Owen's Practice Journal, Part II

"Can anyone else confirm it? Only got four data points so far.

"

Doesn't work for me, but I haven't had a PCE yet, period.

Why do you say that this is the traditional understanding of what "the fruition attainment" is?

are you saying post-4th you still took thoughts to be 'you'? i thought that's what 4th path was - realization of no-self.

in particular i wanted to compare + contrast three things though, not just 4th path but also the stage 7 'i' (i guess i still wasnt clear on the difference there)

1) 4th path/stage 5 'i'
2) stage 7 'i'
3) AF 'i'

"are you saying post-4th you still took thoughts to be 'you'? i thought that's what 4th path was - realization of no-self.

in particular i wanted to compare + contrast three things though, not just 4th path but also the stage 7 'i' (i guess i still wasnt clear on the difference there)

1) 4th path/stage 5 'i'
2) stage 7 'i'
3) AF 'i'"

Dude, I don't know. I doubt I know anything useful. Nobody I know ever got enlightened with a map. Right now, in this moment, are you awake? Practice like your ass is on fire and you come back and tell me!

This is just one person's opinion, coming from the peanut gallery, but I think those are legitimate questions being asked by beoman, who's obviously been trying to follow what's been posted here. I've been following along for a while here myself and honestly, I'm confused about some of what's being said. I have similar questions that I haven't asked thinking no one else had them. But now that they're out there, thanks to beoman, why not venture an answer? I'd be very interested in your version, Owen. Here's mine:

In my experience 4th Path attainment (if that's what I have) allows one to see themselves much more objectively, the moving and shaking "inside," the workings of the mind usually aimed at protecting what it believes is a helpless, victimized, defenseless little "me." To, in essence, see your own sh*t. The sense of self continues to arise in real time, though you can see it happening if you so choose. I have no idea about any 5th, 6th, 7th stages or any AF stuff. I don't practice any of it or, as I find it confusing.

What I do know is that for the past year or so I've been getting more and more comfortable with what passes for "me" at any given moment, what's happening in the mind, seen more objectively, and this has allowed me to develop more ease and grace - the ability to just BE WITH what we call the negative stuff (pain, anguish, angst, anger, jealousy, and so on.) I have no plans to try to eliminate those things or to eliminate my self-sense. I will simply continue to practice the being with everything in my experience, become as intimate with it as I can, and see where that leads me.

I find this practice useful in the extreme, as it has demonstrable effects that help in my everyday experience.

YMMV, of course. We should all pursue the practice we believe in our hearts we need to follow.

Hi Chris,
Yeah, I'm with ya. They are legitimate questions, I just don't have any answers. In retrospect, that probably came off as harsh but wasn't at all meant that way. We need more data points! We need more yogis to flesh out this territory. To be honest, over time I've gotten really impressed with the 10 fetters model, simply because it's so damn clean. You still have a phenomena that being read as self? Not done yet. And by that standard I'm not done yet. The particulars of what selfed phenomena remains is going to be different for everybody, hence all the non-linear maps. All I know for sure is that I'm at my best when I'm not around.

And if ya really want to know what's squiggling around in my little head:

When this was said, Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One: "There is the case, lord, where a monk, having practiced in this way '” 'It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon' '” obtains equanimity. Now, would this monk be totally unbound, or not?"
(cont below)

(cont from above)

"A certain such monk might, Ananda, and another might not.'
"What is the cause, what is the reason, whereby one might and another might not?"
"There is the case, Ananda, where a monk, having practiced in this way '” (thinking) 'It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon' '” obtains equanimity. He relishes that equanimity, welcomes it, remains fastened to it. As he relishes that equanimity, welcomes it, remains fastened to it, his consciousness is dependent on it, is sustained by it (clings to it). With clinging/sustenance, Ananda, a monk is not totally unbound."
"Being sustained, where is that monk sustained?"
"The dimension of neither perception nor non-perception."
"Then, indeed, being sustained, he is sustained by the supreme sustenance."
"Being sustained, Ananda, he is sustained by the supreme sustenance; for this '” the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception '” is the supreme sustenance. There is [however] the case where a monk, having practiced in this way '” 'It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon' '” obtains equanimity. He does not relish that equanimity, does not welcome it, does not remain fastened to it. As he does not relish that equanimity, does not welcome it, does not remain fastened to it, his consciousness is not dependent on it, is not sustained by it (does not cling to it). Without clinging/sustenance, Ananda, a monk is totally unbound."

Hi Owen,
I've been following along as well, like Chris, but like Chris, I don't know much about the post fourth path stages or A.F. I lost interest in maps after fourth, so although I like to read your stuff, I get confused. My interest and quest remains however, but I have no goal in mind because I don't know what that is and I'm okay with that. I find it difficult to articulate what state I am in and what I am able to do. A self still arises, but it is very thin. When sitting there appears to be no normal self as I would describe it in my daily living, there is no observing self. During the day I find 'selfing' rises and dies very quickly which means there is reducing clinging I suppose, particularly negative selfing. I am very curious about the experience of an 'unbound' monk in daily experience....I am practising living 'intuitively,' being engaged without attempting to have a specific outcome which opens things up a lot for me too. I notice that I can access, instantly, an equanimous state that is clear and present and compassionate. My practice has to be compassionate and inclusive of others otherwise for me there is not much value in it apart from an ever diminishing self fulfilment. For me, an unbound monk retains cognitive structures that appear to be 'self' but actually these structures engage the environment irrespective. There is a certain awareness however that goes with this, a kind of flavour. I'm not sure if that awareness is a residue of self. Or, on a biological level, perhaps the limbic brain, the source of aesthetic and emotional intelligence, is permanently by-passed, (or can be consciously accessed or not at will) and consciousness resides only in the forebrain creating an entirely new state or difference state of 'self'.' I don't know what's beyond consciousness though. Just a few musings. Thanks for this thread, great stuff.
Paul

In my experience, what happens at ' stage 7 ' is the eradication of the ' witness' . " the stick that stirs the fire and burns its self out "

I had a feeling of it leaving my body and have not been able to dwell in it as a state since.
This was also accompanied with a feeling of all the scenses coming online, and a feeling of being just these scenses.

Hope this helps Steve.

At some point models have to be recognized for what they are - conceptualizations of things we do not truly understand. And when the model is the product of thousands of years of oral history, coupled with translations over translation, what do we have?

Second, beoman's questions about the differences in the "I" sense among all these stages and models were cogent because they put the hammer right smack down on the head of the nail -- all this talk of this stage and that stage runs together and it's hard to keep it all straight, coupled with the fact that as I read this stuff I sit and wonder why it all sounds so familiar to me, matches much of my experience, but is being presented as if it were new and different. It's like watching common experiences being repackaged as BRAND NEW and EXCITING!

Last, it's OKAY if a self arises. It's OKAY if emotions arise. It's OKAY if you get angry, jealous, anxious. The key IMHO is to just be with that, watch it, learn to be non-reactive to it. Sometimes when I read these threads I think, "What are these people running away from?" "Why are they trying to get rid of something that's normal and natural and a part of being human?" JMHO, but I don't think the Buddha wanted us all to engage in Olympian struggles to rid ourselves of our human traits. I do think they wanted us to know them and deal with them from a place that is mentioned in your quote, Owen - equanimity.

Anyway, end of rant. I'll shut up now.

Hey Chris,

Going through the Suttas, they are constantly on about *Eliminating*, *Eradicating*, and *Dispelling* the defilements (kilesas or fetters) out of existence, not just 'being equanimous with them', nor do they seem to be talking about "seeing through the defilements because they were never defilements to begin with" (This seems to be KFDharma, rather than Buddhadharma

According to Buddhadhamma, these are not "normal and natural and a part of being human", rather, they are conditioned, and if the cause is eradicated, the effect does not arise (negativity of mind).

If you aren't inclined to put an end to the fetters, thats certainly up to you, but thats what the end of the path described by the Sutta Pitaka is all about.

For one example:
"And what are the fermentations to be abandoned by destroying? There is the case where a monk, reflecting appropriately, does not tolerate an arisen thought of sensuality. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, & wipes it out of existence.
Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate an arisen thought of ill will...
Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate an arisen thought of cruelty...
Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate arisen evil, unskillful mental qualities. He abandons them, destroys them, dispels them, & wipes them out of existence. The fermentations, vexation, or fever that would arise if he were not to destroy these things do not arise for him when he destroys them. These are called the fermentations to be abandoned by destroying."

Also, the quote Owen provided, seems to me to be pointing at the fact that Equanimity is useful, but if one clings to Equanimity ("Its OK to feel stress" because one is equanimous about it), one does not go beyond Equanimity and puts an end to the fetters.

"Last, it's OKAY if a self arises. It's OKAY if emotions arise. It's OKAY if you get angry, jealous, anxious. The key IMHO is to just be with that, watch it, learn to be non-reactive to it. Sometimes when I read these threads I think, "What are these people running away from?" "Why are they trying to get rid of something that's normal and natural and a part of being human?" JMHO, but I don't think the Buddha wanted us all to engage in Olympian struggles to rid ourselves of our human traits. I do think they wanted us to know them and deal with them from a place that is mentioned in your quote, Owen - equanimity.

Anyway, end of rant. I'll shut up now.

"

And this, I guess is the crux of the argument. I felt the same way you did for a long while, until I noticed that the sensations of self only arose from phenomena I wasn't clearly seeing. In vipassana terms, the object had yet to be penetrated. Equanimity is lovely, but to be equanimous toward delusion is to still be deluded. Given that delusion is one of the three poisons, it will create dukkha. I'd rather not need to watch suffering arise from a place of stillness and peace if it's possible for suffering to not arise at all.

Well, may you have success eradicating your "self" and all your negative "stuff."

Seriously.

"Dude, I don't know. I doubt I know anything useful. Nobody I know ever got enlightened with a map. Right now, in this moment, are you awake? Practice like your ass is on fire and you come back and tell me!
"

hehe, i'm not done yet. still practicing. trying to straighten out my concepts, though. maybe i'll just abandon them. would this be accurate, though?

1) sense of self is seen as just another self - it's obvious, therefore, that there is no self, just the sense there is one.
2) sense of self ceases to arise. now it is self-evident (hah) that there is no self since it is not seen anywhere.
3) 'becoming', which is no longer seen as that sense of self (since that sense is gone), ceases.

"
Last, it's OKAY if a self arises."

Oh, that's just great. NOW you tell us.

When I think of all the hours I could've spent parked in front of the TV instead of trying to eradicate my d*mn self!

(Sorry, it's been a bad week... feels like today should be Friday)

"Last, it's OKAY if a self arises. "

also - why is it OK if it's a delusion? there is no self, right? so why is it OK for a 'self' to arise? (is it really a 'self' arising?)

"Second, beoman's questions about the differences in the "I" sense among all these stages and models were cogent because they put the hammer right smack down on the head of the nail -- all this talk of this stage and that stage runs together and it's hard to keep it all straight, coupled with the fact that as I read this stuff I sit and wonder why it all sounds so familiar to me, matches much of my experience, but is being presented as if it were new and different. It's like watching common experiences being repackaged as BRAND NEW and EXCITING!"

In my opinion, none of the stuff involved in these "new" models is adequately covered by the traditional-in-our-community technical 4 path model. Whether or not the experiences are new, they are definitely things that were not covered in any useful way by our previous maps.

Whether or not you personally like maps and find them valuable, there are people who do. I certainly find them invaluable, and depend on them. After I attained technical 4th path, I wasted approximately one year going *absolutely nowhere* because not having a map gave me no sense of where to direct my efforts, and the ways I directed them operating purely by intuition were unhelpful. A whole year! How f*cking stupid. So, please don't think that your opinion on the value of this stuff is universally shared or ought to be, and that mapping is some kind of exercise in showmanship or hype. Maybe it would be *for you*, but that's why you're not making these maps.

Also, I asked Kenneth what nearly was beoman's exact question (the distinction between 4th path "I" and 7th stage "I"), and his answer was a huge boon for my own practice; so I'm behind beoman, getting this straight can be really helpful in a nuts-and-bolts practical way.

Beoman, how have your direct mode experiences been going? I imagine if you focus on that you can answer your own question in a final way for yourself.

Edit: Forgot that you weren't 4th path. From where I'm sitting, the distinction between 4th path and 7th stage is hard to grok without 4th path because the distinction relies on an insight that is fully attained only at 4th path. (But that could just be me projecting my cognitive inflexibility onto everyone else.) So my unsolicited advice, which may be worth what you paid for it, is to figure out what 4th-path-no-"I" is like, really figure it out so you feel it in your bones, and go from there. (Bearing in mind that if you really figure it out, you will probably attain it then and there, because all it is is a subtle shift in understanding...)

Profound: "My practice has to be compassionate and inclusive of others otherwise for me there is not much value in it apart from an ever diminishing self fulfilment. "

all the different "I"s are pretty confusing. how do i see through a particular "I"? what about that other one? is there another "I" to see through after? what if seeing through one makes it harder to see through another? it's like we've taken something really really simple - THERE IS NO SELF, LITERALLY - and made it way way too complicated.

still i progress, in terms of baseline, experience is much more EE by default, the glimpses of clearer-vision are ever-clearer and ever-clearer.

Beoman, do you recognize that in proceeding from pre-path to stream entry to second path to third path, at each step of the way you had a clearer understanding of no-self and saw through *some aspect* of the myriad ways that the self delusion presents itself?

(I have no idea whether it makes sense to talk about "seeing through" anything post-4th and my working theory is that it does not, and every change afterwards is better described in terms of the cessation of greed, hatred, and delusion..."the cessation of delusion" being multifaceted and not limited to "seeing through things"/ disembedding / attaining some kind of further reflective or cognitive clarity about no-self.)

"Beoman, do you recognize that in proceeding from pre-path to stream entry to second path to third path, at each step of the way you had a clearer understanding of no-self and saw through *some aspect* of the myriad ways that the self delusion presents itself?"

hmm, i see your point. there aren't different "I"s, because there isn't a single one, either. it's just related phenomena.

so 4th you see through the self. then what cessates at stage 7?

my main issue has been one of confusion regarding self that is seen through at 4th path, and 'being' that stops at AF. i might have progressed faster if i had never heard about 'being'. i was making the mistake - even at late 3rd path - that there actually _is_ a self, lurking in there, somewhere, and that i have to get rid of it. i say 'was' cause i've spoken a bit with a ruthless truther and got that straightened out. not sure if i have 'popped' yet though, will see.

ah yes, here's what it was. at stream entry i , too, realized 'i' can't be any of this stuff. but then i came to think that there _is_ a self, just that "I" am not it. this is what i thought 4th path was realizing - the sensations of a self are just sensations of a self (that is there), but 'i' am not any of it.

but it's that there just isn't a self at all. i'm just retarded, basically =P.

"so 4th you see through the self. then what cessates at stage 7?

my main issue has been one of confusion regarding self that is seen through at 4th path, and 'being' that stops at AF. i might have progressed faster if i had never heard about 'being'. i was making the mistake - even at late 3rd path - that there actually _is_ a self, lurking in there, somewhere, and that i have to get rid of it."

From my experiences with attaining a direct mode state that seems to correspond with it, and having that carry over temporarily into non-direct mode perception, I would say "what ends is a certain feeling that, pre-4th, one would think of as 'being a body'."

Strangely enough, post-4th, the best description I can offer is "a feeling that, pre-4th, I would have called 'being a body."

Congrats on 4th if you've made it, and good luck with it if you haven't.

If you haven't, and what I said above doesn't make sense, and you like pithy RT pointers, contemplate this: "the perception of being a self is not-self, exactly as much as the perception of not being a self is not-self, in whatever forms those perceptions take
and in whatever manners 'being a self' and 'not being a self' present; each is LITERALLY exactly as true as the other; neither is a clearer or higher understanding than the other." When that makes sense, then (I hope!) the 4th path / 7th stage distinction will make sense too.

About "being," I really have no idea what AFers think...all I can say is that 4th made it very clear to me that, whatever it was, whether it would be better or worse for it to be gone, it was just a phenomenon, just like everything else, albeit playing some mysterious special role in the functioning of my mind.

"ah yes, here's what it was. at stream entry i , too, realized 'i' can't be any of this stuff. but then i came to think that there _is_ a self, just that "I" am not it. this is what i thought 4th path was realizing - the sensations of a self are just sensations of a self (that is there), but 'i' am not any of it.

but it's that there just isn't a self at all. i'm just retarded, basically =P. "

Hahaha! I think the best explanation of what attaining paths is like is "repeatedly recognizing that you were retarded."