"Actual Freedom" within a larger context

Kenneth Folk: "I, on the other hand, find you credible, Bruno. Not because you know, but because you don't claim to know and because you are eager to find out."

Kenneth, I find Bruno sincere yet still not credible.

Kenneth Folk: "and AugustLeo, I want to tell you how much I love the fact that you have been contributing more to the forum lately. I like your depth, your experience, your authenticity, and the "lucha libre" pugnacity you bring to your onscreen persona. It's a great addition to the dynamic here, keeps things lively, and keeps everybody on their toes: theexperiencegalleryblog.files.wordpress...-libre-in-london.jpg .

Nice jpg, Kenneth. A temporary provisional persona - which one is you?. Still, what is, is. As a teacher you try to smooth over what I want to highlight. I liked it better when you were more pugnacious. Watch for the new Augustleo website.

Michael

theexperiencegalleryblog.files.wordpress...-libre-in-london.jpg .

"Nice jpg, Kenneth. A temporary provisional persona - which one is you?"-AugustLeo

I'm the big mofo on the left.

"Still, what is, is. As a teacher you try to smooth over what I want to highlight. I liked it better when you were more pugnacious."-AL

What, I don't get pugna-points for takin' you on? ;-D

"Watch for the new Augustleo website."-AL

Count me in, my friend!

Kenneth

Kenneth: "I'm the big mofo on the left". Bigger than me, but I thought you were on my right ...

Kenneth: "What, I don't get pugna-points for takin' you on? ;-D" Of course you do - it's all about being hug-nacious!

Kenneth: "Count me in, my friend! " You are truly my brother. I love you.

Michael

Nikolai: I agree, mangos are indeed the food of the gods!

An open letter to Daniel Ingram:

Hi Daniel,

Some things you said during our Skype session along with some of Craig's comments in this thread made me reconsider the possible relationship between the PCE and the no-dog (aka the Witness). For some reason I had previously ruled out the Witness as a candidate for what the Actualists are pointing to. Yesterday I practiced the no-dog for much of the day and noticed some similarities with some of your descriptions of PCE. Here are some points I find interesting when comparing and contrasting the PCE and the no-dog:

1) I can "lock into" the no-dog and it feels very distinctive. I am either "in it" or "out of it."
2) I can sustain the perspective for hours at a time once I get some momentum with it.
3) Emotions are attenuated or absent.
4) There is a wonderful feeling of ease, but no joy or bliss.
5) I don't feel that I need to "fix" other people or situations while in the no-dog/Witness.
6) When I was really fleshing out the no-dog a couple of years ago, I wanted to cultivate it to the exclusion of all other perspectives. It had a compelling quality. It felt like the next phase in my evolution (although it has since been integrated as part of the larger picture of my way of understanding my practice and the world.)
7) I can clearly feel the moment when I enter the no-dog, but always miss the exit; I just find myself back in my non-no-dog perspective at some point without having noticed the transition.

(cont)

(cont from above)

When I practice it while going to sleep with an intention to stay in that perspective, I don't sleep soundly. Sleep is restless, in and out of the no-dog all night, with a thread of consciousness throughout. When I wake up from half-sleep, I am strongly drawn to enter the no-dog, which I do. This brings fulfillment and relief, at which time I fall back into restless but strangely satisfying sleep.
9) Unpleasant, coarse energy occasionally surges through the body while lying down, seemingly relieved only by re-entering the full no-dog experience or by getting up and abandoning the effort to dwell as the Witness.
10) The experience is pure subjectivity. I have referred to it as the "cosmic narcissist" or the "universal solipsist." Things that would normally be seen as objects, e.g., books, book shelves, dinner plates, televisions are seen as rather unimportant aspects of a great, transpersonal Self. This is what I call 2nd Gear because the emphasis is on subject rather than object.
11) There is complete relief from the problems of "Kenneth." In other words, since the personal perspective is not present, the personal problems of relationships, job, health, etc., are not seen as problems at all.
12) I smile gently but don't laugh much, even if something funny happens.

(cont)

(cont from above)

13) I am fully functional and can type at normal speed, converse with others, eat, prepare meals, teach, read, watch television, whatever. But I do not feel the need for much entertainment, because the Witness/no-dog is complete unto itself. It just wants to make love to itself and has no other compelling needs.
14) People find me pleasant to be around, if slightly aloof. They may even find my deep sense of calm fascinating and attractive, perhaps feeling a bit of "sympathetic vibration" which puts them too in a calmer state of mind as long as we are together and I am dwelling as the Witness. During serious "working it out" conversations with my wife, however, she can become hurt, exasperated, or demoralized by my apparent disengagement and may ask me to let down the no-dog perspective, which can feel cool or even cold to someone who is seeking empathy and human interaction at the personal level. For a couple of years now, I have consciously remained in the personal perspective while having intimate discussions rather than risk alienating my loved ones. But there is a real temptation to pull back into the transpersonal or impersonal perspective of the no-dog rather than feel the pain of the personal perspective.

How much if any of this corresponds to your experience of the PCE?

Kenneth Folk: "Hi Daniel, Some things you said during our Skype session along with some of Craig's comments in this thread made me reconsider the possible relationship between the PCE and the no-dog (aka the Witness)."

Hey Kenneth,

Can you divulge what was said to lead you to your current conclusion?

I always assumed the AF-ists were referring to no-dog, based on their discriptions.

Agree with 1-6, disagree with 7 (can always feel the exit), disagree with 8, disagree with 9, agree with 10, agree with 11, agree with 12.

Though I must say, I rarely stay in the Witness that long anymore, since the "IAm" as dissolved there is a natural tendency to slide into all that's beyond the Witness.

Michael

"I rarely stay in the Witness that long anymore, since the "IAm" as dissolved there is a natural tendency to slide into all that's beyond the Witness."-AugustLeo

Yes, the Witness is much less compelling once it has dissolved. It is still a useful perspective and I can still lock into it at times but not like before; there was a time when it really seemed solid. Now it naturally gives way to 3rd Gear; trying to stay in the Witness when it wants to surrender feels forced and counterproductive. I also don't see 3rd Gear as more important or more desirable than either 1st or 3rd. All of it is fine.

Your comment has made me reconsider my point 7. I would qualify it like this: when I am trying to remain in the Witness and fall back into 1st Gear, I don't notice the exit from the Witness. But when I let things develop naturally and the Witness gives way to 3rd Gear, the transition is clear.

"Can you divulge what was said to lead you to your current conclusion?"-ALeo

Daniel is wondering whether the PCE and the no-dog might be the same thing. As always, things are hampered by difficulties in communication; Daniel and I may not be using "no-dog" to refer to the same state. Having coined the term, I of course feel that my definition should take precedence but that does not resolve the communication issue.

Also in responding to my question about whether the PCE was the same as Thich Nhat Hanh mindfulness, Craig wrote:

"Cast your net wide by opening up your awareness to include every physical sensation, your peripheral vision, your hearing, your sense of touch. Try to see the world in 3d, like a 3d movie, you can pay attention in such a way that it becomes more vividly 3d. Try to see past the veil our of own making, to people and objects themselves. Feeling a person (keeping them with us) will prevent a PCE."

Hi Kenneth and Michael;

I generally wouldn't poke my nose into a conversation amongst arhats et al, especially since I haven't even attained 1st path yet, but nontheless I feel that I have a nearly complete mastery of the no-dog so I'll just add one point to what you guys said. Along with what has already been mentioned I have a marked decrease in thought compaired to most commonplace states, especially in terms of narrative thought.

Unlike yourselves the witness has not yet desolved for me, so at the moment I have no dog in my daily life, which I guess makes me a cat person. I am not really sure what this AF thing is all about, but I look forward to Daniel's reply to Kenneth's original question. -Incidentally Daniel really ripped me a new one years ago when I tried to describe the feeling of no dog on his site; I am glad there is potentially some room for common ground between everyone. But with or without it Daniel is still awesome, no hard feelings.

Kenneth Folk: " I also don't see 3rd Gear as more important or more desirable than either 1st or 3rd. All of it is fine." Easy to say when when can readily access Enlightenment. I find that I access a variety of temporary provisional identities in both waking and dreaming realities. Beyond all of that is Awareness, dreaming the dreamer.

With respect to the Witness, the instructions I gave to Anne-Marie to access the Witness were almost exactly the same as Thich Nhat Hanh mindfulness - by following 's instructions one is inexorably lead into the 4th jhana (and of course, beyond.)

Michael

Thanks for chiming in, Mark. Your perspective is welcome here. And like you, I find that there is a reduction in narrative thought while in the Witness state as compared to the personal (1st Gear) perspective.

Hi Mark,

I'm not an arhat (don't subscribe to the Theravada Buddhist model at all), so feel free to poke your nose where ever you'd like.

I find it interesting that Daniel, who has eschewed anything beyond arahatship in his public persona, is now pursuing AF/PCE. Will we ever reconcile the AF language with traditional esoteric language? Does it matter? Nope. Only to those still caught up in language.

Best wishes.

Michael

Hey Michael, I have to differ with this comment:

"Does it matter? Nope. Only to those still caught up in language."

I find your views and comments fascinating, refreshing and challenging, all good stuff, but there are times when I think the little picture really does matter, if you get my drift. The vast majority of people are caught up in language. Language is how we human beings communicate in the relative space we all share. Mixing the domains of the relative and absolute, which is more or less what saying "language doesn't matter" does, misses a bit of the point, methinks. You can see the language thing play out here all throughout the discusion about Actual Freedom, so what Kenneth and Daniel are attempting to do, essentialy to debug the language issues and get to the meat of the differences or similarities between Af and more traditional Buddhist practice, is a great thing and whatever results the rest of us get from them will necessarily have to be communicated through.... language.

Dear Kenneth,

Thanks for your phenomenological and practical attempts to make these things clear.

When reading your post, I hung on the term Witness, which I think we have had problems with before, but I don't want problems where I can avoid them, so help me with this one.

Try saying Witness in some other way, or using other descriptive language.

The point where I hang is that in the mode of attention I am cultivating, while there are many obvious and clear parallels between what we are both describing, the word Witness seems for me to denote or imply something contradictory to what I am describing, at least as it seems to imply to me some super-Watcher, some Subject with a capital "S", or in this case "W", which makes me wonder if this is a terminological thing or are we talking about something different.

I also really got stuck at point 10, and so would like more about that in some other terms, as this may be a point of some differences. In what I am describing there is this profound directness of perception that is very, very diffuse at the same time, and yet very physical, in which the sensual world in its wondrous details directly delights the senses, rather than being seen as unimportant aspects of some great transpersonal self.

Thanks again,

Daniel

cmarti: " The vast majority of people are caught up in language."
Unfortunately true.

cmarti: "Language is how we human beings communicate in the relative space we all share. "
One of the ways.

cmarti: "Mixing the domains of the relative and absolute, which is more or less what saying "language doesn't matter" does, misses a bit of the point, methinks."
Hi Chris - we'll have to agree to disagree about this.

cmarti: "so what Kenneth and Daniel are attempting to do, essentialy to debug the language issues and get to the meat of the differences or similarities between Af and more traditional Buddhist practice ..."
Perhaps.

Best wishes, Chris.

Hello Daniel,

It seems that that your exploration has first been focused on anicca, dukkha, anatta and sunnata (emptiness) and is now moving towards the tathata (suchness) aspect of reality. Am I correct?

Having followed your practical instructions to get PCE's I wouldn't say that is it identical to the witness or '˜no-dog', precisely because the witness implies a subtle detached and uninvolved witness.

However, I found your description of PCE practice almost identical to what Zen/Ch'an calls 'direct contemplation' (you may check Sheng-yen's take on it on the following google books link):

www.google.ch/search?q=%22direct+contemp...Prv7agE&start=0&sa=N

In direct contemplation, one is totally aware of '˜what is', accepting everything without conceptualizing, naming or judging. The purpose is to forget the self in the suchness of what is. It is total objectivity and everything looks sharper and brighter. It also leads to a state of emotional equanimity.

As such, this practice does not lead to enlightenment, but it can be useful after awakening to cultivate and perfect what the Mahayana calls universal mirror prajna, namely the '˜suchness' or 'thusness' (tathata) aspect of reality.

Best,

Alex

"
When I practice it while going to sleep with an intention to stay in that perspective, I don't sleep soundly. Sleep is restless, in and out of the no-dog all night, with a thread of consciousness throughout. When I wake up from half-sleep, I am strongly drawn to enter the no-dog, which I do. This brings fulfillment and relief, at which time I fall back into restless but strangely satisfying sleep."

Hi Kenneth,

I hope this wouldn't be too much off topic. Do you mean you have trouble sleeping? Yesterday night, perhaps due to having just sat in meditation right before sleep, the 2nd gear Witness is very strong and I had difficulty sleeping (prior to having access to 2nd gear, I usually fall asleep in one minute, but if I am in 2nd gear mode, that can take up to an hour). It happens sometimes, I notice, usually if I have been practicing/meditating just prior to sleep.

Any thought that being 'followed' might have led to a dream state... is in the 2nd Gear mode simply seen to be an illusion occuring in a bright, undeniable and unavoidable background of Awareness. As such those 'dream thoughts' just pop in and out of Awareness without a thread of continuity. The effortless sense of Presence is so strong that I had to relax my focus on the Witness to fall asleep.

However, I still kept waking up soon after I fall asleep, and when I wake up I am in a state of full clarity almost immediately or immediately. After repeated attempts at relaxing the focus I was able to sleep soundly until the next morning.

Sometimes the Witness mode persists in dreams, sometimes not.

Hi Alex

That brief description of direct contemplation sounds a lot like what I would do to induce a PCE. Great to finally find something that appears to describe inducing the same state.

One of the most frequent objections to actual freedom is that it is nothing new. Richard is quite clear that the PCE is nothing new - he even says that everyone has had one - so not surprising that Ch'an has incorporated it. But I haven't seen any instructions pointing towards a PCE in any other traditions until now - so thank you for sharing this!

I don't suppose you know of any Ch'an rebels who recommend direct contemplation to the exclusion of all else and have been ostracised by the rest of the community?

It's worth mentioning that although Ch'an describes this practice, it's quite different to the fact that pursuing the PCE and putting aside all meditative practices altogether (that I don't expect many Ch'an practitioners would do) leads to a permanent state (that's been replicated now by at least seven people) of actual freedom.

From about 2005 to 2010 I mixed AF with 3rd gear/2nd gear/1st gear practices and all I got was this stinkin' Abiding Nondual Awareness t-shirt. No AF for me... no progress to speak of.

It's only been since I stopped paying attention to cycling, stopped meditating, stopped pushing along insight cycles, stopped focusing on dark night when it arrived, stopped paying attention to vibrations (especially), and basically dropped all interest in enlightenment and instead set my sights on actual freedom (via a pure intent) a few months ago that I have started making significant progress in AF that lines up with Richard's description of virtual freedom. If I had the choice I would have rather figured out how to purse AF properly back in 2005. But the opportunity is, as always, in this moment.

Craig

" I found your description of PCE practice almost identical to what Zen/Ch'an calls 'direct contemplation' (you may check Sheng-yen's take on it on the following google books link):

www.google.ch/search?q=%22direct+contemp...Prv7agE&start=0&sa=N

In direct contemplation, one is totally aware of '˜what is', accepting everything without conceptualizing, naming or judging. The purpose is to forget the self in the suchness of what is. It is total objectivity and everything looks sharper and brighter. It also leads to a state of emotional equanimity.

As such, this practice does not lead to enlightenment, but it can be useful after awakening to cultivate and perfect what the Mahayana calls universal mirror prajna, namely the '˜suchness' or 'thusness' (tathata) aspect of reality.

Best,

Alex





"

I wonder if this is similar to what Krishnamurti talked about so much: Wandering through the woods, say, with the sense of the observer faded or eliminated to such an extent that it is all foreground, foreground, foreground. What comes up in these moments can be so beautiful and incredible--the silence, seeing trees for what they exactly are, as though they were being seen for the very first time, the very feeling of the natural landscape itself. It also reminds me a lot of what Trungpa emphasized in the Shambhala stuff. Isn't that the point of all the vivid colors and the emphasis on aesthetics? It doesn't lead to liberation, because there is no active investigation of phenomena, but for an arahat who has already done what needed to be done...sounds like a good place to be.

Hi Craig,

Thank you for your interesting reply. You would be surprised but if we are to believe Tsung-mi's Ch'an preface, a few well-known Ch'an schools of the late Tang Dynasty were strongly opposed to sitting meditation. If Japanese Zen is often focused on the idea of right practice, Chinese Ch'an is rather pragmatic. Whatever works for you is the right thing for you.

But the goal of Zen is neither the suppression of negative emotions, nor the suppression of the sense of self. The goal of Zen is freedom from birth and death. Unless we have clearly seen our original face before the birth of our parents, we haven't crossed the gateless gate of Ch'an. From what I can tell, it has been like waking up from a long amnesia to realize that 'there is no birth, no death, no path and no enlightenment'. I couldn't believe how stupid I had been to miss the obvious for so long and the whole spiritual marketplace looked like a big joke.

Forgetting self and ox, we return to the source and settle in the natural state, free from identification, but also free to experience any emotions, thought or meditative state. This is not the end of the path, but the beginning of genuine Ch'an practice-realization following the way of the bodhisattva. We then go back to the marketplace with open hands, mixing with the crowd, pretending that we don't know anything about Buddhism, meditation, enlightenment or anything of the kind. These also become empty concepts, a dream within a dream (for the Dogen fans).

Best,

Alex

"I wonder if this is similar to what Krishnamurti talked about so much: Wandering through the woods, say, with the sense of the observer faded or eliminated to such an extent that it is all foreground, foreground, foreground. What comes up in these moments can be so beautiful and incredible--the silence, seeing trees for what they exactly are, as though they were being seen for the very first time, the very feeling of the natural landscape itself. It also reminds me a lot of what Trungpa emphasized in the Shambhala stuff. Isn't that the point of all the vivid colors and the emphasis on aesthetics? It doesn't lead to liberation, because there is no active investigation of phenomena, but for an arahat who has already done what needed to be done...sounds like a good place to be."

That's pretty much as I see it, yes.

"Hi Kenneth,

I hope this wouldn't be too much off topic. Do you mean you have trouble sleeping?"-xsurf

No, normally I sleep very easily and soundly. The other night, though, I was deliberately cultivating the Witness before and during sleep, which seems to have resulted in the sleep disruptions. Usually, I just sleep with no agenda. Sometimes there is a thread of consciousness during sleep, more often I am just "out." Most nights, I don't remember having dreams.

"Forgetting self and ox, we return to the source and settle in the natural state, free from identification, but also free to experience any emotions, thought or meditative state. This is not the end of the path, but the beginning of genuine Ch'an practice-realization following the way of the bodhisattva. We then go back to the marketplace with open hands, mixing with the crowd, pretending that we don't know anything about Buddhism, meditation, enlightenment or anything of the kind. These also become empty concepts, a dream within a dream (for the Dogen fans)."


Reading that is like drinking wonderful tea... like reading Dogen

Thanks, Alex.

Cheers Chris!