"Actual Freedom" within a larger context

Amen, amen, amen! -- for a description of what it is to live with true freedom, as distinct from adhering to some agenda making trademarked, 'term-of-art', specially defined claims to 'freedom'.

[back to yadidb & Nicholai-- the food of the gods is avocado AND mango, together: my local gods, anyhow. With wonderful tea, Chris. Reading Dogen.]

In the same rich vein please read Vince Horn's latest:

www.vincenthorn.com/2010/07/09/a-more-comfortable-prison/

Yes thanks, I just read Vince's last blog entry as well as your comments, via a tweet from Kenneth.

""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."

I see.. thanks. I normally sleep easily too.. will try to avoid the 'delibarate cultivating' right before sleep if possible to avoid any sleep disruptions.

Thanks Chris I love Dogen... and thanks for posting Vince's blog--that is exactly what I needed to read this morning...

"Amen, amen, amen! -- for a description of what it is to live with true freedom, as distinct from adhering to some agenda making trademarked, 'term-of-art', specially defined claims to 'freedom'.

[back to yadidb & Nicholai-- the food of the gods is avocado AND mango, together: my local gods, anyhow. With wonderful tea, Chris. Reading Dogen.]"


Yeah! Eating avocado and mango, sipping tea, reading Dogen. Right on, Kate.

Or sitting on the can this morning, taking a dump, the color of boxer shorts, the feel of a tile floor beneath one foot and a bath mat beneath the other, sweat and spit, and the smell of sh*t.

"
In the same rich vein please read Vince Horn's latest:

www.vincenthorn.com/2010/07/09/a-more-comfortable-prison/

"

I read Vincent's article and like it but believe that Vincent is adressing those who are just starting practice.

Don't see how it applies here.

"Amen, amen, amen! -- for a description of what it is to live with true freedom, as distinct from adhering to some agenda making trademarked, 'term-of-art', specially defined claims to 'freedom'.

[back to yadidb & Nicholai-- the food of the gods is avocado AND mango, together: my local gods, anyhow. With wonderful tea, Chris. Reading Dogen.]"

Hi roomy

How is the freedom Vince described, which is Kenneth's "the happiness that does not depend on conditions", any less of a specially defined claim to 'freedom' than any other claim to freedom?

It still took Vince defining it (as opposed to a less comfortable prison, presumably) in that article for it to be communicated, no differently than it takes me or someone else defining an actual freedom from the human condition in order for people to comprehend it. As Chris pointed out, one thing is not another. It's not just you say tomato I say tomato (hehe in written form that really loses it's oomph).

You seem to resent the fact that AF is clearly defined in juxtaposition to what's not AF. I can only reason this is because you think its all the same - which couldn't be less "true" (factual).

I think the happiness that does not depend on conditions is great. I relish it during what's left of my 'being' phase. It's no actual freedom though. The happiness that does not depend on conditions is not a 24/7 freedom, it doesn't work in the marketplace. It's even still a prison, by my definition (more on this in a later post). [Edited to remove reference to Vince's definition which I misinterpreted]

Btw I love both avocado and mango but unfortunately I'm (mildly) allergic to fructose, so yes... I covet the forbidden fruit.

Craig

"(1) 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.

(2) 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)."

Hi Alex

Just wanted to clarify a point you made (quote 1). AF is not about suppression of emotions. This is a misconception that I held for a long time, and perhaps its due to the way the material is presented that the misconception arises. Regardless, AF is about promoting felicitous/innocuous feelings to the exclusion of good/bad feelings - but not suppressing anything. Complete attention is brought to whatever arises, but we do not get caught up in what arises (because that would involve further feeling and imagination - an important choice lies here) but instead remain sensuously attentive to the next thing that arises. AF is also not about suppression of the sense of self, it is about choosing to cease to 'be'.

Re (2) That's what I live. But instead of buddhahood, I chose AF.

Craig

HI Craig,
Nice clarification. Could "remain[ing] sensuously attentive to the next thing that arises" apply to mental-emotional-imaginative content, or only physical sense impressions?
-Jake

One thing I think we would all agree on is that miscommunications abound! But we are undaunted...

"The happiness that does not depend on conditions is not a 24/7 freedom"-Craig

Yes, it is. That's the whole point.

"It doesn't work in the marketplace."-Craig

Of course it does. That's what is meant by "not dependent upon conditions."

"It's even still a prison, as Vince defines it."-Craig

I doubt Vince would agree. I certainly didn't read his essay that way. In any case, being out of prison isn't the same as being in prison. That wouldn't make any sense.

"How is that preferable to freedom?"-Craig

It isn't preferable to freedom. It *is* freedom. Both "freedom from" and "freedom to." Freedom from the unnecessary suffering that comes from mistaking experience for self. And freedom to be a human being with all the richness, intimacy, and beauty that humanity entails. Freedom to be courageous and accepting in the face of pain and freedom to enjoy the beauty of the full human experience. What's not to like?

As far as I know, freedom from pain is possible through suicide (although I can't be sure), but I've managed to resist the temptation to exterminate myself even during my darkest times. Whether freedom from pain is also possible via AF remains to be seen, but no matter how many times AF advocates describe "Actual Freedom," it sounds like a poor bargain to me; it just makes no sense to me to give up functionality (the full range of information we receive from our emotions) in exchange for a universally easeful experience. To say that I find such a bargain unappealing understates the case.

(cont)

(cont)

There is a reason why most people can relate to and even dream about traditional enlightenment even before the fact; throughout history there have been people who embody it through compassion, wisdom, engagement with the world and with other human beings, passion, vulnerability, heartfelt empathy for others, and above all, humanity. Unless and until AF has even one person who embodies those characteristics, it's going to be a hard sell.

"The happiness that does not depend on conditions is not a 24/7 freedom, it doesn't work in the marketplace. It's even still a prison, as Vince defines it. How is that preferable to freedom? It is said that the best or perfect slave is one who thinks s/he is free. Are congratulations are in order?"

Craig, sorry but no, you don't know it and it becomes obvious when you post this kind of thing. The happiness that is independent of conditions does work in the marketplace, and it is very much 24/7/365. That's the point. By knowing exactly what you are and how the individual parts all work, being able to let those parts work as they will without resistance and without judgment and without having to DO anything about it -- THAT'S the happiness that is independent of conditions. That happiness can be had in heaven and in hell. It's liberation from needing anything to be perfect, wanting anything to be different, having to remove anything, add anything, change anything. It's not a prison because no matter what happens, no matter how good or how bad, it comes with the knowledge that everything, all the time at every moment, just IS.

< Kenneth slipped and beat me to the punchline >

"HI Craig,
Nice clarification. Could "remain[ing] sensuously attentive to the next thing that arises" apply to mental-emotional-imaginative content, or only physical sense impressions?
-Jake"

Hi Jake

Mental: Attentiveness to the thinking faculty in the absence of feeling good/feeling bad may precipitate a PCE/apperception. In apperception attentiveness occurs unceasingly and effortlessly. Outside apperception, attentiveness comes and goes. I think attentiveness is actually the mental faculty in action.

Emotional: In the marketplace (daily life) attentiveness will definitely detect emotions that have arisen. This is because it's so habitual to spend every waking moment indulging in our feelings about this thing and that, one after another. Its only in apperception (PCE) that no feelings can be found.

Imaginative: When I am attentive I am automatically not imaginative. I think imagination is the thinking faculty engaging the feelings and memories, whereas attentiveness is not getting caught up in those faculties because they overpower attentiveness and that is why we "wake up" from a reverie.

That's how I experience it at the moment anyway. I find this material to be like an onion, any time I peel back a layer I find another layer underneath

Craig

Hi Kenneth

I'd love to get into the nitty gritty of this if you're willing.

"The happiness that does not depend on conditions is not a 24/7 freedom"-Craig
"Yes, it is. That's the whole point."-Kenneth

Do you experience sorrow, sadness, glumness? I do and I have seen countless times that happiness and sorrow cannot exist at the same time. Happiness arises naturally when sorrow is not. Do you experience differently?

Is there ever a moment of suffering that arises due to a momentary attachment before you bring your awareness to it and it dissolves?

Is there ever a brief surge of anger or aggression towards someone cutting you off in traffic or acting really rudely to you for no reason, or being extremely demanding of you in an unfair way?

"It's even still a prison, as Vince defines it."-Craig
"I doubt Vince would agree. I certainly didn't read his essay that way. In any case, being out of prison isn't the same as being in prison. That wouldn't make any sense."-Kenneth

I have edited my post to retract that statement. Didn't give the article the attention it deserved. Tried to take a page out of AugustLeo's book and ended up as Nacho Libre instead.

"How is that preferable to freedom?"-Craig
"It isn't preferable to freedom. It *is* freedom."-Kenneth

I will wait for confirmation of the above before exploring the topic of freedom further. I will just say that freedom is without conditions, the happiness that does not depend on conditions (that I believe I know intimately and am prepared to be proven wrong about) can still be interrupted by conditions. Interrupt occurs, suffering occurs, freedom is lost, issue dissolves, freedom returns. That's like being released from prison on parole - freedom with conditions. Am I wrong?

Craig

"By knowing exactly what you are and how the individual parts all work, being able to let those parts work as they will without resistance and without judgment and without having to DO anything about it -- THAT'S the happiness that is independent of conditions. That happiness can be had in heaven and in hell. It's liberation from needing anything to be perfect, wanting anything to be different, having to remove anything, add anything, change anything. It's not a prison because no matter what happens, no matter how good or how bad, it comes with the knowledge that everything, all the time at every moment, just IS.

< Kenneth slipped and beat me to the punchline >"

Hi Chris

Firstly congrats on the big E, just saw the post yesterday. I'm assuming that's what it was - sounded remarkably similar to mine, including wanting to talk about it incessantly for a while afterwards

Since then, do you still experience resistance?

Do you still experience judgement?

What I am trying to get at is that if resistance arises then dissolves, and if judgement arises then dissolves, it is not 24/7.

Yes, everything just IS. I get that.

What it IS, though, in the moment, might be sorrow and a lack of freedom. When your feelings run roughshod over you and you find yourself lashing out at someone, and then a few moments later you can laugh and it effortlessly dissolves - that's all good and well for you, but someone still got a lashing. That's non-harmlessness. When the person you want to lash out at isn't present, the lashing occurs over and over in our minds - until it effortlessly dissolves. We still suffer during the time it occurs. Because we are actually the recipient of our own anger. Not only are we the SOURCE of our anger, but we are the RECIPIENT of our anger.

Thoughts?

Craig

CGN: "Tried to take a page out of AugustLeo's book ... "

I have no idea what you mean by this. My point was that from my perspective, Vincent's article has nothing to do with this discussion.

You are attempting to debate a topic about which you clearly have no direct experience or understanding. Your words betray you.

I'm out. _/\_ Best wishes.

"CGN: "Tried to take a page out of AugustLeo's book ... "

I have no idea what you mean by this. My point was that from my perspective, Vincent's article has nothing to do with this discussion.

You are attempting to debate a topic about which you clearly have no direct experience or understanding. Your words betray you.

I'm out. _/\_ Best wishes. "

By taking a page out of your book, I was referring to your style of comment that I have noticed in this thread. Nacho Libre is a comedy in which Jack Black tries to become a luchadore with disastrous results.

You can keep your dismissive confrontational style. I prefer to keep an open mind.

Craig

Not sure how I got pulled into this conversation, but I guess I'll take the bait and respond.

First to AugustLeo's assertion that my post was meant for beginners. I guess that depends on what you mean by a beginner. I actually more considered it a post for intermediate practitioners, who've already gained some mastery of cultivating subtle states of expansion, but whose primary identity is fixated on those states.

In terms of how it's related to this thread, I think it's somewhat connected (though I didn't intend it to be) to the point that Kenneth is making about the PCE state being a pleasant state that one tries to cultivate to the exclusion of all other states. My post was about seeing that all states, especially the most expansive and pleasant (like PCE), are still states. It may not %100 connected to this post, but I see why CMarti brought it up. That or he was just being kind and trying to re-direct the conversation. Or being mean and trying to suck me into a mexican food fight. ;-D

"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
"

wow, that was gorgeous

"What I am trying to get at is that if resistance arises then dissolves, and if judgement arises then dissolves, it is not 24/7. - Craig"

Well, this is a really interesting topic, though maybe a bit tangential to this thread. From reading your replies Craig, I'd have to agree with some of the other members here, that you *may* not be talking about the same thing. I hear in your description of freedom something more akin to removing all forms of suffering.

From my experience, when "things as they are-ness" is realized in a more complete way (lets just call it arhantship for the sake of this community) the sense that these states of consciousness, which you seem to be equating with a lack of freedom, are a fundamental problem is really seen through. It's known, directly and w/o question, that it's not about the states that arise and pass, but about the effortless flow of reality itself, which is completely unimpeded, and always has been. This is the Universal understanding of freedom, which you don't seem to be expressing.

Now, from a personal perspective, there are still sticky points, things I do that I regret, and areas that I work on. There are still states that I get caught up in more than others, and there's (paradoxically, from this perspective) a deepening of freedom which is possible. Anyone who says otherwise I very deeply question their depth of humanity. So, there's the freedom that isn't dependent on conditions, and then there's a deeper and deeper embodiment of that--there's the Universal and the Personal, and both are true.

[cont...]

It could be that what you're talking about is the Personal side of the equation, but you seem to have a view that from this side of things all contracted states can, or should be removed. (I'm basing this on several posts of yours, not just this one). If that is your view, I find it to be a narrow and generally unhelpful one for mature adults. But it's definitely the traditional view in the Theravada world (and in many other Buddhist circles). And there's something very simple and easy about this view. It makes the embodiment of wisdom in the personal realm, "either a or b". And if it isn't A than it isn't 24/7. Well, if by 24/7 we mean timeless, then I'd have to say you're missing the boat. If by 24/7 we mean "all the time" then I'd have to agree with you (in a way), since the embodiment of freedom doesn't appear to have an end, and therefore there may not have an end point. If that's the case, then it's neither a nor b, and that just doesn't fit nicely into a simple "either-or" dichotomy. That's the problem with our humanity, it's messy.

There is still a broader or deeper meta-point which is being missed again and again.

From the point of view of states, stages, jhanas, ñanas, etc. everything is just more states, stages, jhanas, ñanas, sensations, cycles, phases, etc.

From the point of view of what I call the PCE mode, those no longer apply except for the sensations part, as there is a way of things being known that shows that all those stages and states are themselves an artifact of a more fundamental coloring of the field of experience, and without that, those stages and stages do not arise or apply.

Given this, one is then debating not really are the stages and states good, but is that fundamental coloring that makes them occur good.

Having spent some time comparing the two, at least for this one meditator it seems that the coloring that causes the states, stages, ñanas, and jhanas is itself the problem.

Rather than devolving into some further dogmatic pissing matches, I would simply ask that people consider the possibility that the underlying assumption that they are premising their "all stages and stages are just more empty states and stages, live with that fact as it is as the highest way of being or knowing" arguments upon, that perhaps there is actually some last fluctuation that may color the field, some more deeply distorting aspect, if I may use the word distortion without rankling people too heavily.

In modes of perceiving things where this distortion appears to not be present, I personally find things distinctly more to my liking on all fronts, but I ask that people do the experiment for themselves, take the risk, look and see: is there, as has been asserted here, something left, some last thing or at least one more thing to see clearly? That is simple enough, though seeing it is not necessarily that easy, and may require a new or different set of assumptions to be adopted for some time as a point of practice.

"There is still a broader or deeper meta-point which is being missed again and again.

From the point of view of states, stages, jhanas, ñanas, etc. everything is just more states, stages, jhanas, ñanas, sensations, cycles, phases, etc.

From the point of view of what I call the PCE mode, those no longer apply except for the sensations part, as there is a way of things being known that shows that all those stages and states are themselves an artifact of a more fundamental coloring of the field of experience, and without that, those stages and stages do not arise or apply...

Having spent some time comparing the two, at least for this one meditator it seems that the coloring that causes the states, stages, ñanas, and jhanas is itself the problem.

Rather than devolving into some further dogmatic pissing matches, I would simply ask that people consider the possibility that the underlying assumption that they are premising their "all stages and stages are just more empty states and stages, live with that fact as it is as the highest way of being or knowing" arguments upon, that perhaps there is actually some last fluctuation that may color the field, some more deeply distorting aspect, if I may use the word distortion without rankling people too heavily.

In modes of perceiving things where this distortion appears to not be present, I personally find things distinctly more to my liking on all fronts, but I ask that people do the experiment for themselves, take the risk, look and see: is there, as has been asserted here, something left, some last thing or at least one more thing to see clearly? That is simple enough, though seeing it is not necessarily that easy, and may require a new or different set of assumptions to be adopted for some time as a point of practice.-Daniel Ingram"

You seem to be discovering primordial awareness. No need to posit anything new or extra.

Hi Vince

Something that may well be causing confusion is that I am writing in these posts from the perspective of someone who has integrated the wisdom that the PCE has to impart - and this wisdom conflicts with the wisdom that buddhist meditation imparts.

So it seems that I'm not talking about the same thing, because I am talking about it differently to how everyone else is. But I am hoping that by talking about it with my expanded perspective, some ray of light might break through the clouds and get someone to see that this isn't just primordial awareness or someone who hasn't even achieved primordial awareness yet.

It's someone who has a fair degree of understanding and experience with what is on offer with buddhism (nowhere near as much of either as Daniel or Kenneth, I will readily confess!) and is attempting to describe something that people may have glimpsed (and immediately forgotten in the mad rush of their lives), but when developed into it's mature form is entirely new to human experience.

Craig