Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
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.

Higher consciousness is not liberation.

RichardHRichardH Veteran
edited September 2010 in Buddhism Basics
Just a note to new folks curious about Buddhist practice....

Expansion of consciousness is not the goal of Buddhist meditation. Emphasis on "Higher states" of consciousness literally misses the point of Buddhist practice. In basic terms, the point of practice is cessation of suffering. This entails realizing "The Unconditioned". My primary teacher (Thai Forest Tradition) describes the Unconditioned in this way ..."It is not about having an experience, but knowing whatever experience is present" In other words "The Unconditioned" is not a state of consciousness. It is non-attachment in all states of consciousness. Seeking "higher" consciousness amounts to trading one condition for another, it is purely samsaric. Your ordinary "unspiritual" present state right now is your ground.

Seeking transcendent states of consciousness by whatever means simply expands samsara and brings you no "closer" to the Unconditioned, to cessation of suffering. In terms of Dharma practice that activity is a diversion.

Thankyou.:)

Comments

  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited August 2010
    However you do seek to bring yourself to a state of consciousness where you may realize the unconditioned..

    Shamata or calm..

    But the shamata isn't what is liberating...
  • edited August 2010
    Well-said.
  • pegembarapegembara Veteran
    edited August 2010
    AWARENESS


    Now, the mind is alright, it is normal. It won’t be
    and it thinks again. We watch that. Watch it clearly
    Become familiar in watching, and skilled.
    Be a champ in watching.

    It is good to see suffering. To see suffering
    is the most excellent thing.
    Suffering gives rise to ‘BUDDHA’. If there was no
    suffering, there would be no BUDDHA.
    Don’t be the one who is suffering: see it!
    To see suffering is to be the BUDDHA, a little
    BUDDHA. The BUDDHA is the One who knows,
    the Awakened One, the joyful One.
    It doesn’t mean a person, rather, it is the quality of
    knowing, of being awake – that is the BUDDHA.
    The state of seeing is a quality, it is the standard
    of life, it is the Path.

    Instructions at Buddhamandala
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited August 2010
    Certain states of mind do seem to play a critical role in developing this non-attachment, though. Opening to the experience of the present moment depends on metta, for instance.
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    edited August 2010
    Richard H wrote: »
    Just a note to new folks curious about Buddhist practice....

    Expansion of consciousness is not the goal of Buddhist meditation. Emphasis on "Higher states" of consciousness literally misses the point of Buddhist practice. In basic terms, the point of practice is cessation of suffering. This entails realizing "The Unconditioned". My primary teacher (Thai Forest Tradition) describes the Unconditioned in this way ..."It is not about having an experience, but knowing whatever experience is present" In other words "The Unconditioned" is not a state of consciousness. It is non-attachment in all states of consciousness. Seeking "higher" consciousness amounts to trading one condition for another, it is purely samsaric. Your ordinary "unspiritual" present state right now is your ground.

    Seeking transcendent states of consciousness by whatever means simply expands samsara and brings you no "closer" to the Unconditioned, to cessation of suffering. In terms of Dharma practice that activity is a diversion.

    Thankyou.:)

    Does that mean one should not aspire to reach the various states of Jhana?
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited August 2010
    seeker242 wrote: »
    Does that mean one should not aspire to reach the various states of Jhana?
    I don't know. It seems to vary from tradition to tradition. Certainly no state, no matter how subtle or peaceful is "closer" to the unconditioned than another. Maybe some states are more conducive to making the jump, but it is a jump. For me it was the desperate furnace of a Yong Maeng Jong Jin. After which the practice consists of clarifying the realization. That clarification is a long road it seems, working with the habit of identification.
    Chinul speaks of this as "sudden realization,gradual cultivation"
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited August 2010
    fivebells wrote: »
    Certain states of mind do seem to play a critical role in developing this non-attachment, though. Opening to the experience of the present moment depends on metta, for instance.
    That is really true. I remember at a retreat onetime (thai forest) having a very emotional brealthrough where I forgave myself for existing. That was the beginning of opening to the unconditioned, that lead to "sitting without wobbling"...
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited August 2010
    Wow, that sounds like a wonderful experience.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited August 2010
    It was a very person, emotional, and psychologically transformative moment. very much a shift in the conditioned mind state. This is interesting because the "unconditioned" is parallel to all conditioned mind states in that no state is "closer" and there must be a sudden recognition, or "leap" in zen terms. Yet certain mind states are necessary precursors to this sudden recognition or opening.
  • GuyCGuyC Veteran
    edited August 2010
    Richard H wrote: »
    I remember at a retreat onetime (thai forest) having a very emotional brealthrough where I forgave myself for existing.

    A similar thing happened to me on my last retreat, it was like I let go of a massive burden. The thought I had was "There's nothing wrong with me" (I guess this is similar to "forgiving myself for existing"). It's not that I am faultless now, I still have things I need to work on, but there is no guilt trip over it anymore.
  • edited August 2010
    I think expansion of consciousness is a subjective term though. If it means seeing pretty colors and aurus and feeling really happy, then, yah, I agree. Expanded consciousness could also entail the realization that we aren't just a partition and that were all apart of an integrated, cause and effect system. In that case, that type of expanded consciousness or awareness would be very beneficial in helping you understand the role that suffering and ego plays in the world. note: I'm not an expert. This is just my opinion. I may be arguing semantics and just not realize it.
  • edited August 2010
    Consciousness, Higher or lower, is one of the "states" of conditioned existence. Why would any one practicing Buddhism even consider trying to enter a higher consciousness? There is no such thing, it is just an illusion. Those who seek or preach that it is special and important are deceived.
  • GuyCGuyC Veteran
    edited August 2010
    Hi Dennis,

    Perhaps (I say this because I simply don't know from experience) a more refined form of consciousness than our ordinary experience IS important. Why?

    Even though you are right, it is just another conditioned state, perhaps from this conditioned state (i.e. post-Jhana) we can realize the Unconditioned. Samma-Samadhi (which some wise and knowledgeable people believe is synonymous with Jhana) is a factor on the Path.

    Besides, if these things were really so unimportant why would the Buddha go on and on about them in so many of the Suttas?

    But I suppose it depends on your definition of "higher consciousness".

    With Metta,

    GuY
  • edited August 2010
    well i don't know if wending into higher consciousness is purely samsaric...... it certainly can be.... and that is indeed well said Professor H I agree..... though i cant totally agree.... and its not as if higher states, an enlarged awareness, intelligence, process, or experience cannot be used to benefit yourself and other living beings.... the cloak of suffering can be removed through many ways.... however i can't disagree with the blunt of your thrust... good sir... the BUTT of your PIE
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    GuyC wrote: »
    Besides, if these things were really so unimportant why would the Buddha go on and on about them in so many of the Suttas?


    This is just opinion but the Buddha was immersed in Jhana culture, came thought to his Enlightenment through that culture, was taught that. It was the normal experiential environment for a seeker in that place and time. The teachers in the Thai Forest Tradition here say that "concentration" and stilling are only means to an end, and that deeper absorptions are not the point. The Zen teachers are even clearer about not dwelling on states of absorption or having special insights go to the head. Ajahn Sumedho says.... "Just be a little worm that knows two words ..let go.." . It was a real turning point for me to really hear that a condition is a condition, period, whether it is internal, external, subtle, or gross.
  • jinzangjinzang Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Trungpa Rinpoche was asked once if you should pursue the jhanas. He answered that before you pursue them, you have to have them. For most people, it's not something to worry about.
  • edited September 2010
    Richard H wrote: »
    seeker242 wrote:
    Does that mean one should not aspire to reach the various states of Jhana?
    I don't know. It seems to vary from tradition to tradition. Certainly no state, no matter how subtle or peaceful is "closer" to the unconditioned than another. Maybe some states are more conducive to making the jump, but it is a jump. For me it was the desperate furnace of a Yong Maeng Jong Jin. After which the practice consists of clarifying the realization. That clarification is a long road it seems, working with the habit of identification.
    Absorption, or jhana, was taught by the Buddha to be used as a tool in the process of awakening. It therefore, most assuredly, was taught as something to aspire to master. However, and this is made quite clear in the discourses themselves, absorption is not something that one should become attached to.

    The absorption state, when cultivated over time, assists the mind in being able to retain its sense of quietude and stillness, even beyond its practice in meditative states. Such a state of peacefulness outside of meditation is known as passaddhi, which just means "calm" or "a profound inner peace." This translates into an increase in the practitioner's ability to remain in a "mindful" state of mind for increasingly longer and longer periods of time away from meditative states.

    For a more expansive view about these subjects, please read the following extract (in PDF form) linked to below from Ven. Analayo's book Satipatthana, The Direct Path to Realization. While this present extract emphasizes an explanation about the subtle differences between samadhi and jhana, what is also of importance about absorption practice is that it must be taken up within the context of the noble eightfold path in order for concentration (or samadhi) to be called "right" concentration (or samma-samadhi). This latter point is very important for those wishing to complete the process involved known as awakening or liberation.

    (Note: This forum software will not accommodate the file I'm attempting to upload, and so I will redirect those interested to another forum where the file is uploaded in a thread posting and can therefore be downloaded: What's the difference between Samadhi and Jhana?)
  • JasonJason God Emperor Arrakis Moderator
    edited September 2010
    The way I see it, craving is the cause of suffering, and to end suffering its cause must be removed; the difficulty arises when it comes to how exactly this is done. My theory is that craving is a very subtle but powerful aspect of our psychology. It's there, latent in the mind, waiting to exert its influence through mental fabrications by directing or at the very least encouraging the mind to feed upon sensory experiences via the five clinging-aggregates in an unhealthy way.

    The problem is that these processes of subtle movement in the mind are so subtle that they are almost impossible to discern as they are taking place. That's where I believe meditation comes in: meditation helps to calm and still the mind so that these mental events become easier and easier to observe. One, in effect, uses conditionality in order to fabricate controlled states of mental absorption until they're able to discern the presence of craving, its movement in the mind, and the fact that even these refined and subtle states of mental absorption are ultimately stressful and unsatisfactory. This leads one to develop dispassion, and dispassion leads one to cease fabrication thus opening the doors to the deathless by ending the chain of causation.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Establishing a state of peacefullness or stillness of mind has a different meaning in Zen than Theravada in my experience . It's not a matter of right and wrong but different ways of concieving the practice, and different skillful means.
  • IronRabbitIronRabbit Veteran
    edited September 2010
    This peacefulness - this stillness - is it anything like roaring silence?

    And higher consciousness - anything like that proverbial card trick?
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited September 2010
    On that note, check this out: <object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y-QlSW5KwxI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=de_DE&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y-QlSW5KwxI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=de_DE&feature=player_embedded&fs=1&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Going through a bellowing Zen retreat is anything but that. Honestly this stillness is no closer to the unconditioned, no closer to the subjective pole of awareness than a turbulent mind. Here there may just be disagreement.
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited September 2010
    I don't think Jason was saying stillness is the unconditioned, more that it's an important tool in witnessing the working of the mind.
  • shadowleavershadowleaver Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Good point. I once succumbed to the temptation of these altered states of consciousness viewing them as the goal. That wasn't good for me at all. Some aspects of consciousness are hidden for a good reason-- if you try to unmask them you may end up overwhelmed, confused and distressed. And since these phenomena are still considered marginal in our culture, you'll have an awfully difficult time finding support.

    Afterall, people take drugs to experience altered mind states. We all know how well that serves them...
  • GuyCGuyC Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Richard H wrote: »
    Going through a bellowing Zen retreat is anything but that. Honestly this stillness is no closer to the unconditioned, no closer to the subjective pole of awareness than a turbulent mind. Here there may just be disagreement.

    Samma-Samadhi is part of the Path though, right? Therefore, isn't it integral (combined with Samma-Ditthi, etc) to the realization of Nibbana?
  • GuyCGuyC Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Richard H wrote: »
    Ajahn Sumedho says.... "Just be a little worm that knows two words ..let go.." .

    Also, is it not this attitude of letting go which leads to Samadhi?
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    No denying Right Samadhi and Right Understanding are part of the path in Theravada. No denying letting go is part of it. But they are skillful means for realizing the unconditioned, not the unconditioned. In Zen other skillful means have evolved that effect an opening that are different from the Theravada and maybe not for everyone. I don't think there is a better or worse way, but there are different ways of concieving the path.
    I have a foot in both the Theravada and the Zen practices but am wary of trying to line them up neatly.

    There is a leap involved, The unconditioned cannot be approached, yet there is a cultivating or setting of right conditions. Certainly both traditions involve developing a stable, clear, mind and cutting through self view as a right condition for this sudden recognition that, in Zen terms, involves the realization that all conditions are already unbound.

    Also. I can only speak from my own practice and can't claim any special insight. If it strikes a chord with others then I learn as well.
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited September 2010
    This "unconditioned" thing is seeming like a bit of a reification. Everything is conditioned...
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited September 2010
    fivebells only if you are a rangtongpa...

    So you need an infinite series of conditioned minds. Each one to establish that the other is conditioned. (to inspect that conditioned mind from outside of it)
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Richard H wrote: »
    Going through a bellowing Zen retreat is anything but that. Honestly this stillness is no closer to the unconditioned, no closer to the subjective pole of awareness than a turbulent mind. Here there may just be disagreement.

    So in stillness, what do you see as being created, conditioned, fabricated, etc? Would it not be correct to say that if there is still something being created, conditioned, fabricated, etc., then it is not really true stillness? I guess it would depend on what one's definition is "stillness" is.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    fivebells wrote: »
    This "unconditioned" thing is seeming like a bit of a reification. Everything is conditioned...
    Absolutely. There is no "unconditioned". But you apparently get the reference fivebells. Maybe a skillful way of putting it is that realizing "the unconditioned" means realizing conditions-alone, whole, unobstructed, originally unbound, ownerless, self luminous. It is realizing cessation of Dukkha.

    ...so yes there is no such thing as the unconditioned.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    seeker242 wrote: »
    So in stillness, what do you see as being created, conditioned, fabricated, etc? Would it not be correct to say that if there is still something being created, conditioned, fabricated, etc., then it is not really true stillness? I guess it would depend on what one's definition is "stillness" is.
    Perception of stillness is dependent on the perception of movement. Stillness is a condition. Fivebells mentioned the reification of "the unconditioned" stillness is the usual candidate for this.

    Finding the true subject of awareness means realizing the object of awareness is absolutely alone and all pervasive. Here subject and object resolve. Stillness or movement, all conditions are alone. Then even the perception of this "aloneness" resolves.

    ...not trying to be zenny here but just simple about it. It is a sound description.
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited September 2010
    My teacher says that you could say awareness is still, but only because there is no reference point.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Without knowing your teacher this is just a guess, but what you are describing sounds like a skillful means. Describing awareness that is without reference and therefore a stillness, is like describing awareness that allows all colors to manifest in their fullness and is therefore a transparency (jewel). These attributes of awareness, stillness, transparency, and more, are ways of clarifying the subject/awarenesss. But at some point this pure subject/awareness is revealed to be a reference as well, and dropped. "Awareness" is dropped.
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Well that seems to be what the lojong teachings on awareness do. They always pull the rug out when you think you have it figured out. So when you drop awareness and you think you have it figured out? Well you need to pull the rug out on that too.
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Richard H wrote: »
    Perception of stillness is dependent on the perception of movement. Stillness is a condition. Fivebells mentioned the reification of "the unconditioned" stillness is the usual candidate for this.

    Finding the true subject of awareness means realizing the object of awareness is absolutely alone and all pervasive. Here subject and object resolve. Stillness or movement, all conditions are alone. Then even the perception of this "aloneness" resolves.

    ...not trying to be zenny here but just simple about it. It is a sound description.


    I know. :) I think it is a sound description also. However, I was thinking about the type of stillness that does not "have" anything, not even a perception of the stillness. So I was not really referring to the perception of stillness but rather stillness itself. The way I see it, in true stillness there is neither stillness nor not stillness, neither movement nor not movement. To use the analogy of the video, it is what is left, after the cup and the juice are thrown into the bushes and forgotten about.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited September 2010
    Jeffrey wrote: »
    . So when you drop awareness and you think you have it figured out? Well you need to pull the rug out on that too.
    No more figuring out after that. Practice yes, figuring out no.
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited September 2010
    What is the buddha? Answer: not enough toilet paper!

    I'm just being silly haha!
Sign In or Register to comment.