Hardcore jhanas

thanks nikolai-- call me Jake!
Yeah, it's interesting how different people experience and describe these deep structures differently, although the patterns are there regardless, and it's nice to encounter someone with similar descriptions. I definitely became a bit confused by all the detailed descriptions in MCTB, and now that I have a little personal experience I see better the pattern vs. the personal experience of the pattern.
In MCTB there are different kinds of "unknowing" experiences mentioned. A month or two ago, while watching these four states go up and down, I experienced a "heavier" than usual activation of core energy, and a clearer than usual sense of this core energy moving up and down the center of the body corresponding to these four jhannas. The energy landed in the brow region, as usual, but instead of trying to ground it back down, which I was doing before, I just let it do its thing, and it went up to the crown, back down through the cycle then up again with steadier clarity, then "pushing" at the crown i seemed to dip into what I thought of as "microsleep" for an instant, immediately following which I "woke up" with a sense of great clarity spreading thru body from top down, something similar to what sometinmes happens durring 5th nana. For a few days I experimented with this, and found it easy to reproduce, and noticed a sense of mild "pep in my step" for a week or so afterwards.
I wonder whether this is just passing over a/p-5th nana territory at a new depth, since MCTB mentions an "unknowing" event around here, or in fact cycle? Just curious on anyone else's experience here.

I will say that if I sit down with the intention of practicing mindfulness, there is a consistent experience of this core energy and this fourfold cycle just going up and down, etc, although I'll confess that I don't put much time into this sort of practice, and I haven't felt inclined to repeat the "blip" since the first few days after discovering it. Thoughts?

"One thing I'd like to say: Hats off to Vincent Horn for turning the wheel in a major way. He is all about bringing new perspectives to Buddhism. It has been awesome to hear B. Alan Wallace, Kenneth Folk, Daniel Ingram and Richard Shankman come on his show and talk about hardcore practice in an upfront way. Love it! "

Thanks J, I really appreciate it. Our whole intention behind Buddhist Geeks, or one of the main ones anyway, was to bring attention to perspectives on the Buddhist path that were interesting and potentially fruitful.

With the whole jhana thing, I've found it really interesting what a wide variance there is in how important certain teachers think it is, how to define jhana, how to practice it, etc. I haven't done a ton of shamatha training, but know many people who are naturals at it, and they're insight definitely has a very powerful "other-worldly" quality to it. Maybe one day I'll go in for a couple months of jhana practice and see where it all goes.

In any case, I'm glad that the conversation w/ Tina & Stephen is sparking some discussion!

Folks, if you really like Buddhist Geeks then you should become a micropatron:

www.buddhistgeeks.com/

That way we can all help Vince do more great stuff, like an online publication and live events.

(Hope you don't mind my putting that out there for you, Vince, but BG deserves the support.)

I don't mind at all. At this point, you might even see me on the streets of Boulder whoring myself out for micropatronage. hahaha.

just kidding.

sort of.

;-D

Oh and by the way, the online publication went live today: www.buddhistgeeks.com

Funded entirely by micropatronage goodness.

Nice!

Congrats!

Hey guys!

Long time no talk. I've been busy with school, work, practice and moving city.

My take on the jhanas is thus: if we take the jhanas in the Tibetan or Chan sense of shine or quiet (mind) contemplation (thought-free state); and in the Thereavadha sense of their purifying effect on the mind-stream (due to the realization of the Jhanas proper '“ altered states of consciousness or strata of mind), then we cannot underestimate the value of the Jhanas as a platform from which to (stage 1) purify and quiet the suffering samsaric mind, activate kundalini and purify the channels, bring calm stability and happiness to the mind-body, in and out of our meditation, from which (stage 2) to naturally and organically realize the natural state of mind as Buddha-Nature or cognizant-emptiness (insight realization via non-shamatha-based insight practice). That is, working with the jhanas in a '˜soft' manner as the 'first' and primary step, or base, from which we then organically, spontaneous, and involuntarily awaken to our enlightened nature (insight) as a valid and effective path of awakening, cannot be underestimated or adequately expressed.

[cont.]

The argument, then is as follows, by taking the path of insight supported by jhana, following from a still, purified, relaxed and yet highly focused mind, I would suggest we are setting up the optimum conditions to realize the nature of mind; and by doing so we will find the path to be far more stable and enjoyable than say, practicing primarily from Shamatha-based insight practice (first gear Theravada insight), which can be very unpleasant and destabilizing of one's life and mental health. Naturally, any intense meditation will result in purification of the mind-stream and challenges to '˜self'; however, jhana itself, I would argue, is a protective factor in its mood elevating and calming effects; not to mention the benefits to our life and meditation practice of the natural and spontaneous realization of the nature of mind, as a result of deep relaxation, letting go, and openness of mind into pure awareness. Stage 2 may be achieved either via moving from either hard or soft-jhana, to then gently investigate that which experiences or knows jhana, or moving directly to third-gear '˜just sitting'; either way, we move from a calm and stable base to investigate the nature of mind or completely let go and '˜rest in the nature of mind', both of which have the potential to collapse into '˜realization' of the nature of mind (luminous emptiness).

If we are practicing soft jhana, we will notice the spontaneous realization of the unborn '“ non-dual realization following from resting in the nature of mind, calmed and purified by the jhana factors. In any case, it should be quite clear by now how Jhana can be skillfully used to support our path of awakening and our life in general. Indeed, Jhana makes for a compelling path in and of itself; such that one ought to have an equally compelling reason not to take full advantage of its benefits!

[cont.] edited for typos.

In the above model I have outlined, as I understand it, the path more or less presented in Chan, Theravada and Mahamudra in the sense previously described; however, its presentation is unorthodox and syncretic, as I've taken from all three and my own experience / research.

In the above mentioned context, the Jhanas are much more than a fun side path, rather, they are perhaps both a skillful means and a basic foundational stage and support on the path to accessing higher insight into our true nature, and thus, the nature of reality itself in a way that most skillfully meets all our needs; and truly is fun and rewarding.

This is how I would suggest people practice were I an enlightened teacher.

In kind regards,

Adam.

Adam, do you practice the jhanas as presented in the BG podcasts? I'll await your answer before commenting further.

Thanks!

Hey Chris!

Which casts do you refer to? The jhanas come up a lot therein. I am speaking as per the suttas, which of course are subject to variation in interpretation (an understatement, of course) - but they would be the 'soft' jhanas. Shankman makes this distinction vs the hard Jhanas as popularized by the Burmese tradition. Keep in mind these various traditions have different things to say about jhana, its value and its relation to enlightenment. So nothing can be taken for granted; all assumptions are up for critical examination.

-Adam.

"Hey Chris!

Which casts do you refer to? The jhanas come up a lot therein. I am speaking as per the suttas, which of course are subject to variation in interpretation (an understatement, of course) - but they would be the 'soft' jhanas. Shankman makes this distinction vs the hard Jhanas as popularized by the Burmese tradition. Keep in mind these various traditions have different things to say about jhana, its value and its relation to enlightenment. So nothing can be taken for granted; all assumptions are up for critical examination.

-Adam."

Hi Adam.
The approach to jhana being discussed in these podcasts--see links at the beginning of the thread, as well as the links later in the thread to further talks by Steve Snyder and Tina Rasmussen--refers specifically to the teachings of Pa Auk Sayadaw. I believe this is very much "hard" jhana practice: the meditator develops nimitta by focusing on the anapana spot to the exclusion of all else and is drawn into access concentration and the jhanas precisely as described in the Visuddhimagga. Very traditional stuff, and, I take it, very powerful as well for those few practitioners who have really been able to master this system. Myself, I'm still working on developing access concentration, so I cannot claim to have verified the efficacy of this approach firsthand.

Adam, I was referring to the two podcasts this topic was started for: Buddhist Geeks numbers 159 and 160. Those are about hard core jhana practice in the Burmese tradition. So... back to my question -- in what kind of jhana practice do you engage?

Thanks again!

Steve and Tina teach the Hard Jhanas from the Burmese tradition as popularized by their teacher and the Vishudimagga.

Your welcome, my friend.

-Adam. edited for addition.

Hey Adam!
I'll second your model here. I think using jhanna as a way of stabilizing and purifying attention is a brilliant platform for accessing and clarifying natural "clear seeing" as in naked awareness. Plus the activation of core energy, opening of channels, refinement of the energy system seems to have great benefits in all dimensions and again increases the depth and clarity of "clear seeing" of whatever variety!
--Jake

Something I wonder though is whether extensive practice of "hardcore jhannas" as these guys teach doesn't change, rather than disclose, structures in the mind? Even "jhanna lite" needn't be assumed to simply disclose structures, but may enact them in some way, and when you get into "hardcore" meditation practice whether shamata or vipassana based it seems too simple to say these practices simply disclose structures, when they may as easily be enacting them, in which case tying the concept of "enlightenment"- even developmental enlightenment- to one method would be somewhat problematic. Interesting the difference between these guys' take on insight and stream entry as compared to the model and experience of Kenneth and his students, which seems to make cycling much less big of a deal than it would be in this hardcore jhanna tradition.
---Jake

Hey Jake!!

Thanks for chiming in - I appreciate your insight - the question of Jhana is a very loaded issue in Buddhism, and needs clarity.

You said:

"when you get into "hardcore" meditation practice whether shamata or vipassana based it seems too simple to say these practices simply disclose structures, when they may as easily be enacting them, in which case tying the concept of "enlightenment"- even developmental enlightenment- to one method would be somewhat problematic."

Jake what do you mean by 'enact' structures of consciousness, rather than just disclose said structures? Do you mean jhana practice may construct, develop, or actualize such structures of consciousness, rather than, or in addition to disclosure? To me, the later part of your statement is clear, however, further elaboration on the former would be appreciated; as would elaboration on the rest of the quote concerning how tying enlightenment to one practice may be problematic.

Thanks mate!

In kind regards,

Adam.

Just sat a retreat with Shaila Catherine who talked about practicing under Pa Auk Sayadaw recently, I asked her about her Jhana practice and she said: Pa Auk doesn'tt exclusively teach Jhana, and if a student tells him ' I dont wanna do jhana' he gives him the four elements vipassana but according to her 'those who do the jhana route usually "get there faster".
she also said the vipassana practice which is done in relation to the hardcore jhanas is much different than usual vipassana practice, 'much faster' she said.

"Just sat a retreat with Shaila Catherine..."

I'm reading her book Focused & Fearless: A Meditator's Guide to States of Deep Joy, Calm and Clarity. It's really great and is oriented toward both beginning and advanced practitioners tiny.cc/5mAlo .

Yeah.. it looks like a nice read. She is indeed a very diligent meditator and it was a pleasure sitting and getting inspiration from her. Gives great Dharma talks, too.

Hey Adam!
In some ways this could be a topic of another thread, probably, but what I'm saying is based on my encounter with the two podcasts under discussion too so I guess it's not too much of a tangent.
As for enaction: if focusing on concentration leads to a sense of smoothness, continuity, etc, while focus on investigation leads to a sense of discontinuity, instability, etc, there is little immediately in that to suggest that either set of experiences is more veridical than the other. The appearence of layers which both modes of attentional cultivation share could also suggest that attentional cultivation, whether emphasising inquiry or stability, enact the sense that experience has layers in a predictable way.
So if method enacts experiential regularities at least as much as it discloses them, then tying even straightforward models of developmental enlightenment to single methods or even families of methods would be problematic. On the other hand, we know that people are getting "enlightened" by applying these and other radically different "methods". On this thread and a few others the question of different approaches within Theravada has come up, centering on the relation between jhanna and vipassana, and there seems to be some indication that this discussion goes way back in the tradition.
As for tying developmental enlightenment to one particular method, I think a view open to the "enaction" paradigm which really has a sense of humour about the supposed and comparative "reality" of the experiences of the path, can be engaged from the outset and will result in people, who, as they become more enlightened, also have a deepening open mindedness about other paths and methods, rather than becoming more convinced of their own path's self-descriptions.

When I asked myself why I had thought along these lines based on these two podcasts, and listened to them again, I realized that there seemed to be a slightly unsettling subtext to Tina's presentation. While both she and her partner were quick to qualify there presentation a few times with what sounded to my ears a self-conscious statement to the effect of "according to *this* tradition", thereby forestalling anyone saying they were claiming exclusivity, they repeatedly put forth the view- which sounded to me as if they held it more genuinely-- that "according to the Buddha's own words" this method they had been taught was representative of the earliest tradition-- "if you read the suttas", etc.
Anyway, taking their teacher at his word as to what constitutes stream entry and also taking Kenneth, Daniel and others on this forum at their's, the two accounts of stream entry seem worlds, just worlds, apart. Really interesting; is it the same "stream entry" or are they enacting totally different experiences? And given the high bar of stream entry in this hard-core jhanna tradition (my god, you can say it's quick-- but its only quick after you've spent how many thousands of hours mastering this jhannic development?), what might Tina and her partner say about the claims made here about higher path attainments?
For that matter, does anyone know if Tina or her partner claim any path attainment?
---Jake

And as for why it may be problematic to tie enlightenment- even developmental enlightenment, precisely defined-- to one system of method, it is rather simple. If you can differentiate the result from the method, and see that many different methods with their wildly different enacted experiences, may result in liberation which has agreed upon qualities, whether physio-energatic or psychological or phenomenological, then you can begin to evaluate methods more effectively from the point of view of the following question: how into changing your experience are you? How into exploring altered states are you, and how into liberation are you? Because if you're just into liberation, then there may be extremely minimalist methods which can carry you into degrees of liberation which require less extreme sitting and more holistic inquiry into life-circumstances and the question of authenticit, and which take you away from your normal life-- both behaviorally and experientially-- less than a hard-core hypermasculine process of self-change would, yet still open up a space of freedom and clarity in that life.
It seems possible that the emancipatory efficacy of extreme altered states may be the way they challenge the fixed identity of ego, in some ways, which can also be done by just seeing clearly how any fixed identity is constantly and inherently challenged by shifting circumstances, while the invisible essence of identity- awareness- is completely and profoundly at ease with all that occurs, even with the distress of the ego in it's moment of feeling challenged!
Thoughts?
--jake

My thought, if I understand what you are getting at Jake, is that being truly awake is the only real reason to do any kind of practice.

Pick one that suits you.

Stick with it.

Wake up!