Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
dpcalder
Posts: 179
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 6:02 pm

Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by dpcalder »

I have a question about the practical role of luminous mind in Thai Forest Buddhism. Is this understood as a state of non-conceptual thought (no "papanca") that is accessible whenever we meditate, in a way that is comparable to the "Subitism" of some forms of Mahayana Buddhism? Does anyone know if any Thai Forest works that explain the practical significance of the concept?
NuanceOfSuchness
Posts: 311
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:58 pm
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by NuanceOfSuchness »

dpcalder wrote: Fri Jan 28, 2022 4:49 pm I have a question about the practical role of luminous mind in Thai Forest Buddhism. Is this understood as a state of non-conceptual thought (no "papanca") that is accessible whenever we meditate, in a way that is comparable to the "Subitism" of some forms of Mahayana Buddhism? Does anyone know if any Thai Forest works that explain the practical significance of the concept?
Hi

Thanks for asking this interesting question!

From my current understanding, the luminous mind is that which anchors beings to the cyclic nature of samsara. It is a region of the mind that is drawn to the newness of experience, like how you might develop a fresh clarity when visiting a new place or when you become absorbed by a newly bought item.

That is what we are all doing in the world, trying to seek and maintain clarity, but our quest becomes one that is off-kilter and therefore lost in the pursuit of things rather than taking a step back; we are accosted by the experience of form, dropping one form for another thinking that the answer to our turmoil can be found in the experience of form.

This is also why a baby has a luminous mind. I'd rather not try to explain the mechanism there, but in short, the baby is an expression of this cyclic rendition of perpetually seeking fresh and new experiences using the medium of form. Obviously, there is a type of energy that is at play in that motion, which we might call sankhara, and also the actions of those sankaras which are expressed using thought, speech and action, typically known as karmas, and thus their results, vapakas. It's all terribly complicated and makes my head sore.

When the mind is luminous, it is not - generally - conceiving of anything in a conceptual sense. The lack of conceptual intervention is precisely why the mind is luminous, but concept is available as a way to navigate around the world. Rather than those concepts forming part of the inner subjective world, they are understood to only have a very basic reference to things in the world.

One can be in this kind of luminous mind perpetually, even within your usual mundane environments. This understanding is in line with the Thai Buddhist monk, Ajaan Mahā Boowa who had a similar outlook to the luminous mind. It fits quite well with my understanding, too.

I'm not familiar with 'Subutism' from the Mahayana traditions, so I can't comment on that.
waryoffolly
Posts: 346
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by waryoffolly »

NuanceOfSuchness wrote: Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:41 pm One can be in this kind of luminous mind perpetually, even within your usual mundane environments. This understanding is in line with the Thai Buddhist monk, Ajaan Mahā Boowa who had a similar outlook to the luminous mind. It fits quite well with my understanding, too.
Some questions about this luminous mind:
1. Is this luminous mind permanent?
2. Does the luminous mind arise without cause?
3. Is the luminous mind self-supported?
4. When the sense bases arise do they appear in the luminous mind and when they cease do they return to the luminous mind?
5. If I called the luminous mind “a mere mental phenomena at the mind door” how does that make you feel?
6. Is the luminous mind like the sun which always is shining even when blocked by clouds? Or does it vanish without trace every moment of experience?

I’m not going to debate you on this, but I’d like to see your answers to these questions. Maybe you will have the patience and good humor to respond.
SarathW
Posts: 21227
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by SarathW »

dpcalder wrote: Fri Jan 28, 2022 4:49 pm I have a question about the practical role of luminous mind in Thai Forest Buddhism. Is this understood as a state of non-conceptual thought (no "papanca") that is accessible whenever we meditate, in a way that is comparable to the "Subitism" of some forms of Mahayana Buddhism? Does anyone know if any Thai Forest works that explain the practical significance of the concept?
In my opinion, the luminous mind is a level of Jhana from the Second Jhana onwards.
You can call even first Jhana as luminous if you wish but you still have wholesome Vitakka/Vicara.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
pegembara
Posts: 3465
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by pegembara »

May or may not be relevant.

The "one who knows" ("poo roo") or Buddho. The position of being the "witness".
That which is aware of sense objects is called “mind.” Sense objects wander into the mind. A sound, for instance, enters through the ear and travels inward to the mind, which acknowledges that it is the sound of a bird, a car, or whatever. Now this mind that acknowledges the sound is still quite basic. It’s just the average mind. Perhaps annoyance arises within this one who acknowledges. We must further train “the one who acknowledges” to become “the one who knows in accordance with the truth”—known as Buddho. If we don’t clearly know in accordance with the truth, then we get annoyed by the sounds of people, cars, machinery, and so on. The ordinary, untrained mind acknowledges the sound with annoyance. It knows in accordance with its preferences, not in accordance with the truth. We must further train it to know with vision and insight, or nanadassana, the power of the refined mind, so that it knows the sound as simply sound. If we don’t cling to a sound, there is no annoyance. The sound arises and we simply note it. This is called truly knowing the arising of sense objects. If we develop the Buddho, clearly realizing the sound as sound, then it doesn’t annoy us. It arises according to conditions; it is not a being, an individual, a self, an “us” or “them.” It’s just sound. The mind lets go.

https://www.lionsroar.com/awakening-the-one-who-knows/
Watching the mind like so.
"Luminous, monks, is the mind.[1] And it is defiled by incoming defilements." {I,v,9}

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." {I,v,10}

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person — there is no development of the mind." {I,vi,1}

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — there is development of the mind." {I,vi,2}

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Knowing what? Knowing what you are not.
Knowing that sabbe sankhara anicca/dukkha, sabbe dhamma anatta.
"You can't remedy the changing of sankharas.
Fashioned by kamma,
they're out to spite no one.
If you grasp hold of them
to push them this way & that,
the mind has to become defiled & wrong.
Don't think of resisting
the natural way of all things.
Let good & evil follow their own affairs.
We simply free
ourselves.
Unentangled in sankharas:
That's what's peaceful & cool.
When you know the truth,
you have to let go of sankharas
as soon as you see their changing.
When you weary of them,
you let them go easily,
with no need to be forced.
The Dhamma is cooling.
The mind will stop
being subjected to things."

Ajahn Mun
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/tha ... allad.html
"So in brief, there's suffering
& there's the Dhamma
always with the mind.
Contemplate this until you see the truth,
and the mind will be completely cool.
However great the pleasure or pain,
they'll cause you no fear.
No longer drunk with the cause of suffering,
the mind's well-gone.
Knowing just this much is enough
to soothe your fevers,
and to rest from your search for a path to release.
The mind knowing the Dhamma forgets
the mind attached to dust.

The heart knowing the Dhamma of ultimate ease
sees for sure that the khandhas are always stressful.
The Dhamma stays as the Dhamma,
the khandhas stay as khandhas, that's all.
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
User avatar
nirodh27
Posts: 681
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:31 pm

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by nirodh27 »

Hi,

I think some quotes should be needed to comment. There are striking difference both in ideas and in terminology within the Thai Forest tradition.
NuanceOfSuchness
Posts: 311
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:58 pm
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by NuanceOfSuchness »

waryoffolly wrote: Mon Feb 28, 2022 9:17 pm
NuanceOfSuchness wrote: Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:41 pm One can be in this kind of luminous mind perpetually, even within your usual mundane environments. This understanding is in line with the Thai Buddhist monk, Ajaan Mahā Boowa who had a similar outlook to the luminous mind. It fits quite well with my understanding, too.
Some questions about this luminous mind:
1. Is this luminous mind permanent?
2. Does the luminous mind arise without cause?
3. Is the luminous mind self-supported?
4. When the sense bases arise do they appear in the luminous mind and when they cease do they return to the luminous mind?
5. If I called the luminous mind “a mere mental phenomena at the mind door” how does that make you feel?
6. Is the luminous mind like the sun which always is shining even when blocked by clouds? Or does it vanish without trace every moment of experience?

I’m not going to debate you on this, but I’d like to see your answers to these questions. Maybe you will have the patience and good humor to respond.
Hi.

Thank you for your questions.

It might be possible that my interpretation of the luminous mind has evoked some discomfort. That is quite normal. It is not that I say it has no significance, but that the conditioned mind misinterprets it in such a way that it cause discomfort. It is quite common for enlightenment to be described as the luminous mind and for the mind to attach to this as a final destination, and that might actually be the case for some people - who knows.

Remember, these are just models to describe a part of the process and mustn't be taken as fact. It may or may not resonate with you, and that is the key: one must find their own way. What follows is not a complete understanding, so take it with a pinch of salt! Also, due to the manifold appearances of spiritual-type experiences, it might be possible that we are talking about two different things, so bear that in mind too.

1. Is this luminous mind permanent?

As far as my understanding goes, it is not permanent because its recognition is based only through the appearance of forms, because that is what 'lights up' the six-sense experience.

2. Does the luminous mind arise without cause?

In the sense world, luminosity has already established itself as a by-product of form perceiving itself, or humans looking at objects. This luminosity is largely clouded over by our insatiable fascination with objects, rather than understanding the pure mind that lights-up those objects. Regardless, luminosity is a knowing arising from the six-sense experience only, so there is cause and effect. How you interpret that is entirely your prerogative.

3. Is the luminous mind self-supported?

It is a form-based understanding.

4. When the sense bases arise do they appear in the luminous mind and when they cease do they return to the luminous mind?

There can occur a knowing from beyond the six-sense experience, which I cannot describe in terms of luminosity. It is more that the stresses of the mind entirely and completely cease, and since I define myself through the dualities of the mind, I cannot find myself there any longer. It's a very ordinary peace which has the quality of being untouchable; there's no special fan fairs or carnival parades and no funny light shows. There's no religious paraphernalia whatsoever! It's your mind's biggest disappointment and also your final liberation, because it is not connected with form-based experience - it is the absolute! Form-based experience is what drives birth and death.

5. If I called the luminous mind “a mere mental phenomena at the mind door” how does that make you feel?

Seems fairly accurate, but my understanding of these things is always evolving.

6. Is the luminous mind like the sun which always is shining even when blocked by clouds? Or does it vanish without trace every moment of experience?

It seems to be coloured-over by the way in which we place our attention on objects, but is always there regardless so long as forms are there.
xabir
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 8:59 am

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by xabir »

waryoffolly wrote: Mon Feb 28, 2022 9:17 pm
NuanceOfSuchness wrote: Mon Feb 28, 2022 8:41 pm One can be in this kind of luminous mind perpetually, even within your usual mundane environments. This understanding is in line with the Thai Buddhist monk, Ajaan Mahā Boowa who had a similar outlook to the luminous mind. It fits quite well with my understanding, too.
Some questions about this luminous mind:
1. Is this luminous mind permanent?
2. Does the luminous mind arise without cause?
3. Is the luminous mind self-supported?
4. When the sense bases arise do they appear in the luminous mind and when they cease do they return to the luminous mind?
5. If I called the luminous mind “a mere mental phenomena at the mind door” how does that make you feel?
6. Is the luminous mind like the sun which always is shining even when blocked by clouds? Or does it vanish without trace every moment of experience?

I’m not going to debate you on this, but I’d like to see your answers to these questions. Maybe you will have the patience and good humor to respond.
This question depends on the depth of insight, as elucidated in this map: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/ ... ience.html

Ajahn Brahmavamso went through the I AM/Poo Roo/Luminous Mind realisation but points out that is not buddhist awakening and considers stream entry the realisation of anatman.

After realisation of anatman (in the seen just the seen, never a seer behind, in hearing just sound, never was there a hearer behind, etc etc), luminous mind too is realised to be mere impermanent and momentary phenomena/dharmas manifesting according to conditions.

Shared with someone recently:


Soh Wei Yu
Yin Ling
Thai forest emphasizes going through I AM at least initially but maybe not burmese and other forms of theravada.
For example ajahn brahmavamso described anatta insight but went through I AM first.

Reply
1d


Soh Wei Yu
Ajahn brahmavamso on I AM:
“When the Body Disappears.
Remember "con men," "con women" as well. These con men can sell you anything! There's one living in your mind right now, and you believe every word he says! His name is Thinking. When you let go of that inner talk and get silent, you get happy. Then when you let go of the movement of the mind and stay with the breath, you experience even more delight. Then when you let go of the body ,all these five senses disappear and you're really blissing out. This is original Buddhism. Sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch completely vanish. This is like being in a sensory deprivation chamber but much better. But it's not just silence, you just don't hear anything. It's not just blackness, you just don't see anything. It's not just a feeling of comfort in the body, there is no body at all.
When the body disappears that really starts to feel great. You know of all those people who have out of the body experiences? When the body dies, every person has that experience, they float out of the body. And one of the things they always say is it's so peaceful, so beautiful, so blissful. It's the same in meditation when the body disappears, it's so peaceful, so beautiful, so blissful when you are free from this body. What's left? Here there's no sight, sound, smell, taste, touch. This is what the Buddha called the mind in deep meditation. When the body disappears what is left is the mind.
I gave a simile to a monk the other night. Imagine an Emperor who is wearing a long pair of trousers and a big tunic. He's got shoes on his feet, a scarf around the bottom half of his head and a hat on the top half of his head. You can't see him at all because he's completely covered in five garments. It's the same with the mind. It's completely covered with sight, sound, smell, taste and touch. So people don't know it. They just know the garments. When they see the Emperor, they just see the robes and the garments. They don't know who lives inside them. And so it is no wonder they're confused about what is life, what is mind, who is this inside of here, where did I come from? Why? What am I supposed to be doing with this life? When the five senses disappear, it's like unclothing the Emperor and seeing what is actually in here, what's actually running the show, who's listening to these words, who's seeing, who's feeling life, who this is. When the five senses disappear, you're coming close to the answer to those questions.
What you're seeing in such deep meditation is that which we call "mind," (in Pali it's called Citta). The Buddha used this beautiful simile. When there is a full moon on a cloudy night, even though it's a full moon, you can hardly see it. Sometimes when the clouds are thin, you can see this hazy shape shining though. You know there is something there. This is like the meditation just before you've entered into these profound states. You know there is something there, but you can't quite make it out. There's still some "clothes" left. You're still thinking and doing, feeling the body or hearing sounds. But there does come a time, and this is the Buddha's simile, when the moon is released from the clouds and there in the clear night sky you can see the beautiful full disc of the moon shining brilliantly, and you know that's the moon. The moon is there; the moon is real, and it's not just some sort of side effect of the clouds. This is what happens in meditation when you see the mind. You see clearly that the mind is not some side effect of the brain. You see the mind, and you know the mind. The Buddha said that the mind released is beautiful, is brilliant, is radiant. So not only are these blissful experiences, they're meaningful experiences as well.
How many people may have heard about rebirth but still don't really believe it? How can rebirth happen? Certainly the body doesn't get reborn. That's why when people ask me where do you go when you die, "one of two places" I say "Fremantle or Karrakatta" that's where the body goes! [3] But is that where the mind goes? Sometimes people are so stupid in this world, they think the body is all there is, that there is no mind. So when you get cremated or buried that's it, that's done with, all has ended. The only way you can argue with this view is by developing the meditation that the Buddha achieved under the Bodhi tree. Then you can see the mind for yourself in clear awareness - not in some hypnotic trance, not in dullness - but in the clear awareness. This is knowing the mind
Knowing the Mind.
When you know that mind, when you see it for yourself, one of the results will be an insight that the mind is independent of this body. Independence means that when this body breaks up and dies, when it's cremated or when it's buried, or however it's destroyed after death, it will not affect the mind. You know this because you see the nature of the mind. That mind which you see will transcend bodily death. The first thing which you will see for yourself, the insight which is as clear as the nose on your face, is that there is something more to life than this physical body that we take to be me. Secondly you can recognise that that mind, essentially, is no different than that process of consciousness which is in all beings. Whether it's human beings or animals or even insects, of any gender, age or race, you see that that which is in common to all life is this mind, this consciousness, the source of doing.
Once you see that, you have much more respect for your fellow beings. Not just respect for your own race, your own tribe or your own religion, not just for human beings, but for all beings. It's a wonderfully high-minded idea. "May all beings be happy and well and may we respect all nations, all peoples, even all beings." However this is how you achieve that! You truly get compassion only when we see that others are fundamentally just as ourselves. If you think that a cow is completely different from you, that cows don't think like human beings, then it's easy to eat one. But can you eat your grandmother? She's too much like you. Can you eat an ant? Maybe you'd kill an ant because you think that ants aren't like you. But if you look carefully at ants, they are no different. In a forest monastery living out in the bush, close to nature, one of the things you become so convinced of is that animals have emotions and , especially, feel pain. You begin to recognise the personality of the animals, of the Kookaburras,(Australian bird) of the mice, the ants, and the spiders. Each one of those spiders has a mind just like you have. Once you see that you can understand the Buddha's compassion for all beings. You can also understand how rebirth can occur between all species - not just human beings to human beings, but animals to humans, humans to animals. You can understand also how the mind is the source of all this.”
- Ajahn Brahmavamso, https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/ ... clnk&gl=sg
WEBCACHE.GOOGLEUSERCONTENT.COM
Ajahn Brahm - Meditation: The Heart of Buddhism
Ajahn Brahm - Meditation: The Heart of Buddhism
2

Reply
Remove Preview
1d


Soh Wei Yu
Ajahn brahmavamso on anatta insight:
Excerpt from
https://www.dhammatalks.net/.../Ajahn_Brahm_BAHIYA_S...
The Final Part of Bāhiya's Teaching
"Bāhiya, you should train yourself thus: in the seen will be merely what is seen, ... in the cognized will merely be what is cognized. Practising in this way, Bāhiya, you will not be 'because of that'. When you are not 'because of that', you will not be 'in that'. And when you are not 'in that', you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two. Just this is the end of suffering."
What does it mean "you will not be 'because of that'"? The Pāli is na tena. Tena is the instrumental of the word for 'that'. Na is the negative. It means, literally, "not because of that, not through that, not by that". It means in essence, you will not assume that there is a self, a soul, a me; because of, through, or by; the seen or the heard or the sensed or the cognized. The Buddha is saying that once you have penetrated the truth of sensory experience, by suppressing the Hindrances through Jhāna, you will see that there is no 'doer', nor a 'knower', behind sensory experience. No longer will you be able to use sensory experience as evidence for a self. Descartes' famous "I am because I think" is refuted. You will not be because of thinking, nor because of seeing, hearing or sensing. In the Buddha's words, "You will not be because of that (any sensory experience)".
When the sensory processes are discarded as tenable evidence for a self, a soul or a me, then you are no longer located in the sensory experience. In the Buddha's words, "You will not be 'in that'". You no longer view, perceive or even think that there is a 'me' involved in life. In the words of the doctor in the original series of Star Trek, "It is life, Jim, but not as we know it"! There is no longer any sense of self, or soul, at the centre of experience. You are no more 'in that'.
Just to close off the loophole that you might think you can escape non-existence of a self or soul by identifying with a transcendental state of being beyond what is seen, heard, sensed or cognized, the Buddha thunders, "and you will be neither here (with the seen, heard, sensed or cognized) nor beyond (outside of the seen, heard, sensed or cognized) nor in between the two (neither of the world nor beyond the world). The last phrase comprehensively confounded the sophists!
In summary, the Buddha advised both Bāhiya and Venerable Mālunkyaputta to experience the Jhānas to suppress the Five Hindrances. Thereby one will discern with certainty the absence of a self or a soul behind the sensory process. Consequently, sensory experience will never again be taken as evidence of a 'knower' or a 'doer': such that you will never imagine a self or a soul at the centre of experience, nor beyond, nor anywhere else. Bāhiya's Teaching put in a nutshell the way to the realization of No-Self, Anattā. "Just this", concluded the Buddha "is the end of suffering".
DHAMMATALKS.NET
Ajahn Brahmavamso - BĀHIYA'S TEACHING
Ajahn Brahmavamso - BĀHIYA'S TEACHING
1

Reply
Remove Preview
1d


Soh Wei Yu
Ajahn brahmavamso criticising teachers who get stuck at I AM:
From Mindfulness, Bliss, and Beyond
The Buddha’s Word on the One Who Knows
Even some good, practicing monks fail to breach illusion’s last line of defense, the knower. They take “the one who knows,” “the original mind,” “the pure knowing,” or some other descriptions of the citta as the ultimate and permanent reality. To be accurate, such concepts belong to the teachings of Hinduism and not to Buddhism, for the Buddha clearly refuted these theories as not penetrating deeply enough.
For instance, in the first sutta in the first collection of Buddhist scriptures, the Brahmajāla Sutta, the Buddha described in detail sixty-two types of wrong view (micchā diṭṭhi). Wrong view number eight is the opinion that the thing that is called citta, or mind (mano), or consciousness (viññāṇa) is the permanent self (attā)—stable, eternal, not subject to change, forever the same (DN 1,2,13). Thus maintaining that “the one who knows” is eternal is micchā diṭṭhi, wrong view, says the Buddha.
In the Nidāna Saṃyutta, the Buddha states:
But, bhikkhus, that which is called “mind” [citta] and “mentality” [mano] and “consciousness” [viññāṇa]—the uninstructed worldling is unable to experience revulsion towards it, unable to become dispassionate towards it and be liberated from it. For what reason? Because for a long time this has been held to by him, appropriated, and grasped thus: “This is mine, this I am, this is self.”…
It would be better, bhikkhus, for the uninstructed worldling to take as self [attā] this body…because this body…is seen standing…for [as long as] a hundred years, or even longer. But that which is called “mind” and “mentality” and “consciousness” arises as one thing and ceases as another by day and by night. (SN 12,61)
However, just as the hard scientific evidence mentioned earlier cannot dislodge the view that it is oneself who is the doer, so even the hard scriptural evidence of the Buddha’s own teachings is unable on its own to dislodge the view that “the one who knows” is the ultimate entity, the attā. Some even argue that these Buddhist texts must have been changed, solely on the grounds that the texts disagree with their view!
Such irrational stubbornness comes from bhavataṇhā, the craving to be. Bhavataṇhā is so strong that one is prepared to let go of almost everything—possessions, one’s body, and one’s thoughts—as long as one is finally left with something, some tiny spot of existence, in order to be. After all, one wants to enjoy parinibbāna, thoroughgoing extinction, having worked so hard to get there. Bhavataṇhā is why many great meditators are unable to agree with the Buddha and make that final leap of renunciation that lets go of absolutely everything, including the citta. Even though the Buddha said that “nothing is worth adhering to” (sabbe dhammā nālam abhinivesāya) (MN 37,3), people still adhere to the citta. They continue to hold on to the knower and elevate it to unwarranted levels of mystical profundity by calling it “the ground of all being,” “union with God,” “the original mind,” etc.—even though the Buddha strongly refuted all such clinging, saying that all levels of being stink, the way even a tiny speck of feces on one’s hand stinks (AN I,18,13).
One needs the experiences of many jhānas, combined with a sound knowledge of the Buddha’s own teachings, in order to break through the barrier of bhavataṇhā, the craving to be, and see for oneself that what some call “the citta,” “mind,” “consciousness,” or “the one who knows” is only an empty process, one that is fueled by the craving to be and blinded by the delusion of permanence, but which is clearly of the nature to cease absolutely and leave nothing at all remaining (...)
2

Reply
1d
Last edited by xabir on Tue Mar 01, 2022 4:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
xabir
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 8:59 am

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by xabir »

Also to add I just shared with a friend:

"Actually it is also good to point out the importance of I AM (Poo Roo/Luminous Mind/etc). To me its an important breakthrough along the way

So im glad ajahn brahmavamso has pointed it out but placed it in context

Those people who are asking those questions they have not even realised I AM yet

So must be wary of appearing like it should be downplayed or unimportant"


p.s. when I use the term "I AM" it's actually referring to luminous mind, not the 'conceit of I Am'
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by auto »

xabir wrote: Tue Mar 01, 2022 3:27 pm ..
reading the thusness stages,
i find interesting is this,
http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html wrote:Somehow something was blocking the natural flow of my innermost essence and preventing me from re-living the experience.
Presence was still there but there was no sense of ‘totality’. It was both logically and intuitively clear that ‘I’ was the problem. It was the ‘I’ that was blocking; it was the ‘I’ that was the limit; it was the ‘I’ that was the boundary but why couldn’t I do away with it?
stage four, he describes, nice. I were previously wondering how are the stages related, but i now have an idea. Also know the 5th stage.

These stages repeat and are head based. That what took him 13 years, can be done within second, these corresponds with the channels in body(in general sense, particularly in head) and can be imitated after hearing description.

ah ok perhaps that what he means by the seal not a stage quote at stage 7.
NuanceOfSuchness
Posts: 311
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:58 pm
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by NuanceOfSuchness »

xabir wrote: Tue Mar 01, 2022 4:42 pm Also to add I just shared with a friend:

"Actually it is also good to point out the importance of I AM (Poo Roo/Luminous Mind/etc). To me its an important breakthrough along the way

So im glad ajahn brahmavamso has pointed it out but placed it in context

Those people who are asking those questions they have not even realised I AM yet

So must be wary of appearing like it should be downplayed or unimportant"


p.s. when I use the term "I AM" it's actually referring to luminous mind, not the 'conceit of I Am'
Hi,

Yes, I wanted to add this to my last reply, that when things appear to take on this luminosity, it is a landmark of sorts, and one to be acknowledged, not something to be discounted. My understanding beyond here, where the sense organs cease, is only partial, but even though the sense organs cease, form still remains visible - it is just understood differently as "in the seen, there is just the seen". This is something that cannot really be explained with words.
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by SteRo »

dpcalder wrote: Fri Jan 28, 2022 4:49 pm I have a question about the practical role of luminous mind in Thai Forest Buddhism. Is this understood as a state of non-conceptual thought (no "papanca") that is accessible whenever we meditate, in a way that is comparable to the "Subitism" of some forms of Mahayana Buddhism? Does anyone know if any Thai Forest works that explain the practical significance of the concept?
"luminous mind" is just another instance of reification of an aggregate as an imagined "pure" version. Mahayana has similar ideas.
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by auto »

SteRo wrote: Sun Mar 06, 2022 9:05 am
dpcalder wrote: Fri Jan 28, 2022 4:49 pm I have a question about the practical role of luminous mind in Thai Forest Buddhism. Is this understood as a state of non-conceptual thought (no "papanca") that is accessible whenever we meditate, in a way that is comparable to the "Subitism" of some forms of Mahayana Buddhism? Does anyone know if any Thai Forest works that explain the practical significance of the concept?
"luminous mind" is just another instance of reification of an aggregate as an imagined "pure" version. Mahayana has similar ideas.
search luminous mind,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_mind wrote:Luminous mind (Skt: prabhāsvara-citta or ābhāsvara-citta, Pali: pabhassara citta; Tib: འོ་སལ་གྱི་སེམས་ ’od gsal gyi sems; Ch: 光明心 guangmingxin; Jpn: 光明心 kōmyōshin; Kor: kwangmyŏngsim) is a Buddhist term which appears in a sutta of the Pali Anguttara Nikaya as well as numerous Mahayana texts and Buddhist tantras.
..
This term is given no direct doctrinal explanation in the Pali discourses, but later Buddhist schools explained it using various concepts developed by them.[3] The Theravada school identifies the "luminous mind" with the bhavanga, a concept first proposed in the Theravāda Abhidhamma.[4] The later schools of the Mahayana identify it with both the Mahayana concepts of bodhicitta and tathagatagarbha.[5] The notion is of central importance in the philosophy and practice of Dzogchen.
These descriptions help a lot. For example simply being aware is not luminous mind, whereas when being aware you know that there is period of unawareness, or that i were unaware - that state from a 'being aware' point of view is unaware state whereas that state is the luminous mind.
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by auto »

xabir wrote: Tue Mar 01, 2022 3:27 pm This question depends on the depth of insight, as elucidated in this map: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/ ... ience.html
Have you thought that these stages are about concentration/developing consciousness? and not wisdom for path attainments - that there(possibly) is no correlation between fetters model and these stages?
Last edited by auto on Mon Mar 07, 2022 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Question about "luminous mind" in Thai Forest Buddhism

Post by Pulsar »

xabir wrote
What you're seeing in such deep meditation is that which we call "mind,"
(in Pali it's called Citta). The Buddha used this beautiful simile.
When there is a full moon on a cloudy night, even though it's a full moon,
you can hardly see it.
Sometimes when the clouds are thin, you can see this hazy shape shining though.
You know there is something there.

This is like the meditation just before you've entered into these profound states. You know there is something there, but you can't quite make it out. There's still some "clothes" left. You're still thinking and doing, feeling the body or hearing sounds.
In which sutta does Buddha use this simile? can you pl. tell me.
Where in the Pali canon does Buddha say that in deep meditation 'you see the mind or citta'? In which sutta?
Regards :candle:
Post Reply