Stages, Part the Third

While I don't disagree with what's been said-- there's more to the story than that. Human beings, like ogres, 'have layers', are complex and nuanced in their perceptions and motivations. If all the generations of ancestor practitioners had been so resolutely self-effacing and unwilling to teach-- there would be no dharma and none of us would have the opportunity to practice.

The vajrayana lineage I know best offers a non-monastic ordination in which students can take vows; this is understood to be a practice in itself and not many do. But the vows include: never withholding the dharma from anyone who sincerely requests it. AND never offering teaching advanced beyond the capacity or qualifications of the student! These opposing directives make clear what a fine discrimination is required of anyone aspiring to teach!

As Kenneth acknowledged recently:
"If you are so enlightened that nothing matters, renounce your enlightenment immediately; it's missing half the picture. If you are so wise that you see the flaws in everyone's ideas but your own, abandon your wisdom. If you are so humble that everyone else's ideas seem to sparkle more brightly than your own, surrender your humility. If you are so committed to your practice that you cannot imagine life without it, surrender your commitment. If you trust that I or anyone else can tell you what you need to know, abandon that trust now."

I am fully in sympathy with the irritation expressed at self-aggrandizing attempts to 'lay some teaching on' innocent bystanders-- and I'm sure all of us who've spent much time in this scene have seen-- and [speaking for myself only, of course] done that. But we don't get off the hook so easily as to just shut up.
We always wind up back at square one: 'I don't know", doing the best we can with the splendors and terrors of reality and our fellows.

Just to be clear -- I know that I am easily annoyed at a lot of people and situations and that that annoyance usually has more to do with me than the object of my annoyance. And my feeling about dharma teachers is no exception.
I often indulge myself with no censorship which can be good or bad I think.

Dharma teaching seems very complicated, it seems like many jump into the fray too early. And yet, somehow when I think of Dharma teachers I am reminded of the college professor institution. Meaning, just because someone gets something does not mean that they are skilled at teaching it... I dunno

"just because someone gets something does not mean that they are skilled at teaching it..." ~Clayton

You said it!

In high school and in college, I had the privilege to play and learn music from a guitarist who played lead guitar for Elton John's stadium tours for ten years. I've never played with anyone better. The guy is ridiculous. And yet, he's not a good teacher at all, at least not in any structured, formal sense. People with far less technical and improvisational skills than him are way better at teaching, even at advanced levels.

I have a feeling dharma works the same way.

Yes-- teaching is an entirely separate art from mastery of what is the subject matter. And master teachers are rare birds indeed.

There is also the issue of our own irritation about teachers: I saw 'Inception' the other day. I found the endless '˜action movie' violence, explosions, chases, automotive insanity, etc. tedious'”but the skill in rendering some of the characteristics of dream-consciousness made up for the mass-market pandering. One of the things I took particular note of was when the dreamer's '˜projections' / dream '˜extras' would sense something odd going on and would turn and glare at the intruder, and then give chase and attack.
It seemed an artful way of showing how the things that we notice, are irritated by, rant against'”are frequently something in ourselves that is just surfacing, something that threatens our habitual sense of ourselves, that disturbs the dream-construct status-quo.
Now and again I remember to notice what I dislike most '˜out there', what ways of OTHERS' being and acting really get me going'”and just do a quick scan to see if there really is nothing in me that looks at least a little like what I'm ranting about. I can't say I've found anything that passes that inquiry yet.
In the context of this forum, simply posting involves us in something that is at least distant cousin to teaching, student-ing. Or so it seems to me.

And here I thought that subject would be problematic for some. Glad to be proven wrong!

Kinda redefines 'adult content' in an interesting way, doncha think?

Now that we're adult enough to ask impertinent questions and express strong opinions without being totally humorless [bodyparts] about it!

So what's the difference between being very accomplished at meditative technique and being awake? There is definitely a difference as we practice and I think it's important. If we don't make sure we understand this difference we can, I think, get lost in the errata of process. Process is not waking up. I think, too, the difference can be found in where folks' interests lie. If you are all about the technique that's what you'll focus on and talk about, sometimes to the exclusion of a lot of other important things. If you are all about awakening I believe you will very likely engage with life and with other human beings.

You can certainly be very accomplished at technique and awake, or very accomplished at technique and not awake, or not very accomplished at technique and awake... and the human base state is being neither accomplished at meditative techniques or awake. That last place is where the vast majority of us start our practice, isn't it?

Good morning. I think you're trying to point out something important about difference between very accomplished at technique and awake, but I'm don't have enough experience to understand how you would be very accomplished and not awake. Can you explain that some more? Thank you.

Sure, Mark, here's one example -- a person spends years and years perfecting the technical practice of vipassana. They are so focused on the technique itself that they are laser-beamed in on vibrations and on the "doing" aspects of their vipassana practice that they never let go and notice that something else entirely sits between the subject-object duality.

Second example -- a person spends years and years perfecting their experience of the jhanas. The are so enamored of the bliss the jhanas engender that they never investigate anything else. They just hang out in ecstatic jhanic bliss all the time and never notice any non-duality as they are too busy blissing out.

Third example -- someone who practices a hundred different meditation methods and never settles on any one long enough to find anything other than another practice to try. This person spends so much time reading about those practices they're not doing and switching over to those where the grass appears to be so much greener that they never get anywhere other than to the next practice method.

There are other practices that I'm sure would fit this model I've described, like dream practices, for example. My point, of course, is perspective and meaning. We're very lucky to have Kenneth here, who is both very accomplished technically and awakened, so he can point out to those who get into these kinds of box canyons that they are, indeed, box canyons and should be avoided.

That's clear, thanks!

Chris, if this rumination about 'teaching' and 'awakening' is out of place on your thread, feel free to boot it elsewhere. If it's out of place on the forum at all, feel free to say that, too...

Part of my own exploration of these issues has been to have been watching the behavior as well as reading the accounts of those who interest themselves in these matters; I've been developing personal criteria for what seems worthy of respect and emulation-- and what doesn't. So, with the standard warning that this is MY view, which others may find useless or wrong---

Anybody whose account, or claim, serves to inflate their importance, entitle them to abusive or grossly insensitive treatment of others, or otherwise elevate themselves beyond life's basic human interactions-- clearly has nothing to teach. Whatever it is that they've 'realized' is more worthy of avoiding than emulating.

A person claiming 'realization' who can't talk about their experience in any other language than the time-worn formulae of one of the traditions is, at best, not ready to teach. Getting irritated at the stupidity of the audience is a pretty good clue that the 'realization' involved amounts to grandiosity, not transcendent kindness and clarity. [my current working definition of 'enlightenment']

Showing up in a conversation and demanding to be heard to the exclusion of all others-- is an example of such garden-variety grandiosity. The more conviction, not to mention will and (even more) 'charisma' such a person has, the more destructive to the shared enterprise of the coversation this behavior is. When toddlers do this, wise adults respond to correct them. Unfortunately, not all 'toddlers' are 2 feet tall or 2 years old.

Well, my 2 cents, or a start; hope others will chime in, here or wherever.

Everything is fair game, roomy. That applies to life, to practice, and to this thread. And... I agree with what you've posted.

Children are practice, by definition

"
Children are practice, by definition

"

Yeah, and the sign at the entrance to THAT practice space says: 'Abandon hope AND fear, you who enter here-- you're not gonna have time for that!'

No kidding!

So I was in the emergency room very early this morning with a very sick child - this caused by an allergic reaction to shellfish. First time I've ever had to call an ambulance. There from 1 AM to about 4 AM at a busy urban hospital with lots of traffic in and out, mainly older people and people who can't afford to see a doctor because they have no health insurance. So I'm sitting in the waiting room at about 3 AM, half asleep, half awake, and an older man who appeared to me to be a street person, dirty and all but incapacitated, limps up to me and says, "Hope everything works out good for you, man." And then he limped off out the door and into the night.

That was my moment of Zen, ladies and gentlemen.

Sorry to hear that. Is it better now?
I also went through something similar a few weeks ago.
Children are practice, indeed

As a friend put it "serving all beings is the surest sign of a truly enlightened being". This often starts with our own family members.

Sometimes, even more remarkably, we're taught by the kind of people we often avoid looking in the eye...
's happened to me a couple of times lately, too: and it's like having the Lord 'Himself' smack me upside the head. Whatever I think I know-- pfffft!

Yes, it's better now. And yes, the juxtaposition of that particular homeless man and my habit-driven formed pre-judgment of him contrasted with the obvious reality that he was focused on my problem just blew me away. It's a huge reinforcement that things are not what they appear to be as long as we're not seeing only what's really going on right here, right now.

In India they say that Shiva can take the form of a homeless tramp.

Then I'm pretty sure I met Shiva.

Hello!

Got a few questions which I would be glad if you could answer.

The last tenth of hours of meditation before and immediately after the 'final click', what was your experience of'¦
1)'¦the speed of cycling? One cycle a second, one each hour or maybe one each day?
2)'¦the 'subtleness' of the cycles? Did the cycles become more subtle after 'the click', meaning less distinction between the nanas?
3)'¦the 10th nana (re-observation)? Do you still feel a lack of motivation and restlessness (which is common) during 10th nana now, or has that disappeared?
4)'¦the general baseline of happiness? You mentioned a 'leveled playing field'. With that, do you mean a general heightened level of happiness? Is this unconditional happiness affected by your cycles anymore now?

Thanks:)

Even, I don't pay close enough attention to cycles and how they effect me from moment to moment to answer your questions #1 through #3. I can answer #4 by saying that my reference to a "leveled playing field" is the recognition that there are no privileged, special or governing processes occurring anywhere in experience. I had always previously lived under the tacit assumption that there were - that some "me" or other unseen but assumed operator of some sort was in control and owned my experience. Not so.

Sorry I can't be more helpful but others here who are more oriented toward the details of the path can no doubt help you more with the details of cycles and the effects and attributes of each nana.