"Actual Freedom" within a larger context

"
What puzzles me is to see that people who have been the greatest advocates of the "no self" Buddhist dogma, are now trying to suppress thoughts and emotions while sticking to the so called reality of the material body in order to attain actual freedom.


Thoughts and emotions are not a problem if one doesn't derive an illusory sense of self from them. Same applies with everything else including the so-called physical body that is nothing more than a cluster of sensations and perceptions creating the illusion of solidity.

Seeing that clearly is real freedom. And this is what Buddhism is all about.


"

Aha-- putting this together with Kenneth's Post 30 I finally understand what AF is talking about in the PCE! I admit, I haven't put much (any) effort into figuring it out, because it seemed like a strange mishmash of a simple, well known contemplative experience with modern materialist metaphysics.
So, in the Tibetan systems like Mahamudra and Dzogchen Semde, which use 1st gear practices in the context of a timeless nondual view, the PCE is a nice experience you have in learning concentration in which the activity of the five senses are enjoyed without filtering by the sixth sense. From there one can "ease up" and experience thoughts and emotions-- sixth-consciousness activity-- as examples of the same clarity as the other senses, without conflating the mental-emotional interpretations with the "physical" sensations. Then indeed everything can arise and play itself out without hindering "us" because we aren't engaging in the futile attempt to make a self out of something fleeting- whether mental or physical.
Sounds like AF is another great example of what happens when someone attains some realization without adequate knowledge of historical context, other traditions, or the importance of the interpretation given the realization-experience.

Nice, Jake. This is helpful in reframing AF within a broader context. My aim with this thread is to let the air out of the balloon of AF hysteria. There really isn't much going on there. It is the opacity of the AF teachings and the hoo-hah surrounding them that is confusing to people. As soon as people understand what AF is, they can take a deep breath. AF is neither an an evil boogeyman nor the answer to everyone's problems; it's just a peculiar worldview along with an ordinary human experience.

At the core of AF is the "pure consciousness experience." It is easy to imagine that this experience is something beyond ordinary mortals. But AF founder Richard says no. He has written that he's never spoken to anyone about this who had not already had the PCE.

So let us first of all understand that we are not talking about anything extraordinary. As I pointed out upthread, Bill H. called this experience "vipassana consciousness" long before any of us had heard of Actual Freedom. Insight meditation teachers teach this experience at nearly every retreat (e.g., mindfully eating a raisin).

Can everyone hear the air leaking out of the balloon? The PCE is most definitely not a big deal. It's just another pleasant perspective of consciousness.

Now, put this nice but ordinary state together with the peculiar AF worldview that every state other than the PCE is pathological and should be eradicated. That's it, ladies and gentlemen. The AF nugget in two brief paragraphs. Pssssss... (The sound of air escaping.)

AF does not own vipassana consciousness. They did not discover it, nor do they claim to have done so. They just singled the state out for special attention and gave it a fancy name. Their only unique claim is to have cultivated the PCE to the point where it is the only perspective available to them. And this, they believe is freedom. Pssssss... (The sound of air escaping.)

As someone who came into this community after the DhO issues and is not clued-in about AF, I found this whole thing really new and interesting. So I checked out the AF website ( actualfreedom.com.au/richard/default.htm ) to get a better sense of what it was about.

However, it confused me more than ever. What is this guy rambling about? The whole thing struck me as manic-y and more than a little narcissistic (and I'm speaking from the perspective of having treated people actually diagnosed with narcissism).

So I checked the DhO to get a sense there. Still difficult to understand what it actually is. If Kenneth's diagnosis is right, then AF is just plain old mindfulness, deep and powerful mindfulness, but good old fashioned mindfulness none the less. The bare awareness of sensations, without judging, with imputing a self, or "good" or "bad", feels nice. This is being taught in hospitals and clinics to people with a variety of disorders as a way of "grounding" them in reality and helping them get out of their heads (and therefore out of suffering).

But I just can't buy that this is such a big deal. That is enlightenment or beyond. If one gets into this state, it's alright... but isn't there more?

Ron, I commend you on actually checking the AF web site (and at the same time I feel your pain), and on checking out the threads on the DhO about AF. The reason you are having trouble figuring it out is that it is purposefully vague. It has to be in order to make something really simple, straightforward and commonplace (in our world) seem really new, profound and earth shattering. That's how cults do their marketing and drum up followers.

Now, based on your professional training, what happens when a person represses their emotions for an extended period of time? What if a person had, literally, no emotions at all?

Okay, for some reason I'd rather make jokes about AF than be serious about. It is just too fun and too easy. But, I'll say one thing: Trent and Tarin both seem like good, trustworthy people and I've had many chats with each of them in which they were very helpful in talking to me about vipassana and, at one time, answering my questions about AF. So, even though I don't understand AF any more I understand non-dualism, primordial awareness and/or conservative theravada concepts of reality I do think there must be something worthwhile going on there if those two guys endorse it.
But I think for me, along with a lot of you, it is really hard to care a hell of a lot about it.
I just really want to reduce or eliminate my suffering and keep inceasing my intimancy with all of life and I'll use whatever technique works right now to help me do that. It would be really weird to get all worked up about one teacher or technique or philosophy or concept over another.

Here's my perspective as someone mostly lurking here and on DhO for about a year.

-I was interested in meditation for a long time, but it was reading Daniel's book MCTB about a year ago that changed my perspective and made me think 'hey, this is something I can actually do'
-Over time I noticed more and more comments about AF on DhO and checked out Richard's AF website
-My immediate, strong impression was (and is) that the website is horribly written and that Richard is narcissistic, sociopathic, manic, a con man or something along those lines. I've had the 'pleasure' of getting to know a couple of similar people quite well in my life, and something about the thought patterns is very distinctive. I think I agree with Bill Hamilton in that I find a very good approach to life is: 'when it comes to psychopaths, just stay the heck away from them and don't get involved in anything of which they are trying to convince you'.
-Seriously, read Richard's disparaging remarks about his broken relationship with his 2nd(?) wife, and read about how he is currently recruiting people to join him on a 'floating convivarium' (basically a pleasure yacht) with 'no married couples allowed'... all I can say is, move over L.Ron Hubbard, here comes another one. Those are only a couple of examples of the *classic*, cult type behaviour going on with Richard and company.

-Next thing I know, Daniel Ingram is talking about seriously getting into AF practice... and his current opinion seems to be that it is a 'superior' state to his previous state of 'arahatship'.

-So, what conclusions is a reasonable person to draw from this? Whatever level of realization D.I. had, it was obviously quite flawed considering he now views it as 'inferior' to this cult-based practice. [...cont...]

[...continued]

-Also I must add that this attitude of 'whatever, just try for yourself and learn the truth' does not fly with me. Meditation amounts to neuro-re-engineering, it is far more than just 'seeing what's there'. Would we tell someone to 'just try heroin' so they could 'decide for themselves' if it was a valuable addition to their lives? No, as responsible people we must in fact make informed decisions at every step of the way.

Anyway, final comment: Kenneth I sincerely thank you for starting this thread, I think it was the right move.

Enough venting, I do have some more 'constructive' discussion points...

Back to the actual thread title:

On the whole topic of 'eliminating emotions entirely' (which is certainly what AF claims to do):
Are there not various Buddhist traditions in which people do systematically work to transform certain emotions, and/or perhaps eliminate certain emotions?
I seem to recall reading about Tantric practices in which even negative emotions start being experiences as 'just energy' which can then be channeled towards positive ends.

I am starting to get the following idea:
Perhaps even after 'arahatship', the dedicated practitioner *will* in fact eventually decide there is 'more to be done'... It seems Kenneth would suggest the 'more' has to do with acquiring a '3rd Gear Perspective'. Is it possible that there are other routes for continued self-development that focus on 'purifying' the energetic system (including the 'emotions').

Perhaps Daniel has chosen to 'purify his lower chakras' by essentially cutting them off altogether from experience (the AF method)... would it not have been possible, as a different alternative, to work on purifying emotions such that compassion and loving-kindness become more and more predominant? In fact, doesn't that relate to concepts such as 'transforming your body into a radiant Buddha-body', or however people phrase it? I guess I would like to believe this last proposal, since it would be a *much* more attractive vision of the 'path beyond path' compared to deciding to simply eliminate all affect.

One final side thought: what if we are recapitulating the classic split between 'big boat' and 'little boat' Buddhism... ie. choose to eliminate all affect and basically enter 'full-time nirvana in life', or 'stay behind' by retain emotions in order to stay connected/compassionate with the rest of society?

Wow. A lot of material to discuss there.

Personally, I see no value to the elimination of all affect (emotion) since that is first of all a lot of what makes me human and second, that which still often guides what course I chose to take in the world. Far from being a problem, I see emotions, even negative emotions, as quite helpful. I may not enjoy being terribly sad or horribly angry but there is a reason those feelings exist. And it's not just to torture the subject. It's just plain weird to me that any human would wish to suppress, repress or eliminate so much of their nature, but apparently some do.

In my opinion any practice which force fits emotions is a misguided one, but that's just me. I prefer those practices which enlighten and inform just what emotions are and how they operate, not in order to eliminate them but to accommodate them, to be intimate with life thereby, not afraid of it. And why would one claiming arahatship... well, Alex already asked that question.

Kenneth's third gear refers to non-dual awareness, which is distinct from arahatship and is attainable both before and/or after arahatship. It is not addressed by Actual Freedom as far as I know. Other than, I suppose, to be characterized as just another pathological human condition

I appreciate the scope of your comments, Greame_M.

"... what if we are recapitulating the classic split between 'big boat' and 'little boat' Buddhism... ie. choose to eliminate all affect and basically enter 'full-time nirvana in life', or 'stay behind' by retain emotions in order to stay connected/compassionate with the rest of society?"

That's a great question but I'm hard pressed to recall a Theravada master who would assert that the elimination of emotion is nirvana. I'm thinking of Ajahn Cha, Ajahn Amaro, Ajahn Sumedo, Christopher Titmuss, Jack Kornfield, et al, and they all seem to agree that being intimate with emotion, and thus with human existence, is the key, not eliminating affect. But I'm not a Theravada scholar and I could be way wrong.

Like many here I too find the AF site off putting and the whole idea of excising the emotions repellent. Nor, does the robotic tone of some of its adherents impress. My own experience teaches me that good and bad emotions treated equanimously result in richer meaning and greater potency. I'm somewhat baffled as to why you'd want to get rid of emotions. Why not transmute them into that greater sense of power and meaning?

And then, of course, there's the 'this is the answer' theme to the whole enterprise. A theme which deserves great scepticism.

That said lets not forget the Lions roar. The tone of the some of the posts here comes across as overly fearful with a ton of aversion distorting/pre-figuring the view. Why not examine the power of AF and try to place it within an understanding that works for us rather than dismiss it out of hand? It's worth keeping in mind what the average person's response is to equanimity, let alone the notion of an arahat walking around in broad daylight.

And while I like Kenneth's notion that AF is a timeless variant of 1st gear, it's no more than a possibly good beginning for understanding; I don't find it a compelling explanation for the power that Daniel and other's report. And Alan Chapman's take simply degenerates into a non argument and the assumption that western psychiatric terminology explains what is going on with AF. Is that really the beginning and end of what is occuring for Tarin, Trent, and Daniel? Again, its worth recalling Freud's view of all mystics as infantile regressives. Are we going to simply dismiss what we don't get? Let's get it, and then dismiss it, or rather, locate it correctly, cut it down to size?, and then make use of it - or not - as we wish.

"-My immediate, strong impression was (and is) that the website is horribly written and that Richard is narcissistic, sociopathic, manic, a con man or something along those lines. I've had the 'pleasure' of getting to know a couple of similar people quite well in my life, and something about the thought patterns is very distinctive. I think I agree with Bill Hamilton in that I find a very good approach to life is: 'when it comes to psychopaths, just stay the heck away from them and don't get involved in anything of which they are trying to convince you'.
-Seriously, read Richard's disparaging remarks about his broken relationship with his 2nd(?) wife, and read about how he is currently recruiting people to join him on a 'floating convivarium' (basically a pleasure yacht) with 'no married couples allowed'... all I can say is, move over L.Ron Hubbard, here comes another one. Those are only a couple of examples of the *classic*, cult type behaviour going on with Richard and company.

-Also I must add that this attitude of 'whatever, just try for yourself and learn the truth' does not fly with me. Meditation amounts to neuro-re-engineering, it is far more than just 'seeing what's there'. Would we tell someone to 'just try heroin' so they could 'decide for themselves' if it was a valuable addition to their lives? No, as responsible people we must in fact make informed decisions at every step of the way.




"

Thanks for the clarity and passion you put into this, Graeme.
You've reminded me of two things I meant to say:
One is the limitations of ascertaining things for oneself; in my job processing herbs, I've become aware of the crucial importance of being sure about what you see-- there are many important medicinal plants that look very much like Poison Hemlock. [cont.]

[cont.] If you're the person ingesting the herb, you will only be wrong once-- end of story.

The other thing is about the function of the emotions: they're information, pure and simple, just like physical pain and pleasure. Freedom results from responding to, rather than reacting to, that information. Back when I was spending a lot of time with horses, I noticed how human treatment of them correlated pretty closely to how a person saw his or her own bodily life. One of the most horrifying examples of this gone completely berserk is the practice of 'treating' a chronically lame horse [one limping because of foot/leg pain] by cutting the nerves so the horse can 'perform' until it shatters bone and will then be discarded as of no further 'use'.
A less fraught example would be that blacking out that irritating red 'oil' light on your dashboard is a short road to disaster.

"emotion" is a freaking word.
what does it describe? is what it describes exact? is it the same for everyone? is there some scientically sound definition of what an emotion is? (NO!)
so how can one say "emotions" are gone?

@Chris "Florian, I have to ask you about this because you keep saying it, over and over - who here are you addressing about being afraid of Actual Freedom? I haven't seen anyone say that."

Chris, lots of people are. I was, for most of the past year, so maybe I'm just projecting this but:

While your issue may be with people not playing nice on message boards, what I read in Kenneth's initial post is an invitation to look hard at "the buzz" about "Daniel doing AF practice". I'd say that a large portion of the participants here ad KFDh and over at DhO were initially encouraged to do insight practice earnestly by Daniel's book, and later, by the community that grew around it. So even with Daniel expressly stating on his web page and in his book that he doesn't want to be put on a pedestal, that's still what many of us do, if we're really honest to ourselves - it's such a human thing to do. So now our paragon goes off to engage with something that is considered anything from counter-enlightenment to cultism to pathology, by other people whom we respect just a deeply. What are we to do? Let's talk about it, and try to figure out what's going on with the AF guys, with our relationship to them, and therefore, with ourselves as well.

Cheers,
Florian

"And while I like Kenneth's notion that AF is a timeless variant of 1st gear, it's no more than a possibly good beginning for understanding; I don't find it a compelling explanation for the power that Daniel and other's report."-CkD

Never underestimate the power of the timeless perspective. It can be absolutely mindblowing to discover that you don't have to be concerned about what has come before or what comes next. There is great relief in riding the razor's edge of this moment. The gazillions of people who have been touched by Eckhart Tolle's or Adhashanti's works would attest to this.

Consider also the way people fall in love with Mahamudra, or Dzogchen, or Advaita Vedanta. The usual progression is to favor the new perspective above everything you've known before, even rejecting the old, denouncing it and loudly proclaiming the virtues of the new perspective to anyone who will listen. Later, if you keep growing, you integrate the new perspective and the old in a way that allows you to live in multiple perspectives as appropriate. At best, you learn not to favor any perspective over any other, seeing them all as perfect manifestations of awareness. You don't have to privilege any perspective over any other when you can be free in all of them.

There is no need to make a big drama about AF or imagine that it holds some secret beyondo that can't be found elsewhere with less hoo-hah. As always, your native common sense is one of your greatest assets. Ask yourself if you feel comfortable with the proponents of AF, their manner of presentation, and their claims. If not, let them do what they do and go your own way to find a tradition and/or a practice that makes sense to you. You can always change your mind later if new information comes in.

Chris: Bruno, let's play "what if." Let's assume you can effectively use AF to get what you want. Which is... what? Please describe that existence for us and please describe what about that existence is enticing to you.
---
You misunderstand, the whole reason I am so insistent in discussing AF is because I fear that this is the way I'm heading. I don't want to get rid of affections, but I didn't want to get rid of desire either.

What I want:
--- be happy (engaging life, with a sense of celebration)
--- have fun (which I pretty much equate with concentration)

I think this is a reasonable thing to ask of a meditative technology. And I mean it in the most down to earth and practical way you can think of.

And I see two groups of people who are happy and have fun:
--- one of which believes they are "the infinite," that they are "not their body," or variations of transcendental awareness.
--- one of which got rid of their affections.

The situation seems fairly bleak, as both seem like a compromise (to me). (also don't get me wrong, I am fond of people from both groups, I find they are friendly and helpful, and I'm not implying any sort of character flaw in either)

Daniel Ingram was the one guy who didn't seem to compromise in this regard. I started meditation without fear precisely because he made a point of bashing out against the "limited emotional range" models of enlightenment. Now I feel as if ground was swooped of my feet (like Florian describes).

(cont.)

I stopped meditating for a while, but it was soon obvious that the process was continuing regardless (pain the middle of the head, urge to dissolve stuff, etc). So I inquired furiously with the AF crowd to know if they still maintained relationships with others, and they all said "yeah, we still care" (actually they said that now they "really" care), and that at least gave me the (feeling of) security that I would still talk with my mom and dad.

So now I continue meditating, and I am not sure if I will end up believing "I am the infinite," have "no affections," or end up somewhere else entirely. I would guess my major motivation nowadays is to "understand how the mind works."

Bruno

""Now, based on your professional training, what happens when a person represses their emotions for an extended period of time? What if a person had, literally, no emotions at all?"


"

Chris, in almost every well accepted model of psychology repressing, denying or ignoring emotions is a superhighway to pathology. In psychodynamic models it is THE reason why people suffer. In more modern cognitive models, the ignorance that it creates is a primary cause of what are called "cognitive distortions"; public enemy #1 in one's psychological health.

The only psychological models that endorse ignoring emotions are the pure behavioral models, and these are no longer mainstream in practice for that very reason.

My personal take on trying to eliminate emotion: it's a shortcut to major problems.

Someone might have said this before, but I'm sure that according to Buddhism, many conditions which western Psychology would classify as 'sane', Buddhism would classify as pathological.

Kenneth @66

While I pretty much agree with all you say, what I'd hate to see is a wholesale demonizing of AF in the absence of any genuine engagement with either the AF practice, or with what those who do practice AF have to say about it. Assumptions and irrelevancies, and arguments from authority don't cut it with a decent meditation practice - why should they be thought enough in assessing AF? Watching it (almost) gather momentum is disheartening.

To be honest, my view is that the entire AF discussion should be ring-fenced. That is, cut short here and everyone interested told to take it over to DharmaOverground. That way this community could continue to focus on what it does well, and the issue of AF could be examined, explored, and decided on (?) at DhO. DhO is, of course, quite open for anyone here to read, or post at, as they wish. Tarin, Trent, and Daniel seem very willing to answer questions.

As for what I'd really like to see, that'd be Tarin, Trent, and Daniel come out the other side and re-configure the whole AF enterprise for us. Trent, for one, could stop channelling Mr Spock, and they could all say something about what's right and what's wrong about AF. They're all very smart guys. I'd love to know more about AF in a way that made sense, and integrate it into my understanding of what a spiritual practice is about. The current 'extirpating emotion and creativity' just doesn't hang together for me. On one view reality is nothing but a creative act. And if we align ourselves right we get to be agents within that process. How can you 'extirpate' that? Or why? Baffling.

"... what I read in Kenneth's initial post is an invitation to look hard at "the buzz" about "Daniel doing AF practice"" -- Florian

Hmmmm... I misunderstood the issue, Florian. It's not the first time and won't be the last. So, the Big Issue, the 800 Pound Gorilla, the Elephant in the Room, is that Daniel Ingram is doing Actual Freedom? Okay, I love MCTB, and it launched my practice. But my experience with the guy over on DhO quickly taught me that, well, let's just say that certain behaviors and judgments were not to my liking. So while he wrote a great book, which I appreciate the crap out of, other stuff I saw and read never impressed. In fact, it was cause for concern.


Bruno, I misunderstood your issue, too:

" I started meditation without fear precisely because he made a point of bashing out against the "limited emotional range" models of enlightenment. Now I feel as if ground was swooped of my feet (like Florian describes)."

Zounds, man. Take this development as a challenge to re-examine your assumptions about the practice. There are other practitioners and teachers who will be perfectly straight with you and tell you that you do not need to compromise and you will not lose all affect. You're posting your comments in the best place to find that kind of help -- cue Kenneth!

BTW - this practice is best described (my humble version) as a quest to discover what you are, and how to live given that fact. I couldn't be happier with it. So as opposed to being afraid of results - which I do understand - I'm thrilled with them. I have all my fingers and toes, all my emotions are intact and operating and informing me and I talk to mom and dad every day. I believe I'm a better father and husband because I have more compassion, patience and and am capable now of just being with the crap life throws my way.

BTW - I believe what Daniel is doing right now, while I'm sure he believes in what he's doing, is a kind of spiritual bait and switch on those who he brought into practice with MCTB. So I do get what you guys are upset and/or worried about. But I was upset about that last summer as I watched authority given to people who had no business with it based on what I saw of their behavior and attachment to Actual Freedom. Thus was born the realization that he, like me and every other human being, was capable of making a mistake, and even in the one area where we are perceived to be the most reliable and competent.

I'm sorry I misunderstood, but you'll get over this and you'll be better off due to this realization.

"
I am not sure if I will end up believing "I am the infinite," have "no affections," or end up somewhere else entirely. I would guess my major motivation nowadays is to "understand how the mind works."

Bruno"


Cool. Understanding how the mind works sounds like a really good aim, and practice seems like a good way to go about that. As for the matter of affections, practice shows how it's all without a self, a governor. So, who knows how the path will unfold for you or anyone else. It's, as Kenneth and others attest, unscripted.

In the meantime, you've got your limited realm of influence in the relative world. While some people on this forum (and many other modern practitioners) might have a bias against the Pali sutras, I think you might get some sustenance from reading a few of them.

Here are a few recommended readings:
www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.002.than.html

www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.2.10.than.html

And of course, if it's truly of interest, you'll find your own ways of reconnecting with your heart.

(Beyond sutta reading, quality time with friends and other loved ones, listening to Mozart, time in nature, poetry, volunteering, giving to people in need, and brahma vihara practice are other things that do it for me).

It might seem like a head exercise, but in fact what I like most about reading the sutras is the heart quality that comes out in the writing, which I can then bring to practice (of all three trainings).

You probably won't figure out where the path leads you in the long-term until you've been practicing a while (20 years, let's say). In the short-term, reconnecting with the heart side of the practice might be really refreshing for you (and others who are encountering AF with an admixture of attraction/horror).

Metta,
Ryan

Thanks Chris, Roomy, Jake, Kenneth and all those who understood my point. I missed part of the discussion while listening to Lang Lang last night. Great piano concert BTW - you're right Ryan (quality time with friends and other loved ones, listening to Mozart, time in nature, poetry, volunteering, giving to people in need...)

I now understand the fascination for Actual Freedom. It's a quick fix that appeals to our postmodern societies: freedom from negative emotions, rejection of any form of transcendence and the total acceptance of the physical body as the ultimate reality. The only thing that is not acceptable is criticism. Everything is equal after all: Voodoo, traditional vipassana, sensory deprivation tanks or magic mushrooms. Pretending that certain traditions or methods are better than others is just being intolerant and small-minded.

I have therefore decided to support AF and encourage all those who have realized that Buddhism is going in the wrong direction to make a 180° turn and get back to the reality of their physical bodies with a clear mind free from negative emotions.

Has anyone tried cocaine as an alternative? It seems to produce similar effects.