Not a Stage

"Kenneth, thanks for your comments. I have been concerned that you have at times recently seemed almost evangelical in your enthusiasm for this new practice."-cmarti

Yes, I am certainly guilty of that. It's my usual pattern, though. I went through evangelical phases after my first A&P, after 1st Path, after 4th Path, after I felt that I understood Ramana's practice, and after I felt that I understood the clear light practice. Now I have a new understanding and feel a strong urge to share it. If the pattern holds, this evangelical phase won't last; I'll eventually have a more patient attitude about it, just putting it out there for people who are interested, not pushing it on people who are not, and integrating the new understanding more fully into the old.

"I also have concerns about the trade off between my current experience of life and what it seems to take to have all that inner peace. I'm not convinced that's such a great deal. Hell, I'm not sure I could ever do it given my lifestyle - family, career, and such, as I said earlier today. I have to plant flags a lot of the time."-cmarti

I don't know the answer to that, Chris. It may be that you could do all you do now without anger, but I can't say for sure. My hunch is that you and everyone who knows you would benefit immensely, but I could be wrong. I certainly understand where you are coming from; as recently as a month ago I was skeptical and suspicious of people who claimed to be free from anger and fear. I didn't think it was possible and I didn't even think it was desirable. My view on this has changed based on recent experience. It's too early for me to draw sweeping conclusions as I don't even know if my current perspective will last, let alone what the implications are. I can only say that I don't miss the suffering and can't remember exactly why I defended it.

"Kenneth, it would also be a big help if you could address how you see this new practice of yours relating to awakening. It seems to me it's not a practice that will get one there."-cmarti

This practice isn't new. It's Buddhism 101, insight into the 2nd and 3rd Noble Truths. When you feel the mind and body in real time, you see tanha in action. To see tanha is to immediately drop it. The only thing that is new is my ability to sustain it.

"It appears to be a mode or a way to experience existence with less emotional amplitude (more peace?) and that somehow interrupts the chain of dependent origination. But, it cannot be a way to awaken..."-cmarti

Your interpretation of what I am saying is so completely different from how I intend it. What is awakening other than "interrupting the chain of dependent origination"? And although some of us have doubted that greed, hatred, and delusion could be overcome, it is after all what Buddhism is all about.

"But, it cannot be a way to awaken as it doesn't reveal the nature of things. It is not an investigation, not about insight, not about opening to one's true nature or the clear light. As I told you on the phone, the two practices appear to me to be completely incompatible as I experience them."-cmarti

You are right that there are two modes of experiencing the world, but they are not at odds. Being whole is enlightenment, the natural and inevitable result of all the practices all of us have done all along. But when you cannot be whole, you have to work with what you have. This is why we do practices that work in the other mode. But your assumptions about "one's true nature" and "insight" are circular. Those things are not limited to what you or I know about them. As far as the clear light, I no longer assume that it is the final understanding; I am open to learning more.

"Hi Kenneth, you have said an experience is just an experience and to let them go. The report here seems a contradiction of this, so you might like to expand further."-Gary

Hi Gary,

Can you be more specific about the contradiction you see? (I don't mind contradicting myself as it reassures me that I am not entirely immune to learning and growth, but I'm not sure which contradiction you mean.)

"From your previous writing I am getting it that this is post 4th path practice. Therefore I am currently extrapolating that the abiguities are best left unresolved and the whole subject best left alone or ignored by those pre 4th path. It would be good to have a clarification on your intended audience for these practice instructions."-Gary

Direct perception practice, which is just another way of saying "be whole," is something anyone can do at any time. But most people will find it impossible to sustain without the foundation of 4th Path. So practice direct perception when you can... and when you cannot, downshift to vipassana and note your behind off. The three speed transmission applies just as it always has.

All of the practice instructions for yogis of all levels are right out in the open for everyone to see. This is the double-edge sword of openness and transparency; the information is there, but it may not be easy for a yogi to tell which is most relevant for him or her at any given time. Everybody should be have a personal relationship with a teacher to help answer these questions, whether the teacher is me or someone else.

"Can you be more specific about the contradiction you see? (I don't mind contradicting myself as it reassures me that I am not entirely immune to learning and growth, but I'm not sure which contradiction you mean.)

"

Thanks Kenneth,

The motivation for "direct mode" comes across as a way of suffering less because negative emotions do not arise. For example anger will not arise or the process is interupted. This appears to put the focus on experiences in the moment with the judgement of success being measured by the resultant experience. Whereas the opposite advice can be given of the experience a yogi has in seeing his true nature. The experience is said to be what the ego makes of that which is beyond experience. So you will advise a yogi to leave these experiences, let them go. You are probably not contradicting yourself, it is likely the differcultly I am facing in having to interpret because I may not have experienced direct mode even for a short time.

Thanks Kenneth--

I very much appreciate these posts and your openness. I am open to the fact that you may be delivering a difficult truth that is just hard to hear where I am at. On a personal note, it just is sort of a bummer to find your system, sort of fall in love with it, make major progress, and then (in the same month!) watch it change in some important ways. I am kind of purity junky, which is a hang-up of mine.

You are raising all the right issues in my mind. I, of course, don't have answers to the questions of evangelical phases, lucky moments, and external contexts. Those are certainly what I have been thinking about. However these pan out--and I am deadly curious--I also gather you (like everyone) is just doing what seems right and that none of us, ultimately, is the doer. We're actors in a big show and it is my experience as well that we don't have a lot of choice in where we go next.

I am musing over other issues related to all this and will post again soon.

Interesting how this conversation has circled back. To my eye, it has morphed considerably on the circuit. My personal divergence from what was being described as 'direct mode' came when I understood it to be a description of the 'attainment' of the affectless state sought by the Actual Freedom folks. 'Peace' as being devoid of passions-- a far cry from being 'happy in heaven, happy in hell,' it seems to me.

There's some Zen story about a master who answered a question about what he would do when the bitter cold came [no joke in an unheated paper-walled monastery, I'm guessing]. He said, 'In the winter, I die of cold. In the summer, I die of heat.' That seems to me to indicate a 'peace' worth having, and was what my remarks about not making war with Reality were pointing toward. Freedom is the confidence to respond to what is in front of you-- without having to know beforehand HOW. And that's not something that you declare-- or even primarily an experience. It's the doing it.

Someone over on Alan Chapman's blog suggested that there are more enlightened people around than is usually believed-- and that they are the people that others describe as 'wise.' Kind of like Mike's recurrent wonder at his wife. I like this as an example of extremely 'pragmatic' [and democratic!] dharma.

Hi Roomy,

Actual Freedom has been useful to all of us because it shook us out of our complacency. In the face of their "outrageous" claims of freedom from suffering, we had no choice but to wonder if we were just another crab-bucket culture. I salute the Actualists for that much-needed wake-up call.

But Actual Freedom is a red herring that will be forgotten by history. Freedom from suffering is the raison d'etre of Buddhism and we who claim to value the teaching of the alleged Awakened One have an obligation to take this as far as it goes. I am here to say it goes further than most of us have imagined and I'm willing and eager to find out.

This above all: I don't know, Kate. And the more I don't know, the deeper I go. May you be so fortunate as to not know too. I'll see you on the other side of the looking glass.

Kenneth wrote: "But Actual Freedom is a red herring that will be forgotten by history."

Why do you say that, Kenneth?

"You are right that there are two modes of experiencing the world, but they are not at odds. Being whole is enlightenment, the natural and inevitable result of all the practices all of us have done all along. But when you cannot be whole, you have to work with what you have. This is why we do practices that work in the other mode. But your assumptions about "one's true nature" and "insight" are circular. Those things are not limited to what you or I know about them. As far as the clear light, I no longer assume that it is the final understanding; I am open to learning more."


I hear you about being open and not being limited by our concepts of what is possible.

Again, terminology becomes the stumbling block ;-(

The last few replies are the result of me testing the Wetpaint system as it would not post what I wrote this morning. I'll just wait it out and reply later when things are working better, as I'm sure they will, eventually.

Also, if we are to have a discussion about Actual Freedom as a movement, a philosophy, a practice, could we start another thread on which to do it? Please?

Thank you.

Looks like the system is righting itself, so...

"Actual Freedom has been useful to all of us because it shook us out of our complacency."

Kenneth , there is a place from which what you are referring to is not "complacency" but the goal upon which your students were singularly focused. I get the changes to your practice,. I get the enthusiasm you have for them. What concerns me, and I don't think I'm alone in this, is the moving of the goalposts, so to speak. I know you have said that folks should still aim for 4th path first. I know that you see this new practice as a non-linear next phase of your practice. But from outside, from here, based on your own language over the last few weeks, it looks very different than it looks from your internal perspective. It is a very large change in the nature of your teaching and in the way you have delivered them historically. Thus folks are confused, sometimes concerned.

What you are now advocating is not what most traditions advocate and it is not what you advocated just a few weeks ago. And yes, we should have an open mind and yes, whatever the end game may be, if there is an end game at all, should not be the product of someone else's concepts, ideas or maps. But please just take the magnitude of this change into account and please take the effects of this change on your students into account. Far be it from me to even attempt to tell you how to do what you do, but I do think you must be able to see the consternation this has generated.

I'm not even sure where I'm going with this, frankly. My feelings about it are not as well formed as I'd like but I remain skeptical for whatever reason, be it constitutional, psychological, view oriented or due to some undefined cause. I just think this needs to be put out there.

"What you are now advocating is not what most traditions advocate..."-cmarti

What specifically do you mean, Chris?

Kenneth

"Thus folks are confused, sometimes concerned."-cmarti

And I am very eager to hear from those folks! The last thing I want to do is to be isolated from this dharma community. Fact is, I have been talking to yogis all week long on skype, and it has been business as usual. One yogi reached 1st Path and two yogis reached 2nd Path in the last two weeks. Most of what I do is to help people move efficiently through the 4 Paths of enlightenment, and that project has continued without a hitch. "People are getting enlightened here," is still a good tagline for us.

I hear that you are feeling unsettled by recent developments in my practice and philosophy, and although you are not alone, you are in the minority. Most of the people I talk to consider this talk of advanced practice of only marginal interest; they are focused on moving to the next level in their development and many are succeeding. So my point is that it would be misleading to project your own feelings onto others.

I keep coming back to this: what I am practicing and teaching is to keep the attention continuously on the mind and body. This is Buddhism 101. It is not an outrage. As to where this all leads, the "moving of the goalposts" as you put it, I don't think we should be surprised if that chapter is continuously rewritten for each of us. How can we possibly know how far this goes? By most eye-witness accounts, it is infinite.

The biggest change in my own attitude lately is that I feel more open to possibilities. I'm not ruling anything out and my own experience has opened up as though responding to the new space I've allowed it. By saying, essentially, "enlightenment does not include leaving behind anger and fear," I was making a self-fulfilling prophecy. Who am I to say that? This practice goes where it goes. I'm just a human being, reporting my own practice as openly as can.

"...please just take the magnitude of this change into account and please take the effects of this change on your students into account."

I'm new to this forum and still getting up to speed on the "experiment" but I want to second Chris' concern, while also saying that I've heard concepts similar to what Kenneth is talking about voiced by very advanced, traditional Vipassana teachers (though always in more oblique terms).

I've come here from the Dharma Overground, after watching it become the Actual Overground. I have not desire to debate the merits of actualism, except to say that it's not my practice. Vipassana is my practice and I'm looking for open, sane and compassionate support and dialogue about that. Watching the DhO change gears felt like a sort of betrayal--the sort of betrayal that is all too common by spiritual teachers and takes a lot of different forms. Daniel's public foray into AF seems very irresponsible to the people who look(ed) up to him. The issue is not that he has changed his practice, but that he has changed his teaching in real time with his practice without first allowing time for the change in practice to mature and time and distance for him to get the sort of perspective to present those changes thoughtfully to his students.

I was psyched to find this place, but just as I'm settling in I seed the seeds of déja vu all over again. What troubles me is that the "experiment" is taking place in such a public forum before the experimenter has had a chance to really evaluate the result. Not such a big deal in a forum dedicated to open talk about this stuff except that Kenneth is "the teacher" here and his actions have a much greater consequence.

I think about this as a Dad: my job is to provide stability to my kid--not to take her on my own emotional rides. It's HER movie, not mine.
(continued...)

"@Kenneth: This practice isn't new. It's Buddhism 101, insight into the 2nd and 3rd Noble Truths. When you feel the mind and body in real time, you see tanha in action. To see tanha is to immediately drop it. The only thing that is new is my ability to sustain it.
"

I read from this direct mode deepens the insight into our true nature. Tanha the desire for pleasure, aversion or "to be" is born of ignorance, coming from a place of not knowing what is. The idea I originally had of direct mode was just an interupting of the flow of experience. But it seems 4th path may not be the final insight as I had expected and what is being expressed is not different from being ones true nature. If this is the case I can understand the enthusiasm!

I am speaking from ignorance about direct mode but comments may help some of us put it together conceptually, even though this it is not required.

[edit] "coming from a place of not knowing what is", I am saying ultimately desire arises because the way things are is not accepted or understood in a deep manner. This deep manner is deep knowing or insight.

(continued from above 91) This doesn't mean I don't have those rides and it doesn't invalidate my experience, it's just that my role as a dad limits their expression in the context of my kid. If I ultimately do need to make big life changes (or whatever) I will make damn sure I know what they add up to before I introduce them.

That said, I've heard veiled versions of what Kenneth is saying--at least, what I think he's saying. I'm starting to understand why they were slightly veiled. In a talk by Gil Fronsdal available somewhere on the AudioDharma site, he talks about the four noble truths being better translated as the "Truths of the Noble Ones" ie: the truth of the enlightened. What he says is that enlightenment brings a vivid view of path, and that path is seeing the truth of suffering. (He encapsulates all four in the phrase, "If you cling, you will suffer.") Buddhism 101 for sure, but as Gil tells it, it gets turned around so that it's advanced teaching. I've never forgotten that talk.

Kenneth is not teaching actualism here. Even Tarin has said that. None of what we are practicing here will probably lead to the AF state according to him. So I don't think people need to worry about this place going in that direction.

"as what kenneth folk has now an experienced take on is the stabilisation of the mode of experience he has dubbed 'direct perception' (which may or may not be the pce - it likely comes close, regardless), then what he may have an increasingly experienced take on is how the identity in residence can go into (or close to) abeyance, rather than how it can be extirpated. and as an actual freedom is the extinction of this identity entirely, then it can be most conclusively said that he does not have any experience to inform his take on what an actual freedom (AF) actually is. indeed, nothing that has been discussed at kfd in the past, nor is being discussed there at the moment, will even lead to an actual freedom[1].. and whether it leads toward the realisation of what will remains to be seen.

perhaps it would be helpful to have pointed out here that an actual freedom is not the same thing as being in a pce for a really long time. i considered writing an article on this topic some time ago and will likely get to it sooner or later."

[1] 'i' spent months in the same trap as i see happening over at kfd, and was roused out of it only by considering very seriously that what goes in and out of abeyance is an illusion. none of that identity (the wave, whether one filters it or *is* it)[2] has any existence here in the actual world.

[2] the identity (wave) is discussed in the article to which you linked."

Tarin at DhO on this thread: www.dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discu...oards/message/600967

Kenneth has stated and I would have to agree, that this direct mode is best practiced after one has landed 4th path because it's effortless and seems like soemthing natural as a post-4th development. It's just another thing one can do. There are probably more things one can access or do that we haven't discovered yet and I am all for keeping our minds open to those discoveries. I'm feeling more and more curious to know if what the tradionalists meant by being free from craving and aversion is true or not. I'm free from clinging and if there is a way to be completely free from craving and aversion (like the tradionalist promise) AND while retaining access to jhanas and nanas (as opposed to A/F, which eradicates that access, so in other words, the traditionalist take on the arahat), Im going to check it out. It seems that perhaps it is very possible. I'm all for proving them right.

It feels like the best idea is to not plant any flags and say this is wrong, or that is the best thing to do. If people are feeling uncomfortable, then there is lots to observe there. Why are you uncomfortable really? What have you got at stake? What are you attached to?

Yogis coming here aren't children. They should be able to understand that Kenneth still teaches for one to get to 4th path. When one gets there they can then decide what his "experiment" and my own was all about.

I'm only new here too, so I don't feel I have much right to influence the direction of KFD, but given that feedback is being actively sought: I'm in favor of careful experimentation and abandoning limiting assumptions if they prove to be false. Many limiting assumptions HAVE been proven false lately, so it's actually harmful to cling to these and teach them as if they were still valid.

I feel that some people are upset that there is now a new goal (or new standard) to strive for when they thought they were done and wanted to rest there. But anyone who feels that way can stay where they are and be totally satisfied with it (and if you're not, that in itself might be valuable information). In any case, the teachings that got you there are still there and always will be.

I think there are also traces of this attitude, even among the experimenters, when it comes to actual freedom. However, I do respect that AF is DIFFERENT from the 3 Gears teachings, and therefore probably should be kept separate (but not suppressed or dismissed unreasonably, as it has been to date).

FWIW.

Alex

Thanks for the discussion, everyone, KFDharma newcomers and veterans alike. This is exactly what I hoped for. To address some specific points:

@bouef: "I think about this as a Dad: my job is to provide stability to my kid--not to take her on my own emotional rides. It's HER movie, not mine."

Yes, good point. Your comment allows me to clarify my own thinking of my role in this community. The "dad" role really isn't what I do here. I'm more of a coach and a resource. I share what I know, and I always give you my best. That's one of the reasons I am sharing all this in realtime; the advanced yogis who can best benefit from the latest discoveries in my own practice shouldn't have to wait for me to get around to telling them what I really think. And for the less advanced yogis, the instructions remain the same, tried and true and verified in the personal experience of many people who contribute to this board: master the noting practice, balance concentration and investigation. This is how you move through the 4 Paths of Enlightenment.

Frankly, for anyone who isn't at least 4th Path, all this drama is a tempest in a tea pot. It would be like obsessing over the end of a movie you haven't seen yet.

(cont'd)

@Nick: "Kenneth is not teaching actualism here. Even Tarin has said that. None of what we are practicing here will probably lead to the AF state according to him. So I don't think people need to worry about this place going in that direction."

I'm so glad you pointed this out, Nick. I don't really even know what Actualism is. The only relevance it has for me is the inspiration provided by people I know who claim to be free from suffering. I was inspired to re-embrace this highest of ideals by the claims of Tarin and others. But I prefer to work within the traditions I know, so for me Actualism per se is a distraction at best. I have complete confidence that my own practice will unfold in a healthy, natural, and organic way without my having to buy into any belief system whatsoever. I am a yogi, not a religious guy or a guru worshipper. I just do my practice and trust that it will lead somewhere good, as it always has.

I think in some ways for me it comes down to not liking that the site seemed to change and started to emphasize things I wasn't interested in. I liked (loved) things the way they were, damn it! (smiley face). I just want to talk about and learn about and do vipassana practice in all it's details. That's me.
For some reason my mind reallly resists all the terminology like lava lamp toll booth lightning rod (?) deadman swith. But that is me again, because for sure it shows Kenneth being a creative and innovative teacher.
Kenneth is NOT the typical dharma teacher and I think all his students and dharma friends need to figure that out and find a way to deal with it. He really does open up and share himself warts and all. He doesn't want to be seen as 'up there' somewhere on a pedestal, you know? He makes mistakes, he gets caught up in things, he changes his mind. Just like the rest of us. For sure most typical dharma teachers are trying to make their students and probably themselves believe in some phony persona that has no warts. I hate that sh it.

So yes, Mike Monson at this point just wants vipassana developmental insight practice with a bunch of zen thrown in. I'm creeped out by Tolle and Adyashanti and Richard and Ken Wilbur. I just am. But that could change. knowing myself, it could change really fast.
I can't let go of my vision that an enlightened life for me includes all feelings all the time so any other kind of vision bugs me. But, I can understand the appeal of wanting a really cool suffering-free life.

@akyosti: "I do respect that AF is DIFFERENT from the 3 Gears teachings, and therefore probably should be kept separate (but not suppressed or dismissed unreasonably, as it has been to date)."

Yes, thank you Alex, these are also good points. Let me explain my attitude toward AF and why it doesn't have a place on this forum. It isn't hard to explain because it is for exactly the same reason that we don't much discuss Baha'i, Andrew Cohenism, or Meher Babaism around here. All of those are traditions based on one central figure. They depend on buying into a particular belief system as laid out by the founder. What we do here is completely different. The three speed transmission is simply my synthesis of several traditional contemplative methods. You could cut me out of the equation entirely and work with another teacher using the methods I advocate and you would still get enlightened. People around here are completely technique-oriented, with just enough theory to support you as you practice the techniques. (Even surrender could be considered a technique in this context.)

So the Pali Buddha's "ehi passiko" ("come and see") is the guiding principle here. I don't care what anyone says, including, frankly, the Buddha, if it isn't borne out in my experience. So any tradition that depends upon adopting some worldview is suspect to me. In fact, my main beef with Tibetan Buddhism is that it so easily lends itself to religious devotion. I can barely tolerate even the minimal religious posturing of the Tibetan Buddhists who post here, let alone the dogma of teacher-oriented traditions.

In other words, this site is not the place for Actualists, Meher Baba devotees, practitioners of Baha'i or Christians. Discussions of the merits of those systems have no place here. We are not going discuss AF here, because it lies outside the mission of this site.