Jnanas: States and/or Stages?

"Here's a simple example: when I would sit an intend to practice concentration, jhanas would result. When I would sit an do vipassana investigation, path moments and related insights would result. Intent matters is another way to think about this." -Chris

Yes, this is the case for me as well.

This is a BIG topic - one that cannot be fully covered in a forum conversation. In fact, a book probably wouldn't do the topic justice, either. Understanding this stuff is the result of experiential insight, and all of the other maps, models, systems, techniques, etc., are paths to realizing such wisdom.

Jake2, I notice in your comments a common assumption, which is shared by many of us intelligent Western folks who take up dharma practice. The assumption is that all of the true manifestations of spiritual practice and transformation must be object, real, "out there" for all to experience. And if they don't experience it, they're probably not as awakened as they or others may think. (I'm exagerating, so forgive me if I am not characterising your position properly.)

The thing is, from my perspective, every path is a fabrication, and fabrications are shaped by intention and implied meaning as much as they are by action. When you take on a view - and I mean REALLY take it on - and you intend and act on that view, your experience will arise in partial dependence on those factors.

In other words, it's not just that phenomena like chakras, skandhas, jhanas, ñanas, or whatever else are empty of your particular sense of "I" - they are empty of inherent existence, bar none.

This doesn't mean that one has to have prior knowledge of a phenomenon in order to experience it. Many people experience kundalini illness before they know such energy can arise. It's more complicated than a simple equation of belief + intent + action = result. But all such factors come together in an extremely complicated way, beyond total control.

My point (if I can get to one... I tend to ramble) is that because paths are fabricated from other fabricated phenomena, there are MANY different paths. The conclusion that one may arrive at certain realizations through different means is highly tenable, both in theory and via testimony of practictioners, using their own first-person, empirical observations.

Over the course of a 5 years, I've taken on many views; both unconsciously an consciously - the latter occurring more frequently in more recent times. Taking on a view, and really buying into it, and then going about your life according that view, will change the way you experience just about everything, including your meditation practice.

Goodness, I hope that makes sense! :-/
-Jackson

There is a dynamic that I'm noticing more or more for me. I'm not sure if it is true for anyone else, but it is certainly my experience --

Once I've taken up the intention or ambition to "practice" I've set up an inherent sense of dissatisfaction or tension in myself. The hoped-for results of my practice are something better or higher quality than my present reality and something "over there" in some imagined, better future.

I've also noticed that the main objection my brain puts up against simply letting go and being totally open to the present moment is the idea that I'll miss out on something much much better if I don't hold on to my practice-related ambitions.

And, for me, then there is this paradox -- I want "intimacy" but I can only really get it when I totally drop the idea of wanting intimacy.


Edit: Now for certain types of self-improvement projects -- losing weight, getting into shape, learning yoga or a martial art, mastering a foreign language or some academic subject -- future goals are necessary and there can be clear markers of future progress one can achieve and verify. I guess this is even true for learning concentration meditation techniques in order to master all the samatha jhanas, and for all kinds of spiritual endeavors. But what I am talking about (I'm calling it "intimacy" for now) can only happen right now and I think it disappears once a future goal is introduced. It is subtle and elusive but worth it.

“Here's a simple example: when I would sit an intend to practice concentration, jhanas would result. When I would sit an do vipassana investigation, path moments and related insights would result. Intent matters is another way to think about this.” – cmarti



@cmarti: By “intent” here, you mean intent to practice a certain way, e.g. vipassana or concentration? Do you think the type of practice itself might greatly inform the map?



All following quotations are Jackson’s.

“When you take on a view - and I mean REALLY take it on - and you intend and act on that view, your experience will arise in partial dependence on those factors.”

So, are you saying that experience itself is meditated by belief, rather than only interpretation of experience? That is, the range of experiences a person can have is greatly restricted to those experiences identified in his/her belief system?

“This doesn't mean that one has to have prior knowledge of a phenomenon in order to experience it. Many people experience kundalini illness before they know such energy can arise. It's more complicated than a simple equation of belief + intent + action = result. But all such factors come together in an extremely complicated way, beyond total control.”

Okay, so I see here that you do accept the possibility of unmediated experience.

“The conclusion that one may arrive at certain realizations through different means is highly tenable, both in theory and via testimony of practictioners, using their own first-person, empirical observations.”

By “different means”, you mean different practices? I agree with this wholeheartedly. My contention was these “certain realizations” are universal across humanity.

"I've taken on many views; both unconsciously an consciously - the latter occurring more frequently in more recent times. Taking on a view, and really buying into it, and then going about your life according that view, will change the way you experience just about everything, including your meditation practice."

I’d love to hear about some of the views you’ve taken on, both consciously and unconsciously, and how they influence your experience.

"There is a dynamic that I'm noticing more or more for me. I'm not sure if it is true for anyone else, but it is certainly my experience..."



Yes, a paradox indeed.

It’s actually incredibly difficult for me to articulate. It’s as if we know that we’re dissatisfied with the status quo, so we start trying to find something better. But, we employ the same methods of seeking that we would to find something of value in the world. But nothing of the world (per se) is going to relieve suffering in the way we desire.

So, we have to turn our focus to how we are responding to what is immediately experienced in each moment, rather than looking elsewhere. This brings a certain degree of relief, but it isn’t best we can do. Somehow, through changing our responses to experience here and now, we eventually let go completely. And when we do, we realize something more than letting go; and, that something is what we wanted all along. We just couldn’t get to it in the same way we normally get something.

Of course, no “thing” is attained or gained. But it would be misleading to say that the path leads to nothing at all. It’s beyond nothing and something. You can’t grasp it, for if you try it will evade you.

It sounds like such nonsense, doesn’t it?

(sunyata -- I hope it doesn't seem like I'm hijacking your thread. I feel like the subject kind of grew to maps and expectations and intention and the pros and cons of all of those)

@Jackson: Another thing that I meant to emphasize in that post was that, for me, suffering is often the most salient outcome from seeking. [/b]

So much of my tension is between an impulse to end suffering and the impulse to know something, to have more wisdom, more insight. Ending suffering can sometimes seem so simple when all the elements are present that make me suddenly able to drop all my agendas and expectations and discriminations for how the moment should feel, look like, etc. If I just subtly stop wanting things to be different friction will cease. However, any impulse/intention to gain insight seems to create desire and cause suffering and bring me out of now.

And, again, a paradox -- I am suspecting that it is actually the same subtle process that eliminates suffering in the moment that creates the best possible state of mind to really see things as they are -- if I'm no longer looking for anything that I've made up in my mind as worth seeing, then I can actually really see.


edit again: and, as I read or listen to talks by the "non dual" teachers like the ones on the "Buddha at the Gas Pump" a lot of the emphasis seems to be on what I just discussed/described. Right?

“Okay, so I see here that you do accept the possibility of unmediated experience.” –Jake2

Hmm… not really, no. I'm undecided.

“By ‘different means’, you mean different practices? I agree with this wholeheartedly. My contention was these ‘certain realizations’ are universal across humanity.” –Jake2

I’ve gotten into this debate a number of times, at this forum and others. I do not wholeheartedly agree that certain realizations are universal, though I think it is potentially true. The reason I hesitate is because I think there’s reason to believe that subjective meaning plays a role at all levels of reality. There may be deep features, and these deep features may mean similar things to the various traditions, but they can also vary.

Here’s an example. Among nondual traditions, there are those who view the absolute nature of awareness as Emptiness, while considering aspects like luminosity and cognizance as relative attributes. Others contend that primordial Emptiness is inseparable from the attributes of luminosity and cognizance, and perhaps even compassion, resulting in a more multi-faceted conception of absolute reality. Both positions are presumably support via direct experience and applied reason. So, either one of these is incorrect, or we have a case where either could appear to be true based on one’s view and perspective. This suggestion may appear to support the former position, but it doesn’t have to. See what I mean?

To put it succinctly, view matters.

“I’d love to hear about some of the views you’ve taken on, both consciously and unconsciously, and how they influence your experience.” –Jake2

One example is how beliefs/view affect one’s experience of the jhanas. Kenneth Folk discovered a while back that he could access jhanas in a sequential fashion, going up to the highest he could reach one at a time, and then back down in reverse order. This is not something found in the traditional literature, as far as I know. Anyway, when I found out about this, I tried it. It works, actually. One can do this. But, I went through a time where I believed that if I just sat down and became concentrated, the “natural” result would be rising through each jhana up the highest I could attain, and then a “natural” return back through all of them. I assumed this had little or nothing to do with my intention; it just happened. It turns out this isn’t the case. People tend to cycle through jhanas the way they expect to.

Another jhana example comes from the so called “pure land jhanas,” which are states assumed to arise beyond the usual sequence of 8. This is also something that Kenneth Folk came up with, along with Daniel Ingram. Though it’s based on the traditional teaching on the “planes of existence,” it isn’t something taught in the same way for the more traditional or classical approaches. However, as soon as people know (read: believe) that there are states beyond the 8th jhana, they suddenly start reaching them. What’s more, Folk determined that anyone who can access these pure land jhanas must have at least reached the 3rd level of awakening in the Theravada tradition (i.e. Anagami), because he believe the states correlated with the planes of existence that were only available to anagamis or arahants. So, there are a lot of little yogis running around thinking that they’re anagamis, simply because the accessed some fabricated states and interpret their meaning according to a framework that Folk fabricated. (This isn’t a put down, by the way.) At one point, I was one such confused little yogi.

Does that make sense?

-Jackson

"any impulse/intention to gain insight seems to create desire and cause suffering and bring me out of now." - Mike

@Mike: Agreed! However, I think as long as one practices diligently, the intent to gain something slowly dissolves along with the associated suffering.

"Here’s an example. Among nondual traditions, there are those who view the absolute nature of awareness as Emptiness, while considering aspects like luminosity and cognizance as relative attributes. Others contend that primordial Emptiness is inseparable from the attributes of luminosity and cognizance, and perhaps even compassion, resulting in a more multi-faceted conception of absolute reality. Both positions are presumably support via direct experience and applied reason. So, either one of these is incorrect, or we have a case where either could appear to be true based on one’s view and perspective. This suggestion may appear to support the former position, but it doesn’t have to. See what I mean?"

@Jackson: This may be a function of your example, but the fact that both camps agree that emptiness is a foundational reality tells me that both had a similar experience. They just don't agree on particulars. However, it could also be that one experience represents a higher level of awakening than another. The Buddha ran into this when he learned the 7th and 8th stages from the ascetic teachers in the wilderness. Neither of them had ventured as far as they could and the Buddha intuitively sensed this. So he moved on and realized an even higher awakening by himself. This is an instance of belief restricting experience that I had overlooked. At least, the belief here is that “I’ve gone all…the…way. There is no deeper wisdom.” Essentially, you are putting a “cap” on how high you can go. However, this differs from the idea that intermediary experiences are mediated by the belief system itself. Maybe the interpretations are greatly influenced by the belief system, but the experiences not as much (obviously, this is just my opinion). The one example that I can think of where experience is mediated by belief is the image-experience of a divine being. These experiences are usually restricted to the belief system, so that, say, a Muslim will see Allah or a Christian, Jesus. But the universal aspect of such an experience is the experience of a divine being itself, not what divine being is experienced. This is why I still argue that the overall trajectory is universal across cultures and beliefs despite that the experiences themselves may vary in their particulars.

“People tend to cycle through jhanas the way they expect to.”

and

“So, there are a lot of little yogis running around thinking that they’re anagamis, simply because the accessed some fabricated states and interpret their meaning according to a framework that Folk fabricated.”

Re: a “cap” on experience imposed by a belief system. This seems to be related. If you don’t know or believe that a certain “higher” experience can be accessed, then it is less likely that you will access it. However, I don’t think this fabrication—or “pointing out of the path”—is necessarily deterministic in that your experience does not remain a possibility even if you are not exposed to a map. For example, I believe everyone could cycle through the jhanas before Folk discovered you could. Just nobody attempted to and succeeded prior to Folk. (Pardon the italics--they are not intended.)[/b]

Those are good points, Jake2. I enjoy these conversations.

I’ve tried to write a few replies, but I didn’t like them I think my mind needs a rest.

"any impulse/intention to gain insight seems to create desire and cause suffering and bring me out of now." - Mike @Mike: Agreed! However, I think as long as one practices diligently, the intent to gain something slowly dissolves along with the associated suffering.

-sunyata

Interesting. While it's a wonderful idea, my suspicion is that there is no slow dissolving of the intent to gain something through diligent practice. What leads you to this conclusion? Has it happened for you?
So far, what I've seen is that I am either suffering from desire right now or I am not. there is no gradual and permanent improvement through practices that will create a natural and automatic state where desire never arises. I realize this probably sounds awful and goes against the common ideas of Buddhist practice as some kind of gradual path of perfection. It probably just sounds annoying.

Mike, I think it's all of the above: instant application, gradual change, and sudden change. All are possible, in my opinion. For me, this stuff isn't that unlike learning any other skill. Other skills can be developed, so why can't this one?

What Chris said.

EDIT: Also, with regard to those maps that are attempts at comparing and integrating certain deep features of many spiritual traditions, such as Ken Wilber's Integral map or others - even these are maps that will result in yet another characteristic way of experiencing reality and realizing the truth. The "deep feature" approach, I think, assumes that the deep, shared features are more important than particulars. This may be true, and probably is. But it isn't necessarily the case; the jury's is still in, with no verdict yet in plain view. We need more than conceptual maps to sort this stuff out.

Why ten?

Maybe its unlimited.

"Answer to the second question is "probably the other way around." If I read Jackson correctly he and I are in agreement that the maps might be maps because when you know about them and what they say you expect to get where they tell you to go. Of course then you (without too much surprise) end up there. If you practiced in an entirely different tradition or had an entirely different map you'd be far more likely to end up where those things tell you you'll end up." - Chris



So you believe that if one practices vipassana outside of the Mahasi/Folk tradition, then s/he would have successive experiences that would hardly parallel those successive experiences of individuals practicing vipassana within that tradition?



"All I'm getting at is that we're not dealing with simple vectors here, a fact which is also corroborated by human experience. We know that people in many, many contemplative traditions all over the world wake up, and they all tend to follow different, almost unique, paths."

As we have established, the maps are intertwined with the culture in which they were created. This echoes what you’ve said above Chris, although you might also say that the map itself greatly influences the range of possible experience, and not just the upper range. I think I am coming to agree with this contention. Part of the problem is that I have been working under an erroneous assumption that the idea that maps influencing experience precludes maps from having common elements. This is not the case. Maps influencing experience still allows for experiences that are common to all maps and which point to a common overall trajectory. When you think about it, the maps had to come from somewhere and that somewhere was the experience. Now, the maps have been refined over time, but they are still founded in experience. And I argue that the arc of this experience is similar across traditions. If you accept this, then you can also take common elements from all maps and compare where they fall on each individual map. This allows us to measure each map against another. Specifically, I think it is important to identify where these maps end. If a map ends at waking up, which I interpret as the initial experience of awakening, then it seems that such a map does not proceed very far. For example, in the Ten Ox-Herding Pictures in Zen, the initial awakening (kensho) occurs in the third picture. There are still seven pictures after that. I am not entirely sure where the initial awakening occurs in Motoyama’s map, although I suspect that it occurs in the 1st or 2nd stage. I would have to go back to find evidence for this though. I am not familiar enough with Folk’s map to make an educated guess as to where the initial awakening occurs in his map. Of course, underlying this comparison process is the assumption that there is a common trajectory leading to final awakening that can be teased out of the maps themselves.

I was thinking that an interesting research project might be to take Meister Eckhart’s experiences and compare them to an advanced Eastern master’s. I say this because, according to my teacher, Eckhart went pretty far in meditation. I’ve never read his work, although I think it would definitely inform this discussion.

"I know I have often tried to shape the nature of results to match my expectations when in some cases they simply don't. I'm just trying, as all minds tend to do, to make sense of what my practice is like conceptually."

Can you please provide an example? That would be very interesting for me. It'd be nice to know what conceptual framework you were working under and how the experience did not fit into it.

"And.... why bother trying to pin this all down? Go practice!" - Chris
Can't I do both?

"We're not dealing with replicable, objective science here just yet." - Chris

Do you think that at some point scientists will be able to determine a person's level of awakening by some objective manner, say, neurological imaging?

"I know you were kidding, but I think practice should take the highest priority and that way you'll be able to answer some of your own questions from experience "

I concur! Otherwise it's a lot of language games.

It would also be more interesting for me if the discussion was more about our (and your, Sunyata) own experiences and less of an interrogation about concepts. However, that's just my vote. I'll wander off elsewhere until...

@chris: Oops. Well, yeah, I agree.