Letting go is impossible

betaboy

unless one is mindful.

Try a little experiment. Do nothing for ten minutes, and you will realize that the mind would easily and quickly get caught in some story - past incident, future concerns, anything at all. So how is 'let go' possible when the mind gets trapped in the story?

This is why mindfulness is important. You are aware of the trap, which in turn helps you to let go. So my point, mindfulness and 'letting go' go hand in hand. You can't just wake up one morning and decide to let go. It is a long, hard process which begins with mindfulness .......... and ends in 'no mind.'

lobster

What do you mean by no mind?

You are right, mindfulness and intent. Can you let go or grasp 'no mind'? You have certainly shown the capacity to grab suffering. It is not making you happy I take it. This is why 'grabbing hold' of positive attributes is a precursor of letting go . . .

:wave:

federica

betaboy said:

...unless one is mindful.

...is sufficient.

Jeffrey

We cannot grasp anything, so why not just let go? It's our natural state even though it seems otherwise right now. Yes, mindfulness.

lobster

We cannot grasp anything, so why not just let go?

?
I am trying to grasp your meaning? Is it meaningless? Too absolute? A platitude?
There many things we grasp. Happiness, joy, equanimity, well being, good will. There are many things we can grasp.

What do you mean? :buck:

Jeffrey

Grasping does *not* lead to happiness etc. At least not what I am talking about as grasping. I think Peme Chodron calls it 'shenpa'. I'm sure you can find a you tube. A 'meaning' comes from non-grasping to our assumptions.

wangchuey

We eventually have to.

lobster

I'm sure you can find a you tube

Why would I? It will not lead anywhere . . .

Jeffrey

lobster said:

I'm sure you can find a you tube

Why would I? It will not lead anywhere . . .

Who can be sure where things will lead? It's an invitation. Find out what Pema Chodron is saying? Why would that be so painful?

ThailandTom

@betaboy what have you let go of totally without any grasping or attachment still connected with out of curiosity?

lobster

It's an invitation

So it is. Thanks for the invite.

pegembara

betaboy said:

unless one is mindful.

Try a little experiment. Do nothing for ten minutes, and you will realize that the mind would easily and quickly get caught in some story - past incident, future concerns, anything at all. So how is 'let go' possible when the mind gets trapped in the story?

This is why mindfulness is important. You are aware of the trap, which in turn helps you to let go. So my point, mindfulness and 'letting go' go hand in hand. You can't just wake up one morning and decide to let go. It is a long, hard process which begins with mindfulness .......... and ends in 'no mind.'

Here is a powerful meditation.

Imagine that your life is slipping away. Is there anything that you can hold on to? You have to lay everything down because you have no choice! Everything is returned to nature.
How does it feel then to let go of all the burdens of life?
That is the essence of death contemplation (maranasati).

The Blessed One said, "Mindfulness of death, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit & great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end. Therefore you should develop mindfulness of death."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.019.than.html

David

If letting go is impossible, just wait til it's time to let go of letting go.

fivebells

Mindful means keeping something in mind. You have to be mindful of something. In this case, the topic seems to be mindfulness of the opportunities for dispassion and letting go. That is an excellent practice, but it's worth thinking about why the anapanasati instructions don't recommend that approach until the very last tetrad.

DairyLama

fivebells said:

That is an excellent practice, but it's worth thinking about why the anapanasati instructions don't recommend that approach until the very last tetrad.

Why do you think that this is the case? Do you mean because "letting go" is a fruition of practice rather than an effort of concentration?

fivebells

I think the earlier tetrads establish a foundation of certitude and stable attention, which is useful because serious contemplation of "letting go" is often disturbing. ("He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me," "Just let it go.") The tetrads can be used out of sequence, but I do think the canonical ordering represents a valuable progression for most situations, particularly challenging ones.

Jeffrey

According to my teacher one aspect of mindfulness is recognizing what things are benefitial and what things are harmful.

Jeffrey

@fivebells, Isn't mindfulness something different from concentration? They are two separate things on the eightfold path.

Citta

betaboy said:

unless one is mindful.

Try a little experiment. Do nothing for ten minutes, and you will realize that the mind would easily and quickly get caught in some story - past incident, future concerns, anything at all. So how is 'let go' possible when the mind gets trapped in the story?

This is why mindfulness is important. You are aware of the trap, which in turn helps you to let go. So my point, mindfulness and 'letting go' go hand in hand. You can't just wake up one morning and decide to let go. It is a long, hard process which begins with mindfulness .......... and ends in 'no mind.'

Awareness is not about strain or hyper vigilance. It's about fully resting in the moment in a state of relaxed alertness..neither dwelling in aversion nor attraction. That is what is let go of. Not the myriad arisings of the world. They just arise.

lobster

Jeffrey said:

According to my teacher one aspect of mindfulness is recognizing what things are beneficial and what things are harmful.

Good advice whilst we get our relatives in order. So we have to gain discipline, useful internal attributes and qualities. We can be absolutely sure they will arise spontaneously through awakening.
Moving straight to the absolute posture is fine but eventually that 'posture' has to be dropped as another relative . . .
If you have wasted your time on harmful behaviour, the results will be absolutely obvious.
Oh must be time for my drug taking . . . aka formal sitting. Excuse me whilst I flatten Mr Cushion, that low life . . .
:buck:

how

Mindfullness is just allowing your mind to truly be full. The only thing that limits such fullness is through our habitual ego protective attempts at co opting our data input.

If I find letting go impossible, I just drop it.

DairyLama

Jeffrey said:

@fivebells, Isn't mindfulness something different from concentration? They are two separate things on the eightfold path.

Yes, in the context of the 8-fold path they are distinct but related qualities. Mindfulness of a single object like the breath is a common way of developing concentration. Though "concentration" isn't an ideal translation for samadhi, which is usually defined in terms of jhana in the suttas.

DairyLama

Citta said:

Awareness is not about strain or hyper vigilance. It's about fully resting in the moment in a state of relaxed alertness..neither dwelling in aversion nor attraction.

According to your Dzogchen tradition?

Citta

Yes, but I first learned that from Trungpa Rinpoche, and it was repeated almost verbatim
By Ajahn Anando . So it would appear to be a widespread view. And certainly works best for me.

fivebells

@Citta, I wouldn't call the views coming out of Amaravati Monastery (Anando's home) representative of Theravadin teachings or practices by any means. They are heavily influenced by Dzogchen teachings, in a decidedly uncanonical and in my opinion confusing way. You can see this in the writings of the abbot, who I am told by people who know him is quite a devotee of Drubwang Tsoknyi Rinpoche.

@Jeffrey, yes they are separate, but closely related. Can you expand on your question, please?

Citta

Gosh five bells this Dzogchen stuff is pernicious isn't it ?

Citta

Incidentally Ajahn Anando was the former Abbott but one, not of Amaravati but of Chithurst. He has been dead for 20 years.

fivebells

Oh, a different Ajaan Anando?

Citta

I don't know Five bells.

iI suspect that Anando is a common name for monks. The one I knew was the second Abott of Chithurst. Died in his forties as an indirect result of injuries sustained in Vietnam,many years earlier. experiences which also led him to become a monk.
One of the most impressive people I have ever met.

Jeffrey

fivebells said:

@Citta, I wouldn't call the views coming out of Amaravati Monastery (Anando's home) representative of Theravadin teachings or practices by any means. They are heavily influenced by Dzogchen teachings, in a decidedly uncanonical and in my opinion confusing way. You can see this in the writings of the abbot, who I am told by people who know him is quite a devotee of Drubwang Tsoknyi Rinpoche.

@Jeffrey, yes they are separate, but closely related. Can you expand on your question, please?

How is mindfulness different from concentration is what I was interested in.

Are you saying that concentration is jhana type things and mindfulness is holding an object in mind. For example I could focus on a penny. And then in my meditation I visualize that penny exactly as I did in preparation?

fivebells

In Western Theravadin circles, these kinds of claims tend to come from students of Ajaan Chah, and they need to be understood in context. There's a mostly Theravadin discussion of a related assertion of his here, about "judgement-free awareness." As the author of that thread's OP says, "this is an attitude for a mature (i.e. advanced) practice." Goals and practices blend into one another as the path progresses, but "Fully resting in the moment in a state of relaxed alertness..neither dwelling in aversion nor attraction" is more like the final goal than the heart of the practice, and it's a shame that so many talk of that goal while glossing over the foundational practices which eventually make it realistic and truly attainable without sweeping anything under the rug. Those foundational practices sometimes do involve an awareness which is strained or hyper-vigilant.

Citta

Jeffrey said:

fivebells said:

@Citta, I nwouldn't call the views coming out of Amaravati Monastery (Anando's home) representative of Theravadin teachings or practices by any means. They are heavily influenced by Dzogchen teachings, in a decidedly uncanonical and in my opinion confusing way. You can see this in the writings of the abbot, who I am told by people who know him is quite a devotee of Drubwang Tsoknyi Rinpoche.

@Jeffrey, yes they are separate, but closely related. Can you expand on your question, please?

How is mindfulness different from concentration is what I was interested in.

Are you saying that concentration is jhana type things and mindfulness is holding an object in mind. For example I could focus on a penny. And then in my meditation I visualize that penny exactly as I did in preparation?

Concentration is effortful. Mindfulness is our natural state when we get attraction and aversion out of the way by seeing them arise.
jnana is a circus trick.

Citta

fivebells said:

In Western Theravadin circles, these kinds of claims tend to come from students of Ajaan Chah, and they need to be understood in context. There's a mostly Theravadin discussion of a related assertion of his here, about "judgement-free awareness." As the author of that thread's OP says, "this is an attitude for a mature (i.e. advanced) practice." Goals and practices blend into one another as the path progresses, but "Fully resting in the moment in a state of relaxed alertness..neither dwelling in aversion nor attraction" is more like the final goal than the heart of the practice, and it's a shame that so many talk of that goal while glossing over the foundational practices which eventually make it realistic and truly attainable without sweeping anything under the rug. Those foundational practices sometimes do involve an awareness which is strained or hyper-vigilant.

I strove for more than 30 years on the gradual path....vipassana, Samantha, precepts, and realised more in one weekend of Dzogchen than all the previous decades together.
That was my experience. Other peoples experience may vary.

Citta

Five bells my understanding is that New Buddhist is a pan-Buddhist forum rather than one that sees the Thervad, and indeed a particular emphasis within the Thervada as normative.
The Theravada is one time honoured school within Buddhism. It is not the acme by which other schools are judged. Personally if I wanted to keep up to date with Theravada debate I would do so via Dhamma Wheel which IS a specifically Theravadin forum.

fivebells

fivebells said:

"Fully resting in the moment in a state of relaxed alertness..neither dwelling in aversion nor attraction" is more like the final goal than the heart of the practice, and it's a shame that so many talk of that goal while glossing over the foundational practices which eventually make it realistic and truly attainable without sweeping anything under the rug.

Citta said:

I strove for more than 30 years on the gradual path....vipassana, Samantha, precepts, and realised more in one weekend of Dzogchen than all the previous decades together.
That was my experience. Other peoples experience may vary.

The developmental path you describe is exactly my point. You spent years on foundational practice and that made the Dzogchen practice fruitful. It's obviously fallacious to assume that because Dzogchen was what you were doing at the time of the breakthrough, Dzogchen alone must be the sole necessary factor. It's far more likely that Dzogchen is a capstone over the fruits of all the practice which came before. But a lot of people seem to like this fallacy.

fivebells

Citta said:

Five bells my understanding is that New Buddhist is a pan-Buddhist forum rather than one that sees the Thervad, and indeed a particular emphasis within the Thervada as normative.
The Theravada is one time honoured school within Buddhism. It is not the acme by which other schools are judged. Personally if I wanted to keep up to date with Theravada debate I would do so via Dhamma Wheel which IS a specifically Theravadin forum.

That's a strawman. I'm not holding Theravada up as acme, I'm explaining how your position on the innate nature of awareness fits in a Theravadin context in order to rebut your implication that since Anando said it it must be a widespread view in Theravadin circles as well.

Not that it matters, but I'm not a Theravadin. I'm a mahayanaist but I regard hinayana practices as foundational, and I believe I wasted a lot of time trying to practice in line with assertions like the one you made here, that relaxed, accepting awareness is a complete practice which anyone can just do no matter how much mental chaff might seem to be getting in the way.

Citta

fivebells said:

fivebells said:

"Fully resting in the moment in a state of relaxed alertness..neither dwelling in aversion nor attraction" is more like the final goal than the heart of the practice, and it's a shame that so many talk of that goal while glossing over the foundational practices which eventually make it realistic and truly attainable without sweeping anything under the rug.

Citta said:

I strove for more than 30 years on the gradual path....vipassana, Samantha, precepts, and realised more in one weekend of Dzogchen than all the previous decades together.
That was my experience. Other peoples experience may vary.

The developmental path you describe is exactly my point. You spent years on foundational practice and that made the Dzogchen practice fruitful. It's obviously fallacious to assume that because Dzogchen was what you were doing at the time of the breakthrough, Dzogchen alone must be the sole necessary factor. It's far more likely that Dzogchen is a capstone over the fruits of all the practice which came before. But a lot of people seem to like this fallacy.

You would then need to explain why people who walked straight in off the street experienced exactly what I experienced.
Let's be clear. I am not suggesting that anyone should drop what THEY are doing. Just that Buddhadharma is not a single entity.

fivebells

Jeffrey said:

How is mindfulness different from concentration is what I was interested in.

Are you saying that concentration is jhana type things and mindfulness is holding an object in mind. For example I could focus on a penny. And then in my meditation I visualize that penny exactly as I did in preparation?

This essay explains the difference well.

Concentration is stable attention on some object, whereas mindfulness is remembering some fact or task ("keep something in mind.") For instance, when you get into a flow state playing a video game, the concentration is the attention on the game, the mindfulness is remembering to scan for threats and knowing where to look for them. When you're doing breath meditation, the concentration is resting attention on the breath, the mindfulness is a range of tasks related to maintaining that concentration, such as returning attention to the breath when it wanders, viewing the breath with good will, etc.

Citta

fivebells said:

Citta said:

Five bells my understanding is that New Buddhist is a pan-Buddhist forum rather than one that sees the Thervad, and indeed a particular emphasis within the Thervada as normative.
The Theravada is one time honoured school within Buddhism. It is not the acme by which other schools are judged. Personally if I wanted to keep up to date with Theravada debate I would do so via Dhamma Wheel which IS a specifically Theravadin forum.

That's a strawman. I'm not holding Theravada up as acme, I'm explaining how your position on the innate nature of awareness fits in a Theravadin context in order to rebut your implication that since Anando said it it must be a widespread view in Theravadin circles as well.

Not that it matters, but I'm not a Theravadin. I'm a mahayanaist but I regard hinayana practices as foundational, and I believe I wasted a lot of time trying to practice in line with assertions like the one you made here, that relaxed, accepting awareness is a complete practice which anyone can just do no matter how much mental chaff might seem to be getting in the way.

I think a more careful reading of what I wrote made no suggestion that such a view was ' widespread' in the Theravada. Merely that it widespread in Buddhadharma, including among some Theravadin teachers. You will presumably say that those teachers, including Ajahn ChAh Ajahn Sumedho and Ajahn Amaro are not typical of the Theravda. To which I would reply that there is no single enity called the Theravada.
i would also argue that I sweated many years attempting to deal with the symptoms of dUkkha rather than grasping its root.
In the end I suspect that it comes down to karmic circumstances and the resulting predelictions.

Citta

Citta said:

Yes, but I first learned that from Trungpa Rinpoche, and it was repeated almost verbatim
By Ajahn Anando . So it would appear to be a widespread view. And certainly works best for me.

This is what I actually wrote. No specific mention of the Theravada at all.

fivebells

Citta said:

I sweated many years attempting to deal with the symptoms of dUkkha rather than grasping its root.
In the end I suspect that it comes down to karmic circumstances and the resulting predelictions.

Yes, and the foundational practices shape those circumstances and predilections so that the root is perceptible and graspable.

Citta

I accept that this is true in your experience five bells. Foundation practices which I encountered first in their Thervadin form at the original Wat buddhapadipa and the very conservative Si lankan Chiswick Buddhist Vihara merely had me going in circles for quite some time. I then encountered the Vajrayana and then Dzogchen and it was like rain on dry ground.
Other peoples experiences may vary. I don't doubt that you have found what works....for you.

Jeffrey

Citta said:

Jeffrey said:

fivebells said:

@Citta, I nwouldn't call the views coming out of Amaravati Monastery (Anando's home) representative of Theravadin teachings or practices by any means. They are heavily influenced by Dzogchen teachings, in a decidedly uncanonical and in my opinion confusing way. You can see this in the writings of the abbot, who I am told by people who know him is quite a devotee of Drubwang Tsoknyi Rinpoche.

@Jeffrey, yes they are separate, but closely related. Can you expand on your question, please?

How is mindfulness different from concentration is what I was interested in.

Are you saying that concentration is jhana type things and mindfulness is holding an object in mind. For example I could focus on a penny. And then in my meditation I visualize that penny exactly as I did in preparation?

Concentration is effortful. Mindfulness is our natural state when we get attraction and aversion out of the way by seeing them arise.
jnana is a circus trick.

Again, there is already a spoke of the 8fp of effort. Why say effort for two spokes of the eight fold path?

Jeffrey

fivebells said:

Jeffrey said:

How is mindfulness different from concentration is what I was interested in.

Are you saying that concentration is jhana type things and mindfulness is holding an object in mind. For example I could focus on a penny. And then in my meditation I visualize that penny exactly as I did in preparation?

This essay explains the difference well.

Concentration is stable attention on some object, whereas mindfulness is remembering some fact or task ("keep something in mind.") For instance, when you get into a flow state playing a video game, the concentration is the attention on the game, the mindfulness is remembering to scan for threats and knowing where to look for them. When you're doing breath meditation, the concentration is resting attention on the breath, the mindfulness is a range of tasks related to maintaining that concentration, such as returning attention to the breath when it wanders, viewing the breath with good will, etc.

Thanks for giving both an explanation and a link. Sometimes I have a very hard time concentrating on links. I have like a skin I need to break to branch out to links. That said I will give your link a try.

Citta

I was not referencing the 8fp.

Jeffrey

Oh, ok.

Jeffrey

Just be with the body in and of itself, sitting right here. You close your eyes — what do you have? There's the sensation of "bodiness" that you're sitting with. That's your frame of reference. Try to stay with it. Keep bringing the mind back to this sense of the body until it gets the message and begins to settle down. In the beginning of the practice you find the mind going out to grasp this or that, so you note it enough to tell it to let go, return to the body, and hold on there. Then it goes out to grasp something else, so you tell it to let go, come back, and latch onto the body again. Eventually, though, you reach a point where you can actually grasp hold of the breath and you don't let go, okay? You keep holding onto it. From that point on, whatever else that happens to come into your awareness is like something coming up and brushing the back of your hand. You don't have to note it. You stay with the body as your basic frame of reference. Other things come and go, you're aware of them, but you don't drop the breath and go grasping after them. This is when you really have established the body as a solid frame of reference.

When he says body could a practitioner access the body by noting the breath?

Jeffrey

You can see this in the Buddha's instructions for dealing with the hindrances. In the first stage, he says to be aware of the hindrances as they come and go. Some people think that this is an exercise in "choiceless awareness," where you don't try to will the mind in any direction, where you simply sit and watch willy-nilly whatever comes into the mind. In actual practice, though, the mind isn't yet ready for that. What you need at this stage is a fixed point of reference for evaluating the events in the mind, just as when you're trying to gauge the motion of clouds through the sky: You need to choose a fixed point — like a roof gable or a light pole — at which to stare so that you can get a sense of which direction and how fast the clouds are moving. The same with the coming and going of sensual desire, ill will, etc., in the mind: You have to try to maintain a fixed reference point for the mind — like the breath — if you want to be really sensitive to when there are hindrances in the mind — getting in the way of your reference point — and when there are not.

How can you find a fixed point in light of the three marks. Just impermanence refutes a fixed point. Does he mean a relatively fixed point? Like the stars which are going to stay there for millions of years?

fivebells

@Jeffrey, yes, he means relatively. A light pole or a roof gable is not permanent, but it is static enough to provide a temporary frame of reference against which to measure the motion of a distant object. You could use the light pole for this purpose even if it's going to be chopped down in five minutes. Similarly, the stillness which comes from concentration is bound to cease some day, but while it lasts it provides a uniform background against which the mental processes comprising the hindrances stand out very clearly.

Nevermind

federica said:

betaboy said:

...unless one is mindful.

...is sufficient.

How do you know that?

DairyLama

Citta said:

...jhana is a circus trick.

You keep reminding us that Buddharma isn't a single entity, then you come out with dismissive comments like this. Why?