thereductor wrote: Now, about the various modes of concentration, I will say this: the term jhana seems suitable for a wide spectrum of experience. So far that I can tell, the mind uses the same factors time and again in creating these experiences, but the manor in which they are applied varies.

The only useful test is in the results they bare: do they provided a clear platform from which to evaluate ourselves. If so, then continue with them, experiment with them, see what they show you, see how they work. Don't get bent out of shape if they do or do not meet official definition or not.

But if you do decide to pursue a particular definition of jhana, then keep in mind that the experience is much less important than seeing the 'how' and 'why' of its being.
Now we're getting into the heart of the matter I wanted to highlight and discuss by starting this thread.

Occasionally while on this path (i.e. the practice of meditation in general) I've been told to "expect this or that result" as a consequence of the instruction I've been given to practice. And quite often I've come to learn from my direct experience that either the power of suggestion was at work in what I was "told to expect to occur" and that expectation was met, or that what I experienced totally abrogated the expected result and something different occurred which may have contradicted what I was told would occur.

I think it is important that people be informed about these two contradictory outcomes and situations so as to be aware how vulnerable the mind can be to "suggestion" (or preconditioning) when it comes to subjective practices like meditation in general, and subtle mind states like absorption in particular.

While, in general, I may pay attention to "official definitions" of this or that, I also endeavor to practice with an open mind and to let whatever does happen to occur in whatever way it may occur. In other words, I endeavor to be as unbiased and mindful of what is taking place such that I might be able to "see" the experience "for what it actually was" as opposed to seeing it as I may have been told it would be. This all comes back to being able to hone and sharpen our discernment, which is one of the important components we are training for in the first place.

All I wanted to point out is that to blindly accept and expect to be able to live up to "official" or "traditional" pronouncements about anything (especially delicate subjective areas of experience like meditation) can be fraught with disappointment when what we are told to expect does not meet with our experience, and thus, in some cases, the person could become disillusioned and quit the practice because what they are expecting to achieve is too difficult (or maybe even impossible) for them to achieve. The whole point of a person's becoming involved with the practice of the noble eightfold path and the Buddha's Dhamma is to be able to take practical steps toward ending the personal suffering and dissatisfaction that they experience in life. If, on the other hand, we are telling them that this practice is difficult (which it is) and that it is unlikely that you will be able to reach your goal within this lifetime, then that seem to me to be a particularly negative development which might cause the person to give up. While such a circumstance might have been avoided if the person had been given a more realistic picture going in, rather than a dogmatic approach which espoused "you can achieve this or that, but not this other."

I've probably not made myself very clear about this. There is more that can be said about these matters, but that will have to wait until later, when I have more time to compose.
"The gift of truth exceeds all other gifts" — Dhammapada, v. 354 Craving XXIV
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by tiltbillings »

IanAnd wrote:
With regard to the first passage, what may have seemed like "lecturing" (in Nib's case in particular) may be a valid point. But I saw no evidence on Clayton's part at any attempt to lecture. He was simply presenting some information in a respectful manner; yet the beating that he took at the hands of some members here was uncalled for, and was, in part, a catalyst for the reason I decided to compose and post this thread, in order to help perhaps clear the air and to further explore people's differing perceptions and opinions of subtle experiences like absorption.
Just be careful you do not turn this into a meta-discussion, on the edge of which you seem to be skating.
While, in general, I may pay attention to "official definitions" of this or that, I also endeavor to practice with an open mind and to let whatever does happen to occur in whatever way it may occur. In other words, I endeavor to be as unbiased and mindful of what is taking place such that I might be able to "see" the experience "for what it actually was" as opposed to seeing it as I may have been told it would be. This all comes back to being able to hone and sharpen our discernment, which is one of the important components we are training for in the first place.
This is not unreasonable, but there is a reason for working with a teacher and for working with the traditional take on things, and there is a reason, which has been illustrated all too graphically here, for sharply questioning one's own conclusions about one's own experience, never resting content with such conclusions.
All I wanted to point out is that to blindly accept and expect to be able to live up to "official" or "traditional" pronouncements about anything (especially delicate subjective areas of experience like meditation) can be fraught with disappointment when what we are told to expect does not meet with our experience,
And the flip side of that is rejecting the traditional understanding in favor one's own take on things, which - at its worst - is essentially redefining the Dhamma to fits one's needs, to fit one's experience.

It is, of course, a balancing act. So, what are you recommending?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Kenshou
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by Kenshou »

Without trying to turn this into a meta-discussion, the funny thing about this is that the sort of thing that you have just said, Ian, has been said by many other people in support of many extremely different views. My point being that in a long-term practice, all sorts of "stuff" is liable to happen, and so there are many little side paths to go down and funny things to get caught up with. There is a lot of "territory" and without a guide or at least a few pointers and warnings things could get strange.

But I don't disagree, per say, with what you've said, I myself am fond of keeping things simple and natural and seeing what happens without too much expectation. I believe you have expressed in the past that the suttic literature has acted as your primary "guide", right? So then you are by no means divorced from tradition entirely, but don't get me wrong, as far as texts go that's source #1, imo, a pretty reliable source to weigh experiences against. Perhaps there is a specific tradition(s) that you are criticizing here, it might make what you are saying a little clearer if it were put in context more directly. Though I suspect what that thing is, you've said that you plan to clarify, so I'll stop blabbing.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Ian,
IanAnd wrote: Occasionally while on this path (i.e. the practice of meditation in general) I've been told to "expect this or that result" as a consequence of the instruction I've been given to practice. And quite often I've come to learn from my direct experience that either the power of suggestion was at work in what I was "told to expect to occur" and that expectation was met, or that what I experienced totally abrogated the expected result and something different occurred which may have contradicted what I was told would occur.
That's one of the reasons I'm uneasy about some things that are posted here or elsewhere. The teachers I've trusted just tell me to do this and watch that. Several I've then experienced something and had the following sort of conversation:
"I see X, am I imagining it?"
"Hmm, do you also see Y?"
"Yes"
"OK, that's good, keep going, and try Z"

Also, my personal experience, and listening to the reports of other yogis, is that many of the things people find interesting, intriguing, and exciting, especially in the first few days of a retreat, are just random stuff coming out as the mind is settling down. That this random stuff is coming out is a good sign - the mind is tidying itself up. But the content is mostly irrelevant. And different people will have different random stuff. It takes some time to figure out what is "random stuff" and what is something ultimately more interesting. It could be very time-wasting to fixate on the former.

I do think it's useful to hear about the experiences of others. But unless they are my teacher I don't take any of it particularly seriously.

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
IanAnd
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:19 am
Location: the deserts of Arizona

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by IanAnd »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Ian,

I don't really have much to offer to the conversation other than thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences.

My meditation practices has lapsed over recent weeks, and reading this has encouraged me to try to get back on the bandwagon.
Glad this could be of assistance in reigniting your passion for the fruits of meditative practice. There's a lot to be gained (at least in my experience) from this practice that can be used in conjunction with academic study and contemplation. And I've not even begun to touch the surface of some of those wholesome abilities which occur with me on almost a daily basis.

The practice is, of course, much more than just that (meaning the achievement of certain abilities and such). But, stay on the meditative path and work through the grind, so to speak, as you can go along for a long time and not experience any of these delightful side benefits and then wonder why you are putting yourself through this. Yet, if you stay with it, one day just everything happens to "click," and suddenly you begin to realize three dimensionally the truth you've been reading about and practicing about all these years. That's when you know that you know, and can corroborate the teaching directly.

Freawaru is next, but I need some time to think about her post and respond. She's brought up some important points.
"The gift of truth exceeds all other gifts" — Dhammapada, v. 354 Craving XXIV
User avatar
IanAnd
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:19 am
Location: the deserts of Arizona

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by IanAnd »

Hello Freawaru,

Good to see you posting again.
Freawaru wrote: Concentration is like a muscle, the more one trains it the stronger it becomes. But when one [decreases] the training the muscles will become weaker, too.
Yes, indeed. This is one of the very simple things I've wanted to make clear. It is the development and cultivation of concentration, rather than the exotic sounding and seemingly intoxicating "jhanas," that is the important side benefit of absorption practice. People are "wowed" by reports of the pleasure ("bliss") factor of the jhanas, and it is not wrong to be impress by that factor; but what is truly important about their achievement is the ability to more easily cultivate a mind that can concentrate on an object or subject like a steel trap, and thus be able to, through sati-sampajanna (mindfulness and clear comprehension), "see things as they actually are." Seeing things as they truly are ends ignorance, one of the main three poisons of greed, hatred, and delusion or ignorance.
Freawaru wrote: So at that time I spend much time on workout of this muscle - the pleasant side effect of increase of general concentration during every day life was only stimulating. However, after some time my mind spontaneously entered states of concentration I didn't know what to make of. I don't know for sure if one of them was, [e.g.] the infinite space jhana but some descriptions I find on jhana are close.
This is one of those instances where Tilt's assertion (with which I concur) of having a trustworthy teacher available can help correct the practitioner's perception of what is happening, keeping us on the path. Of course, in real life, such advantages aren't always available to us. Which is where forum communities like this can come in handy, if one can locate a trustworthy person to listen to.
Freawaru wrote:In my experience (and it looks like we differ here) during this state of concentration there were no body sensations (no sounds, no tactile impressions, no smells, etc) nor thoughts, images and so on. The impression of, say, infinite space dominated the mind completely, suppressing everything else.
No, I wouldn't necessarily say that we differ. It is possible, when practicing what has been described in some circles as an immaterial "samatha jhana" to experience the cessation of the five senses in the context that you've outlined. I've done so myself. What I was talking about was what might be called (for lack of a better term) a material "vipassana jhana," where the senses are still in play and attention to insight is the key factor of one's intent. There's a subtle difference, and I'm not ashamed to admit that I've played heck trying to figure this out myself. What I was reading about this subject was telling me one thing, but my experience was telling me another. This is why I say that some of the instruction we receive is "not written in stone." It just depends on the context and the intent of the use.
Freawaru wrote:But then again there was something else, something new. For the first time I knew what was going on in my mind the moment it did. When the state broke and I was "Freawaru" again (and not infinite space) I could only see it in retrospect. And I realised that in general I could only see my mind and body in retrospect, too. I didn't like that. So, while I felt a bit scared of the states of concentration because I had never heard about them and didn't know what they were, I liked that Knowing.

It is that "knowing" that is what we are after. That knowing helps us end delusion and ignorance.
Freawaru wrote:Sometimes on this forum the question arises "what is the difference between mindfulness and Insight?" - maybe it is more difficult to see for a suddha-vipassana-yanika but for me it is obvious: during these kind of states mindfulness was present. There was the ability to see the mind in the present, like an eye that was open or a light that shone. But that itself is not identical to Insight. Mindfulness is like a kind of tool and one has to use that tool to gain Insight. Insight requires not only mindfulness but also will, investigation, analysis, memory and a number of other faculties. And I couldn't access them during the states of concentration as they were suppressed. At least at first. Later there was something new and strange: there was will, investigation, analysis, memory and so on, but they were quite different than those of the Freawaru personality. I still don't know what to make of this.
Insight can be accessed from any of the first four levels of absorption, if you've been taught how to correctly discern and access these levels. You have to kind of be able to maintain attention and mindfulness when pursuing a vipassana subject as opposed to a samatha subject (as with the immaterial attainments, where deeper and deeper states of calm are, in general, the goal). It's a matter of training and self-discipline when accessing absorption states. One can learn how to do this on one's own, but it's often better to have an experienced teacher to help assist.
Freawaru wrote:And luckily I didn't have to. One day I returned from such a state of concentration and mindfulness didn't cease. I still knew what was going on in my mind (and also body, a new idea for me at that time) the moment it was going on. I stopped my practice of these states then: you might say I got what I wanted from them: mindfulness. For some years the states would still happen on their own now and then but without practice it became [fewer and fewer].
Aaahhh. Wasn't that a delightful realization to make. You didn't have to focus or concentrate on being mindful. It just happened! How marvelous. This is another of the simple benefits of absorption that I have been endeavoring to point out. It can help us to cultivate constant (or relatively constant) mindfulness. It helps to recondition the mind (or re-incline the mind) toward mindfulness.
Freawaru wrote:Presently, I don't practice states of absorption. I limit myself to Insight (the reason why I investigated the Pure Insight Path). My main practice is to investigate the mind during every day activity like Bhate G suggests here:
You can be mindful while solving problems in intensive calculus. You can be mindful in the middle of a football scrimmage. You can even be mindful in the midst of a raging fury.
http://www.vipassana.com/meditation/min ... ish_16.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That's a good approach. One which, at one point, I took up also. If one can work it out (their living situation, that is) such that they have the time and the condition to watch the mind daily without too many distracting events intervening and thus distracting us from the realization of these insights, the self-knowledge and wisdom that amounts from this can be truly astounding and life changing.
Freawaru wrote:I know there are several definitions of jhana and maybe my experiences of complete absence of the senses was not jhana but I think in the end this does not really matter. What matters - in my opinion - is that through them I gained that tool called mindfulness. Like you. :smile:
Yes, indeed. That tool, as you describe it, is one of the main keys in achieving the cessation of dukkha. Because it helps us to put an end to ignorance (meaning, ignorance of our mind and body and how they work).

Be well and prosper.

Ian
"The gift of truth exceeds all other gifts" — Dhammapada, v. 354 Craving XXIV
User avatar
IanAnd
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:19 am
Location: the deserts of Arizona

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by IanAnd »

Kenshou wrote: My point being that in a long-term practice, all sorts of "stuff" is liable to happen, and so there are many little side paths to go down and funny things to get caught up with. There is a lot of "territory" and without a guide or at least a few pointers and warnings things could get strange.
I agree completely.
Kenshou wrote: But I don't disagree, per say, with what you've said, I myself am fond of keeping things simple and natural and seeing what happens without too much expectation. I believe you have expressed in the past that the suttic literature has acted as your primary "guide", right?

So then you are by no means divorced from tradition entirely, but don't get me wrong, as far as texts go that's source #1, imo, a pretty reliable source to weigh experiences against.
We're on the same page here. (That means keep this in mind when you read the rest...)
Kenshou wrote: Perhaps there is a specific tradition(s) that you are criticizing here, it might make what you are saying a little clearer if it were put in context more directly.
I'm not necessarily criticizing any tradition per se. Perhaps some here have read too much into what I've written. I know Tilt certainly has.

I'm talking about instruction or ideas (coming from a traditional standpoint in many cases) that can tend hold people back from making progress if they take it to heart and begin to believe it; that just because its coming from established tradition (or some proponent of that tradition) that it must be true. I've already given a couple of examples of this (if people have been paying attention). Read the response I gave Freawaru where she made the statement: "In my experience (and it looks like we differ here) during this state of concentration there were no body sensations..."

One of the things that is playing havoc with comprehending what I'm saying is that you all are coming from a background of Buddhist involvement, working from within that context, and some of my statements have a context that was outside that tradition. And from your Buddhist perspective, people are reading what I'm saying and naturally tying it to their understanding coming from that perspective. I've been told things from people who I respected at the time which later turned out to be untrue. And because of that, I ended up wasting a lot of time going around in circles.

What I learned from those experiences was to trust only my own perception of whatever I experienced and to keep sharpening my discernment. I may listen to what someone has to say, but then I try it out to verify what they are saying. When I could prove my perception wrong, I changed it. Always seeking the truth in all cases.

It was an intense and difficult experience to undergo, not having anyone in particular with whom to corroborate what I was undergoing. It meant that I was literally forced to ramp up mindfulness and heedfulness to a level that was almost physically and mentally unhealthy in order to be able to, as quickly as I could, find out the truth. The good news is that I made it through that intense period and was able to find a way to be more relaxed and at ease with mindfulness. I don't recommend learning the Dhamma in this way. Although it did teach me a lot of lessons.

Personally, I wouldn't have it any other way (principally because there is nothing to be done to take it back, at this point). Although, as I said, I wouldn't recommend this to anyone. It just happens to be the route I took. That's all. We've all got a unique path to tread. All I'm saying is: Let's focus on making it as smooth as possible. Because it is rough enough as it is without adding additional unnecessary hurdles.
"The gift of truth exceeds all other gifts" — Dhammapada, v. 354 Craving XXIV
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by Ben »

Hi Ian,
IanAnd wrote: One of the things that is playing havoc with comprehending what I'm saying is that you all are coming from a background of Buddhist involvement, working from within that context, and some of my statements have a context that was outside that tradition. And from your Buddhist perspective, people are reading what I'm saying and naturally tying it to their understanding coming from that perspective. I've been told things from people who I respected at the time which later turned out to be untrue. And because of that, I ended up wasting a lot of time going around in circles.
As you point out, we all come different perspectives. Whether its a Buddhist perspective or non-Buddhist perspective, its ultimately just something we shed as the result of engaging in practice and we move along the path. Developing sammadhitthi I think tends to be an iterative process.
IanAnd wrote:What I learned from those experiences was to trust only my own perception of whatever I experienced and to keep sharpening my discernment. I may listen to what someone has to say, but then I try it out to verify what they are saying. When I could prove my perception wrong, I changed it. Always seeking the truth in all cases.
One of the things that I have learned is that my perception of reality is conditioned by ignorance, and I am acutely aware of that especially when it comes to meditative experiences. I tend to use the texts, the instructions of my teachers and the wisdom of kalayanamittas and scholarly authors with my perception. Examining all under the prism of objective analysis. Yet again, I mention the corruptions of insight only manifest to those who are diligently practicing Dhamma.

IanAnd wrote: It was an intense and difficult experience to undergo, not having anyone in particular with whom to corroborate what I was undergoing. It meant that I was literally forced to ramp up mindfulness and heedfulness to a level that was almost physically and mentally unhealthy in order to be able to, as quickly as I could, find out the truth. The good news is that I made it through that intense period and was able to find a way to be more relaxed and at ease with mindfulness. I don't recommend learning the Dhamma in this way. Although it did teach me a lot of lessons.
I think its important to acknowledge that practicing Dhamma and the development of insight is not easy and rarely pleasant.
IanAnd wrote: Because it is rough enough as it is without adding additional unnecessary hurdles.
Sure, but I think maybe the nature of practicing Dhamma is that it is hard, difficult and deeply confronting. Not for the feint of heart.
kind regards

Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by tiltbillings »

IanAnd wrote: I'm not necessarily criticizing any tradition per se. Perhaps some here have read too much into what I've written. I know Tilt certainly has.
Rather than a snide side comment, if you have have a problem with what I say about your lecture series here, address me directly. I am taking what you write as it is written. There is no point in doing anything else. If you feel I am misunderstanding what you are saying, address me directly.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Not Everything Is Written In Stone. . .

Post by tiltbillings »

IanAnd wrote:
I'm talking about instruction or ideas (coming from a traditional standpoint in many cases) that can tend hold people back from making progress if they take it to heart and begin to believe it; that just because its coming from established tradition (or some proponent of that tradition) that it must be true.
How about addressing this directly in more detail, since this seems to be a focus for you.
One of the things that is playing havoc with comprehending what I'm saying is that you all are coming from a background of Buddhist involvement, working from within that context, and some of my statements have a context that was outside that tradition.
Let us see this spelled out in detail, especially since you are claiming what you are saying is in part outside the Buddhist context.
It was an intense and difficult experience to undergo, not having anyone in particular with whom to corroborate what I was undergoing. It meant that I was literally forced to ramp up mindfulness and heedfulness to a level that was almost physically and mentally unhealthy in order to be able to, as quickly as I could, find out the truth. The good news is that I made it through that intense period and was able to find a way to be more relaxed and at ease with mindfulness. I don't recommend learning the Dhamma in this way. Although it did teach me a lot of lessons.
According to you, you made it, but it is not unreasonable in face of that very claim, and the claim that you are somewhat outside the Buddhist perspective, that we should not take what you say without question, without a great deal more explanation. Because you claim a state of awakening, why should we believe it?
All I'm saying is: Let's focus on making it as smooth as possible. Because it is rough enough as it is without adding additional unnecessary hurdles.
And you are claiming, it seems, that "traditional " beliefs are are "additional unnecessary hurdles." And you wonder why I am skeptical? You really need to unpack this for us; spell it out so that we can see what it is exactly that you are claiming.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Post Reply