Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Meditation is.....
RichardH
Veteran
This post is a response to the misconception of meditation as being about a one-time realization of oneness. This misunderstanding is usually a Zen one and the meditation described here basically a Zen approach, but it can be an issue for new people in general.
Just to be clear....
We have at the core of our sense of being a pervasive feeling of unsatisfactoriness or incompleteness that we do not want to experience. We fill our time with a continuous stream of overlapping compensations to avoid facing it. These compensations can consist of pretty much anything, another trip the the fridge, watching tv, having a serene reflection on oneness, a fantasy about something we want, shifting positions in our chair, reading, pacing, eating again, having sex or a sexual fantasy, working, sleeping.....on and on it goes. All driven by the need to fill or cover up this incompleteness. Meditation is the practice of stopping this activity of avoidance. In meditation we sit still and are allowed no compensations. we cannot even shift our position or escape into fantasy. We must sit and experience directly our core dissatisfaction, our feeling of incompleteness and need. Because it is the last thing we want to experience, we may mask it for a while with the novelty of meditation, or a feeling of being "spiritual", but with time we are left with absolutely no wiggle room, and are pinned to a board like a bug. Then there is no choice but to experience and know this Dukkha completely and yield to the experience fully. When we do this, we see that the feeling of incompleteness is identical with the sense of "I". Through the 100% yielding and experiencing of it, there is a momentary unbinding of it, and we know for the first time freedom from "I" and incompleteness. This is just a glimpse because our habitual way of being will reassert itself quickly. But once having known non-suffering and genuinely seen the difference between suffering and non-suffering in this way, we have our compass, and understand where we are going.
Just to be clear....
We have at the core of our sense of being a pervasive feeling of unsatisfactoriness or incompleteness that we do not want to experience. We fill our time with a continuous stream of overlapping compensations to avoid facing it. These compensations can consist of pretty much anything, another trip the the fridge, watching tv, having a serene reflection on oneness, a fantasy about something we want, shifting positions in our chair, reading, pacing, eating again, having sex or a sexual fantasy, working, sleeping.....on and on it goes. All driven by the need to fill or cover up this incompleteness. Meditation is the practice of stopping this activity of avoidance. In meditation we sit still and are allowed no compensations. we cannot even shift our position or escape into fantasy. We must sit and experience directly our core dissatisfaction, our feeling of incompleteness and need. Because it is the last thing we want to experience, we may mask it for a while with the novelty of meditation, or a feeling of being "spiritual", but with time we are left with absolutely no wiggle room, and are pinned to a board like a bug. Then there is no choice but to experience and know this Dukkha completely and yield to the experience fully. When we do this, we see that the feeling of incompleteness is identical with the sense of "I". Through the 100% yielding and experiencing of it, there is a momentary unbinding of it, and we know for the first time freedom from "I" and incompleteness. This is just a glimpse because our habitual way of being will reassert itself quickly. But once having known non-suffering and genuinely seen the difference between suffering and non-suffering in this way, we have our compass, and understand where we are going.
0
Comments
Once you reach that level of liberation and things are a-okay isn't that still suffering because that feeling will eventually leave or is the fact that you are free from the "I" in life makes you immune to suffering?
And one last question. Is it wrong to find the liberation from suffering humorous along the way and life as a big joke?
Swinganamiss.
What is suffering?
Congrats chanratt!
Brxan,
The wrongness sounds to me like its coming from some sort of pessimism.
The agitation doesn't come because life is 'bad', but because we cling to some kind of notion of self. Once we begin to dissolve that self, which is very akin to completely embracing the dissatisfaction, then we no longer feel disturbed.
With warmth,
Matt
Not really. It is more like hugging the horribleness that life is, and then realizing that it's not horrible and it never was to begin with.
Not really because it is not dependent on "that feeling". It's dependent on the letting go of those things and allowing whatever it is, pleasant or unpleasant, to come and go as they please without anyone needing to intervene.
Will it still be a big joke when you are face to face with death when it comes to take you?
I'm not sure where this passive-aggressiveness streak comes but in time it will be gone.
seeker242 - As for the death comment. The answer is I have been there and it wasn't much of a joke. It was more of an "are you serious?" moment. Death, though, is something I am comfortable with. When the time comes you can't stop it so why worry about it.
I'm not sure what you mean by little pieces of insight. How I typically relate to it is that as we erode the self, insight remains. I think its great to not focus on the insights with meditation, it seems best to work on the erosion.
WW,M
The 'I' always thinks that it is a huge big deal.
chanratt glad something clicked for you :thumbsup:
So this is like a "temporary taste" of Nibbana. This is probably how you verify to yourself where the cause of dukkha actually lies. This is probably where you actually experience cessation and arising of dukkha. So you know with absolute certainty this is where the cause of the entire mass of suffering is...
But the question is this realization is not a "permanent fix". This does not enlighten you. Does it? Question is what does? Is enlightenment supposed to be a one-time realization or is it a continuous practice and a cultivation?
The question: What next? does that happen question occur to an enlightened person? Probably not in the same craving way we have. The way we crave special experiences.
Trungpa Rinpoche taught to examine the ego and understand what that is first. Before hearing about special experiences. Otherwise we are always looking off to the future and never confront the problem of the ego which wants to possess these experiences.
So you think enlightenment is a one-time realization which happens during meditation?
Nios.
One that there are points you cannot fall back from. *many* enlightenments
Two I also acknowledged that there is enlightenment proper but that there are endless buddha qualities that emerge over time..
I also have hinted that its part of samsaric mind to wonder 'what next'?
It is ok if you disagree. As the OP put it, "the meditation described here basically a Zen approach". There are other approaches to meditation that might suit you better.
The OP describes an experience of cessation of suffering and the permanent end of spiritual confusion. The end of existential "Mystery" and doubt about the path. It does not unbind this whole train-load of karma, of greed hatred and delusion. In my understanding true Enlightenment means all greed hatred and delusion have been unbound for good, and obviously that is not the case in my practice. The Op describes the clarity of the path ahead. It is so much easier to work with the habit energy of greed hatred and delusion every day when you know what it is about, but it blows me away just how deeply ingrained clinging is, and how much persistant day to day, moment to moment practice there is to do. At the recent retreat there was a really moving moment where Ajahn Sumedho just sat and looked at us for a long while, then he said.. " I wish I could do it for you, if I could I would, but it has taken me my whole life just to do this myself".
Great post Richard. Thanks
I think we are on the same page here. I agree that such insight (BB called it "temporary taste of Nibbana" if I am not mistaken) takes away doubt altogether. But you know for sure you still have defilements of the mind.
So, my question is this:
Once you have experienced for yourself and verified to yourself that the cause of suffering is self-clinging, is the rest meant to be practice or is there a definite "once and for all" state that the mind attends to while in meditation which destroys all defilement? The latter seems unlikely to me but I can be terribly mistaken. It is possible that my lack of practice makes me think it is unlikely
What do you think?
Every so often in practice there are these "kenshos" and we are instructed to not cling to them and to just attend to things as they present right now. Generally there is less suffering, as the default mode becomes "just this, just this, just this" without measuring things-as-they-are against some idea of what they should or should not be.
One of the things that has come from meditating through enough phases of inspiration and struggle is an appreciation of what I have to work with, this karmic profile, it's mass and momentum. There is also an appreciation for those people who are really mature, and gratitude for their presence. I didn't appreciated that at first..
thanks for your time
The "Is enlightenment spontaneous or gradual?" question is a good one with no clear answer.
I think its gradual, but hey, thats just me.
Apparently it's not just you...
... Although I look at cultivation within this lifetime
She said that both paths supported eachother. The example she gave was in the gradual path one thing you might do is contemplate past karma during meditation. She said that at some point you come to realize that you MUST have accumulated HUGE mountains of negative karma. At that point you realize that you must cut the suffering at its source, the ignorance, rather than only accumulating more merit. You may be in a tradition with this whole notion of merit is foreign, I am sorry I don't know therevada well; in that case bear with me and just entertain this for discussion. At that point the teacher would give a direct pointing out instruction of the nature of mind and so forth to help the student directly realize the teachings. In other words at that point the Lam Rim (gradual) path switched over to the upadeka (pointing out directly) path. The Lam Rim brought you to the point where conditions are right and then you practice directly with the pointing out instructions.
Another example is a forms practice of generating maitri for all beings. Even giving up all your possessions real and imagined to the buddha. This is a forms practice. It is a way of working with your mind. Strictly speaking all you need to reach enlightenment is formLESS meditation to realize the nature of mind. Meditating with no object just letting go into the impermanence and noting how clinging leads to suffering. But the forms practice which we can liken to Lam Rim (gradual) shows us exactly where we are clinging. What happens when we actually try to generate maitri for our enemy and we say, 'but not maitri for him/her'? What happens when we try to give up our possessions to the buddha and we say, "but not my sacred 2 video game"?
This is like a short cut. The Lam Rim shows us places where we are stuck and exactly the areas we need to work on with our formless meditation or where we need to ask our teacher for direct pointing out instructions.
I am sorry but that is the best I can recall from a talk I heard over a year ago. I hope I haven't botched it too much
Note: the direct pointing out instructions are a creative endevour teacher to student. They may shout loudly at you are tell you to build a tower (like Milarepa)... creative means to communicate wordless truths. My teacher said she would read dharma texts and then ask her teacher 'what does this really mean'... Her teacher would get this look in his eye like he was happy that he had been asked. And then he would give a further creative pointing out instruction to help tease out the meaning to the student of a text.
Richard,
I wonder if certain thresholds are experienced, such as the one depicted in the OP, that is like shifting the gravity of the 'karmic profile' as you describe it. Once you pass beyond it, there is a new pull away from delusion and mental rumination.. as though the energy of the karma is no longer refueling itself, and so unbinding the experience becomes a natural thing to do as the peak energy of the disturbance passes.
It seems to me as though it wouldn't be an insight that unbinds everything at once, because insight is just passive... but perhaps an experience could be so alchemically potent that some major unbinding of mental fixation occurs afterwards, as there is such a radical shift in gravity... like if the old planet explodes, the mind creates a new one that has less dysfunctional patterns. It wouldn't change the effects in the queue so to speak, so karma would still unfold, but the relationship with the karma could be direct.
With Warmth,
Matt
Does anyone believe that it's both? A bunch of little insights that gradually do away with things and then one last big one that does away with everything else that remains.
For me that would still mean gradual.
Exactly
Isn't the 'I' created in an effort to avoid suffering? Isn't there some suffering or fear that is not dependent on the 'I', which creates the 'I'?
edit:
I just thought of something, what about proceding straight to egoless or less egoness or just a method of eroding the ego...
I say this because I was thinking about this feeling of incompleteness in relation to devotion to god, and that perhaps in religions where one devotes themself to god they feel complete because the devotion is egoless...
Peeling away the layers of conditioning and old patterns of avoidance is not easy, but I can sense there's a calm and still place within me that I can reach if I only keep digging.
Any genuine Enlightement actually unbinds greed hatred and delusion, and I can't see such an unbinding not being preceded by development and effort.
Thats one take on it anyway.
Could you please elaborate more as to what you mean by "Nibbana is beyond any concepts"
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset;"> Does anyone believe that it's both? A bunch of little insights that gradually do away with things and then one last big one that does away with everything else that remains. </td> </tr> </tbody></table> What if you have a situation where there is a person who has weakened the defilements to the point where they are just hanging by the very last fiber of the thread and then they die and are reborn. But, because the thread is still hanging on, even if it only by a single fiber, they have not yet reached enlightenment because enlightenment means the thread is completely cut.
Then in their next life, one insight comes and "suddenly" breaks the last fiber of the thread cutting it off for good and they attain enlightenment. One could view this as "sudden enlightenment" or "gradual enlightenment", or both depending on how you look at it, yes?
If you are looking at the very moment the thread breaks, that is a "sudden moment". But if you are looking at the entire process of wearing down the thread AND then the moment of the last fiber of the thread breaking, that would a gradual process.
Perhaps this is the reason why there is a debate on the issue? When in reality, both views would be correct depending on how you look at it.
Personally I think the teaching of the sudden school is not contradictory to the gradual school because the sudden school refers to the very moment that the very last fiber of the thread is broken, and that "sudden" moment" is what causes the transition from unenlightenment to enlightenment.
So, the wearing down of the thread is a gradual process and the actual breaking of the thread happens suddenly. But, enlightenment does not occur until the sudden moment of the thread actually breaking. So the way I see the teaching of the sudden school, it goes like this.
1. Wearing down the thread - still not enlightened
2. Wearing down the thread more - still not enlightened
3. Wearing down the thread even more - still not enlightened
4. Wearing down the thread to the very last fiber remains - still not enlightened
5. The very last fiber is cut - Boom, enlightenment!
The transition from "4. still not enlightened" to "5. Boom, enlightenment!", happens "suddenly" because it takes but a moment to cut the very last fiber of the thread.
Looking at it this way, the gradual school and the sudden school are both correct.
My mind is projecting or interpreting dubiousness in the question you pose, but I'll answer it.
My words directly regard post #30, where it was brought up that nirvana is beyond conceptions. My post is describing that the stilling and rebirthing of concepts happens well before nirvana, ie, the dual view is stilled and embraced. With practice, there is a detachment from clinging to both conception and non-conception.
Does that clear it up?
With warmth,
Matt
What do you mean?
Isn't Nibbana supposed to be a state when mind recognizes right view and wisdom? You seem to imply nibbana is a completely void state.
That would be the extreme of nihilism. It is beyond all conception or attributes. In Vajrayana it is described simply as "of the nature of clear light or luminosity".
I wouldn't call nirvana a state, nor give it suppositions, but I also wasn't specifically referring to nirvana, just the development of a non-dual view, which I do not equate to nirvana. If you take the original statement out of context with post #30, I can see how you might continue to have the notion that I consider nirvana as a place that has something to do with conceptions. Proper handling of conceptions is certainly wise, but I don't think that nirvana is without them, which has been the central theme of all three of my posts.
Wisdom occurs with right understanding of conceptions, without clinging to them. The view is not without depiction, only without fixation. So it is not proper to say nirvana is beyond conceptions, because conceptions are how we reach between subjective experiences, on either side of enlightenment. It would be more proper, as I understand it, to say that nirvana is without clinging.
I don't consider it void-like, rather, an experience that occurs without the emotions or delusions that arise from clinging.
With warmth,
Matt
That would make sense
Nibbana is the removal of unwholesome qualities, namely greed (loba), ill-will (dosa), ignorance (moha) from the mind and replacing them with wholesome qualities like wisdom, right view and compassion. It that sense, it is removing certain qualities and replacing them with other qualities. I don't think it makes sense to imply that Nibbana is completely void of or beyond concepts and views. (I mean implied by post 30
Sorry, still not convinced.
What is this thread you are wearing down?
The cessation of attachment to all conditions, so that they follow their own nature without obstruction. Non-duality that does not negate conventional "I" and "other".
Maybe you are saying the same thing in another way. Maybe you have a different way.
"I" and "Other" are conditions. When they arise - conditions arise, when they cease - conditions cease...
Best wishes