Comments about "Are We Redefining the Four Paths of Enlightenment?"

This is a place for questions and comments about my brief essay, "Are We Redefining the Four Paths of Enlightenment?"

Original essay here: bit.ly/abzdGz

Hi Kenneth,
Thanks for this succinct essay which defines very clearly the reason why I practice. Years ago when I first started meditating I got the impression I had to be superhuman, saintly, or special to gain enlightenment. I was put off by the whole thing. I also was very disheartened by the 'not in this life time' chant I heard so often. Subsequently I felt I could never join a group of any sort. Imagine the relief and rejuvination and inspiration I felt when I found this community, and now I know I am third path and more than that, I don't know anything about the suttas, I don't read apart from what is posted here. I know next to no theory, but I know the path thus far. It's a real irony to have my Christian brother in law wax lyrical to me about the dangers of the path, the formless realms and the disbelief on his face when I tell him I know what they are!!! I've lost all interest in committing concepts to memory. Practice and community is all I need. What I do get a kick out of, is recognizing states or attainments described in the material I have read!
Love, Paul

"Any yogi who attains to First Path today has to know that this MUST be what the early Buddhists were talking about; the changes that occur are so natural and organic that it becomes obvious at nearly every step of the way just how deadly accurate the ancient maps are. (Here I am talking about the phenomenological maps, rather than the fantasy-encrusted fairy tales of what an enlightened person would look like.)[...]

"I have said that the ancient maps are uncannily accurate and that this is verifiable for anyone willing to do the hard work to find out. The "definitions" of the various stages of enlightenment, on the other hand, are subject to the same sorts of distortions that are so common in all hagiography." ~Kenneth Folk

What you say about the ancient maps being "uncannily accurate" has been true in my experience as well. For example, I was given a copy of "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma" (edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi) last year. In reading about the "supramundane paths" and their phenomenological (i.e. 1st person experiential) descriptions, I found myself being able to clearly understand - from my own experience - those descriptions which lined up with my level of insight development at that time. What I was unable to reconcile, though, were the emotional and moral results that the text suggests that one should experience as a result of having gone through the process.

It seems there are two basic explanations available: (1) I am completely misunderstanding my direct experience, or (2) the moral and emotional results in the classical material are not necessarily the fruit of the path of insight whose phenomenological descriptions are provided in the Abhidhamma. Kenneth, the argument you propose in your essay clearly favors explanation #2, and I would have to wholeheartedly agree.

(continued below)

(continued from above)

That's not to say that insight work and the associated paths of insight (i.e. attainments) don't provide one with a much better platform for further emotional and moral development, as well as other trainings like concentration. But the myths don't hold up to reality testing. And rather than choose to side with the myths, I choose to side with reality as expressed in the here and now.

I thoroughly enjoyed this essay, Kenneth. Thank you for continuing to do your part to dispel the many myths and misunderstandings that continue to plague dharma scenes all over the world.

~Jackson

Nice article. Thank you Kenneth.

I think that a lot of misunderstanding comes from models based on what an Arahat can't do, namely "to store up possessions, intentionally kill any form of life, steal, perform sexual intercourse, tell a deliberate lie, and act improperly out of desire, out of ill will, out of delusion, or our of fear" (Anguttara Nikaya IX, 7).

Obviously, these ideas have been inspired by the Yama/Niyama of Patanjali's Ashtanga yoga, which together with Jainism, have been major source of inspiration for early Buddhism. The Buddhist monks who became Arahats after more than 20 or 30 years of strict moral discipline might have at perfected these virtues during the course of their moral training, but evidence shows that an enlightened yogi is not necessarily impotent, poor or unable kill a mosquito.

We can therefore say that, yes, the 'pragmatic dharma movement' doesn't believe in fairy tales.

Hello kenneth!

Thanks a lot for the fast clarification!

I do now understand your standpoint!

For anybody who wants to understand how such a question could arose please have a look in "the sankhara thread" post 120 to 125.

One thing more do you also have an essay about what of these fairy tells is true and what not?

Thanks in advance!

Respectfully,
Max

"Here I am talking about the phenomenological maps"

Can someone please provided a detailed and specific rendering on what these maps cover.

I agreee with the essay in other aspects of the earily teachings. One of the main reasons I turned to Theravada practice is that when I read the teachings I was really struck by how closely the tecahings mirrored my own experience in terms of realizing the 3c's and the Jhanas. I haven't yet attained a path though, so I am interested in these phenomenological maps, but in a way I almost wonder if it's better to just figure it out on my own via practice. I know that my confidence in the 3C's and Jhana is unshakeable because it all happaned directly and completely removed from any teachings I'd ever heard before. I would certainly guess that even if 1st path exactly mirrors a teaching I've heard it still won't be anything like I ever expected it to be. At this point I'm just hoping that these maps might help me to recognise things better as they naturally occur.

Thanks for the essay, and for the initial question Max.

Hi all,

When I read these writings from Kenneth and the book by Daniel Ingram and listen to their contributions to the Buddhist Geek podcast, I feel both motivated as doubtful about attaining arahatship. It's great to hear people are getting there, but it seems they only manage it after long intensive retreats: months on end, during several years ...

This is something you can do when you don't have a steady job, a wife and kids that need you around, etc ...

One hour of formal practice a day, lots of paying attention during daily life and a 10 day retreat each year seem to be all I can manage the coming decade. Are there any arahats out there that reached their goal on a similar routine?

I sure hope so.

Omni, you can do it without going on long retreats, while having a full time career, while having a family and raising children and having an otherwise normal life. No matter what, even if you become a monk, this path will take time. You will have to be very dedicated and you will have to sit, and sit a lot. But... YOU CAN DO THIS. I know this to be fact.

I would say it is certainly possible to accomplish that. I know several arahats who have never been on retreat... practice diligently and pragmatically and you can't help but progress...

Omni,
I would like to also encourage you in your endevour. I crossed the A&P for the first time fourteen months ago. I am now third path. I have never been on a retreat. I am married with two young girls. I have a hectic job as a high school teacher. I try to sit twice a day, often without success, but get to sit at least once for 45 minutes. The rest is intention, immersion and patience. If i can get this far, then so can anyone esle. Oh, by the way....with the extraordinary support this community offers, I have no doubt that I will attain to 4th....I just know it!!! So, farewell your uncertainty and worry...if it's up to you, it's up to you....and folks here will stear you and assist you with all their heart along the way.
Paul

Wow, that's great! Thanks for the encouragement!

"I have never been on a retreat. I am married with two young girls. I have a hectic job as a high school teacher. I try to sit twice a day, often without success, but get to sit at least once for 45 minutes. The rest is intention, immersion and patience. If i can get this far, then so can anyone else."-Cartago

Thanks for this testimonial, Paul. Every day I work with people who, like you, have families, jobs, and "real lives." Again and again I am amazed at the progress people can and do make once they truly commit to this practice.

"Oh, by the way....with the extraordinary support this community offers, I have no doubt that I will attain to 4th....I just know it!!!"-Cartago

I believe you. In fact, I expect nothing less.

May you awaken in this lifetime,

Kenneth

Thank you Kenneth!!
I'll get on it right away!
Paul

This is super valuable and inspiring. Thank you.

Dear all,

I must admit that I'm a little confused over what is actually considered fantasy, myth, and idealism versus what is directly knowable and verifiable by ones own experience.

The prevailing interpretation is that the fetters let go of in the different stages are the work of mythologizing religious salesmen trying to one-up the competition. This would call into question sevaral doctrinal points central to Theravada, which is fine, but such challenges must be backed up by no only personal experience and intuition but also reasoned arguments and a reintreptation of not only what awakening means but also the context and worldview in which it unfolds.

Frankly speaking, it seems unlikely that the Buddha thousands of years ago advocated a humanistic approach to the holy life - humanistic as we interpret it today, meaning inclusive of the full range of human emotions and foibles. It seems quite clear to me that the entire aim of the early Buddhists was soteriological, escaping the endless cycle of birth and death and attaining nibanna by severing all forms of clinging and releasing the heart from the qualities of greed, aversion, and ignorance. Without this purification, the soteriological aim would be meaningless. There would be no possibility of escape. The question of whether an afterlife exists, Kamma functions, and liberation is possible and worthwhile were just as real and controversial in ancient India as they are today. The position in the Suttas is clearly in the affirmative.

The Buddha could have easily taken a more moderate and humanistic approach in his teachings and not been reviled in the "ascetic scene" of the time. There were many contemporaries which held such moderate views, but he did not, or at least from what we know through the Suttas.

I am saying this not to say that you are wrong in describing the path of awakening, it could very well be right, but...

The view that you can still have Theravadan Buddhism without Samsara, Kamma, and the total extinction of the three poisons would contradict and remove so much from the Suttas that it would be Theravadan in name alone. As I said, this is fine, but if this is what is suggested here it seems more like an attempt to co-opt a religious traditition and reinvent in by iterpreting it through a lens which does not simply stand up to scrutiny and analysis, from a doctrinal point of view.

If there is no belief in Kamma, Samsara, and Nibanna as the total extinction of the three poisons and the endless process of rebirth, then it should no longer be called Theravadan.

The danger that I see is that these stages fit within a particular doctrinal framework and ethical understanding of the range of human possibility. So when someone says "I am on the Fourth Path" but they still have the fetters of lower paths noticeably present, to what does that experience refer? Why are you calling it First, Second, etc., Path when it is no longer relevant to what it once referred to. What are the distinguishing marks between the two?

Is this just watered down Dhamma? And if it's "real" Dhamma then just say that your tossing out all the rebirth nonsense and trying to find a happy and satisfying way to live outside of any particular doctrinal framework. Don't think, however, that this view is somehow doctrinal free. It has underpinning it certain values and beliefs just as much as a traditional Theravadan view.

I question whether the Four Paths being split into technical attainments and social/psychological attainments is not a redefinition. I mean by this a split between mental development and social conduct, i.e., someone defined as on the Path still being severely troubled by the problems offered up by life.

I have a different view than Brendan on rebirth, kamma, etc., but want to avoid the endless debates on this found on other lists. I see a very important teaching of the Buddha is to rely on worldly experience instead of speculative metaphysics. To me, this leads to a moment to moment interpretation of rebirth and kamma which I don't see this list questioning.

jack

There is a simple way out of these philosophical boxes. Go practice. Find out for yourself.

We don't need to complicate the dharma with historical conjecture, metaphysics, philosophy or religion. To my way of thinking that's what's blasphemous to a process (yep, process -- method, system) that thrives ONLY on what you can see for yourself.

Practice! Start a personal investigation into the very processes that create you and your universe second by second.

Peace.

Brendan, since you just arrived here it might be a good idea to check the place out a bit. We are really dedicated to the practicalities of meditation practice. Deeply philosophical questioning and commentary are welcome but as you can see from the reaction to your comments by Jackha and me, we're predisposed to finding things out the way the Buddha suggested -- investigate these things for ourselves. This tends to answer a lot of the issues that come via pure speculation, not grounded in a practice.

Hope this helps,

Chris Marti
KFDh Admin

By the way, I am going through John Peacock's 6 part series of talks on Buddhism Before the Theravada at www.audiodharma.org/teacher/207/ . This was recommended by someone on this list to whom I thank. Peacock is a renowned scholar as well as practitioner. Very informative on what the Buddha really taught.

jack


There is a detailed series of talks that turned some dharmma teachings on end for me in what proved to be key to progress. Most interesting is a six part series of talks, 8 1/2 hrs total. I included a few notes I took from his first lecture below, wish I had more notes to share but I only reviewed the first lecture for you to get a sense of his take on the history. Here is the link:

www.audiodharma.org/teacher/207/

Thank you both for your comments. Because I have very limited Internet acres, it will be a long time before I can watch listen to those talks, but I do hope to do so when I can.

I truly appreciate this earthy and practical approach to the dhamma. It is a healthy antidote to the needlessly speculative tendencies of the mind, especially the progressive intellectual-elite among whom Buddhism is so popular. Modern meditation teachers, however, seem unable to question there own metaphysical views based on those very experiences had in meditation. The most central one is the question of rebirth and Samsara. Looking at the twelvefold dependent chain, which is first taken on faith and then later verified through personal experience, ignorance causes Kamma formations which gives rise to consciousness and then finally mind and matter arise. Its not quite this clean and simple, but the process CAN be observed and verified in meditation. Seen in this light, there should be a questioning of the current naturalistic worldview under which most of us operate (and which informs many of these "humanistic" reinterpretations of Buddhism), but also an appreciation of the endlessness of this cyclical process, a process called Samsara. Perhaps modern meditation teachers avoid this question so as not to turn-off empirically minded Westerners, but it is a question which almost all the modern meditation teachers that I've come across are completely silent on, at least publicly - Daniel Ingram, Kenneth Folk, Shinzen Young, even Theravadan monks like Ajahn Sumedho and Amaro have no talks on the subject, at least that I'm aware of.

The question of rebirth, at first as a theory and then later as a verified truth, has far-reaching implications ethically, especially on how one is to conduct one's life.

It's easy to stay at an office job and do a retreat here and there, content with the richness and satisfaction that a life informed by meditation and understanding brings, when there doesn't seem to be an afterworld and this possibility of rebirth. But when Samsara is appreciated, it can provoke within practitioners a deep desire for liberation and an abandoning of other pursuits in favor of a far greater calling. That office job and your other attachments appear minor compared to eons more of suffering and woe. People are more likely to commit themselves to the practice if they have genuine FEAR of rebirth. It's too easy to get complacent and make excuses otherwise.

If this does not correspond to the experiences of these meditation teachers, they should say so and start to question the very doctrinal framework in which they are working. If it does correspond, then they should start tearing down and questioning the prevailing naturalist worldview and start asserting the reality of Kamma, rebirth, and Samsara. Instead what I see is waffling around and skirting issues rather than people having the courage to take stand.

On a much lighter note, my favorite story in the Suttas is that of Ven Mahogallana fighting a giant, fire-breathing dragon with his psychic powers. Simply kick ass, and a wonderful example of the hagiography of those ancient texts.

You have quite a soapbox going there!

And it is based on conjecture and a set of beliefs that may, or may not, bear any resemblance to the actuality of this life. I suggest a dedicated meditation practice....

Brandan,

I suggest you check out the list Dhamma Wheel at www.dhammawheel.com/viewforum.php . There are over 8,000 posts there mentioning rebirth. It also has lots of posts on other metaphysical issues.

This isn't meant to say that you aren't welcome here to talk about your experiences and meditation.

jack