Jhanananda on Shinzen Young

Hello everyone,

This is a slightly off-topic question. I've just been listening to Shinzen Young's audiobook "The Science of Enlightenment" and I know that many people here and in Pragmatic Dharma circles are keen on his stuff. I certainly have thought he presents a very grounded and technical approach to meditation. Anyway, I was interested in what he has to say about the jhanas, so I Googled "shinzen young jhanas" and took a look.

One of the top articles that pops up is by Jhanananda, a.k.a. Jeffrey S Brooks, a self-ordained Buddhist monk who leads an organisation called The Great Western Vehicle. I notice that Jhanananda has recently popped up at the Dharma Overground and has kickstarted a debate about enlightenment. Anyway, it seems Mr Brooks is no fan of Shinzen Young, and makes out in the article that Shinzen is more or less a fraud.

www.greatwesternvehicle.org/criticism/shinzen.htm

This is the kind of thing that used to really mess up my dharma practice. I'm childishly incapable of hearing critical things about teachers I admire, and my usual reaction is to drop everything and run for the hills. To put it slightly dramatically, I can't bear the idea of being on the losing team, and would rather ditch something I once treasured than try to work out the nuances of the debate. I have had major spiritual crises precipitated by learning about - for example - the involvement of Zen roshis in Japanese atrocities during WWII, or the various misadventures of Chogyam Trungpa. These days, I'm trying to be slightly more mature about the whole thing, and feel where and how my body reacts to these kinds of stories.

But I'd be interested to know what you think of Jhanananda's article. If Shinzen isn't all he's cracked up to be, then he does a pretty decent job of looking like it.

Andy

"
But I'd be interested to know what you think of Jhanananda's article. If Shinzen isn't all he's cracked up to be, then he does a pretty decent job of looking like it.

Andy"

Hey Andy,

You might want to hold off on that decision to be influenced by Jhananda's rants against one amongst many other Dhamma teachers he seems to constantly rail against.

I think you might want to wait and see how Jeffrey handles boeman's questions and further exchanges on the DhO before you decide to run for the hills.

www.dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discu...ards/message/1575996

You can find his criticisms of anyone and everyone all over the net. It seems to be how he is trying to set up his newly claimed fetter free arahat status and his take on enlightenment. He does not , it appears, follow the idea of awakening that we follow here and the DhO or that is what Iv'e gathered so far.

It is his brand of enlightenment that perhaps does not correspond with what Shinzen Young teaches. Be wary that he seems to be teaching that enlightenment is something you have to continuously"'maintain" through continuously hanging out in the 4th jhana all day. If you stop hanging out in the 4th, you lose your enlightment. That is what we have understood so far from his exchange at the DhO. Awakening, in my experience of at least 4th path, left permanent changes in perception and suffering levels. No need to dwell in jhana all day. It is his different take on enlightenment, so any criticism has to be seen in the light of his viewpoint.

He even disagrees with Kenneth: groups.yahoo.com/group/Jhanas/message/18139

Aaaaaaaaaaaagh ! Run for the hills!

Hehehehe!

Too late. I'm already running!

One day, when I am a great mystic (ho ho), all my teachers will gather round and have a good laugh about the number of 'freak outs' I had.

A

Shinzen Young has his own unique spin on techniques and teachings which is in agreement with hoards of other respected yogis. It also lines up with the many meditation journals and teachings you'll find on this site. Many of the folks on here who have attained one, or several paths, have recommended his videos and articles on several occasions.

Jhananda agrees with nobody except himself (according to him everyone else has it wrong). Enlightenment consists in attaining a certain level of concentration for a certain period of time every day. He says that if he didn't meditate in this way each day, he would lose his attainment. He isn't offering a permanent solution, though I don't doubt that what he is describing is accurate in terms of what he is experiencing.

I'll leave it up to you to decide which one you find best to take advice from. As for me, I prefer a permanent solution. One that doesn't take three hours of sitting a day to maintain.

here here

I have read quite a bit of Jhananda's online rantings and it's not very impressive to say the least.

"Until Kenneth Folk realizes that the Buddhist priests are just priests, and not mystics, then he has not figured out anything. " - Jhananda on the link Nikolai posted.

For example.. All I can say about that, is.. haha

Check out what's happening over on DhO in a thread called "Meditation Experiences of Jhanananda", Claudiu, Florian and myself have essentially left the guy without a leg to stand on and shown him to be incapable of answering questions without reference to his own body of work i.e. the dude can't answer a question without giving you a link to his site/youtube videos.

We've asked him directly about his attainments and he's totally unwilling to enter into honest discussion or directly answer questions. I've spoken to a yogi who's knowledge of the suttas I find to be outstanding and who's met this guy in real life, apparently he's actually a nice guy but he can't accept that he's wrong with this stuff. I don't think he's a mad guru sort of guy but, while his knowledge of them is exceptional, his understanding and translation of the suttas is appalling, he claims that all previous translations are incorrect and that his understanding is the only correct interpretation.

In the discussion on DhO, he's being given enough rope to hang himself basically. It'd be rather stupid to think you can argue that samatha is the route to enlightenment with a bunch of people who know first hand how wrong that actually is. Check the thread out, Claudiu, a.k.a. Beoman, my dharma bro, is doing an excellent job of questioning him and remaining objective without resorting to, as I did, calling the guy a "jhana junkie". Ha!

I wouldn't be overly concerned about his criticism of Shinzen, Jeffrey's a confused man who can't tell jhana from ñana.

"I wouldn't be overly concerned about his criticism of Shinzen, Jeffrey's a confused man who can't tell jhana from ñana.

"

I am a Zen meditator, and I believe Shinzen Young has had a destructive impact on my life. It all began several years ago with his guided meditations in his various products. I developed a dependency on his voice, and soon I only listened to him while meditating. I was a fan of his work until I saw a lecture of his in my home town; my third of Young's lectures.

When I saw him give a lecture at Canisius College in Buffalo, NY in late 2010, he was discussing equanimity, and he then started yelling at the audience. He yelled "and this applies to each and every one of you!" He then looked at me and gave a sharp frown - distinctly in my direction, as if he was trying to send me a message; he had never met me before or communicated with me in any way! I didn't come to be analyzed in any way, but instead, I came to listen to a science lecture from the intelligent spiritual teacher I heard on his various products. It is highly unusual for a spiritual teacher to insult a stranger like that. In all my years of attending spiritual lectures, nothing like this had ever happened. Many spiritual teachers I have talked to since last year have told me the man is out of his mind!

When searching for Young's name and "criticism", I discovered Brooks' article; I found that many puzzle pieces finally fit regarding Young. He claimed in the Canisius lecture that he would soon be teaching a class at Harvard; there is no evidence of that. A major plot point in his life story in The Science of Enlightenment is that he was a science teacher at UCLA; there is no such evidence. Also, where are the sources in his books and papers? Such cavalier professional conduct regarding reference material is unprecedented in science, which he claims to be an authority in.

It is a good idea to look out for any spiritual teacher's record; as with all cults and cult leaders, you have a lot at stake.

To AndyW45: Sometimes fear should not be meditated away; we have it for a reason.

One man's opinion: Shinzen Young is one of the most important spiritual teachers of our time. I am a big fan and have personally gained immensely from his recorded talks and from my personal exchanges with him. I do not hesitate to recommend Shinzen and his work to students.

I probably should have handed Shinzen a copy of "Introduction to Science"?

Are you done? So the guy gave you a dirty look (or so you interpreted it), and based of someone elses heresay you are going to call the man "destructive" and throw words like "cult leader" around?

If you develop a dependence on someone's voice and then don't get the warm reception you think you should and that causes a damaging effect on your life, perhaps the problem lies with you and not with Shinzen.

Sources? The guy isn't writing for scientific journals.