Relating Buddhism and the PCE

"Rigpa, in my experience, is not a state. It is the all-encompassing envelope of Awareness (Big "A")"

Chris in my opinion, the tradition is clear, Rigpa is not a synonym for awareness. Lama Tony Duff (professional translator for many high lamas) is very clear that awareness is the wrong translation for Rigpa. Rigpa means the recognition of the 'essential' nature of awareness, or better put, mind. Recognition. So one is not in recognition of the nature of mind when one is suffering, in dualistic fixation. That is the condition of ordinary sentient beings, who have not recognised the nature of mind in that mind moment.

So it is not useful or correct to use rigpa as an all-pervasive base for all phenomena and states. That would be Dharmakaya. Rigpa is the recogntion of the Dharmakaya in one's and as one's very on mind-stream. Without this recognition there is no rigpa, and there is suffering.

This conflation of epistemology with ontology is the source of the neo-advaitan absurdity that i am already enlightened, because enlightenment is my essential nature. We aint enlightened till we are enlightened. We aint in rigpa till we recognised the nature of mind. And in so doing, no aversive states are present.

"1- when i was trying to induce a pce, i tended to be more successful when there was some degree of sensuous pleasure happening.. nothing extreme, a simle walk down a flight of stairs or the street could do it. now actually free, i find the experience of being here pleasurable by default, though pain still operates as is appropriate (for example, the experiences of burning my leg against a motorcycle tailpipe and having a sinus headache are painful). it is not an entirely constant condition, but it is on-going for the most part. however, in addition to bodily pleasure, there is also the pleasure - to use the term loosely - inherent in apperception.. and this is all-the-time."

Same could be said of Rigpa, me thinks.

Thanks for the quotes Martin456. I would say that both experiences sound like they could be rigpa. The talk of no god or whatever is clearly tacked on in hindsight, represent personal speculations of a secular materialist persuasion, being neither here nor there. Clear both felt ordinary sensory pleasure and delight. Nothing out of the ordinary there. No sense of self. Pure, unified sensory / cognitive experience. That is, no dualistic grasping.

Thanks,

Adam.

"EDIT: The key point is that there is no pleasure or displeasure or neutrality in the PCE that is ever the kind of thing that one could experience as happening to 'me'. Affect is the same as the perception of a self as the subject of the affect, so the simplest way to sum this up would be to say "any pleasure that could be experienced as 'you' enjoying it is absent from the PCE." (EDIT AGAIN: In other words, anything that *could* have an imaginary 'you' as subject, whether or not you discern it as actually having an imaginary 'you' as a subject, is absent.) Helpful?"

That is helpful. So it is not that there is no pleasure, just that there is no "you" who experiences pleasure. It is clear that Richard and Peter experienced pleasure and delight in their pce's. That'd be Rigpa my friend.

Ok. So I think we seen enough comparison for people to make up there on minds now. Each to there own.

Thanks for the clarification. Been interesting.

Thanks,

Adam.

Very interesting conversation. adam west's definition of rigpa certainly is very similar to a PCE. Now, speaking pragmatically... Adam, you said:

"There is a degree of mastery or stabilization. I am not a master. I am not in permanent Rigpa. My journey of stabilization continues. Certainly my suffering is a bear minimum these days, with periods of zero. There is profound richness, completeness and perfection. I enjoy the full human experience. Habit patterns continue, but are diminishing. The fetters model is correct. There is an end to suffering."

So: is it possible to have rigpa as the default state - for it to be impossible to come out of rigpa? What change would that require: would it be quantitative - full mastery of stabilization - or qualitative - a shift that changes something fundamentally?

How long have you been able to go in + out of rigpa (as I take from your comments that you have some experience with it)? How much longer do you need until full mastery? How long does it usually take?

I ask because, for someone following the path to an actual freedom, by the time the point is reached where PCEs are a regular occurrence, they are almost done - the last remnants of self just have to vanish. Perhaps the expediency of the path to actual freedom is precisely because of the parts you call rubbish - their understanding of what the 'self' is, how 'i' am 'my' feelings and 'my' feelings are 'me', agreeing to go into extinction, etc? Perhaps taking a belief like "I would absolutely deny that affect equals self." would delay the 'mastery' that you talk about to have perma-rigpa? (And why do you believe that? does not both self and affect fully vanish when you enter rigpa/when it self-liberates into rigpa?)

"re: enjoyable, how is pce worthwhile?

It seems AF has a dichotomous position on pleasure, linking it with suffering. If one is capable of pleasure, one is capable of suffering. Or perhaps, in fact, pleasure is a gross kind of unrecognized suffering? endinsight, would you clarify that for me please? This is not a new idea. In fact da buddha spoke of this. "

Hi Adam,

After reading through the last flurry of posts, it strikes me that I have my own bizarre terminological problem, using "worthwhile" for what normal people would call "non-affective pleasure". Thanks for helping me to see that. Not being able to communicate clearly does suck.

About pleasure as a kind of suffering, I think this sutta is an exact, literal explanation that I would hang my hat on; sensual pleasure (affect) is suffering, always is, whether it goes recognized or not. www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.075x.than.html

"Sensual" in the sutta as far as I understand it means "pleasure born of desire" which means affect (as positive affect is identical with the desire-for-in-the-moment or relishing of that affect).

After recognizing my terminological problem I'm leaning much further towards thinking you're right in identifying the PCE with your meaning of rigpa.

For how long have you been recognizing the essential nature of mind?

What is impersonal compassion?

Good conversation so far, thanks.

"Endinsight: "to see whether things like "perfection," "nirvana," "the meaning of life," "the peace that passes all understanding," "heaven on earth" and so on strike a chord."

I remain again convinced that we are talking about the same thing. Your quote is exactly it. That is Rigpa. You just kant speak of it outside of the AF dogma. What is very unfortunate.

We/re experiencing the same heaven on earth, but using different incomparable language."

Gosh, I'm using very little "AF dogma." I'm not an actualist. I keep telling you that!

Any communication problems we're having are either due to your non-AF terminology, or my idiosyncratic terminology, leaning towards the latter.

EDIT: If anything, my peculiar terminology is more influenced by the Pali suttas, which never talk about any sensuous (not sensual) enjoyment, and usually describe nirvana with the rote formulation (in Thanissaro's translation) "This is peace, this is exquisite--the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding". In fact, the more I think about it, the more AF terminology seems straightforward and well-matched to modern sensibilities.

"Orasis, it's interesting that you bring up the "shape bubble" of attention. I'm familiar with this in a vague way. I notice that in normal experience, attention bounces between objects of experience and parts of the body, and the particular parts of the body that it bounces to determine something about how we describe the experience's qualities. The list you provided is way more detailed than anything I ever figured out, though.

I have the feeling that this phenomenon is not present in a PCE. As I recall, attention has no "shape bubble" in a PCE. But I'm not sure of that right now because I never took a specific note of it and my recollection isn't precise, so until I have another one I can't say either way.

It would be interesting for you to find out whether the phenomenon is present in your experiences of rigpa, I'll do the same, maybe someone else like Nick or Owen will weigh in, and we'll see if we can triangulate something about PCEs from that."

Hey Adam, since you're here, would you weigh in on this?

"According to Kenneth, if none of these areas should be favoured over the others, the logical consequence must be that all of these should be included in the experience of enlightenment. All of the perspectives should be kept accessible. Even though the mind would very much like to pick one, plant the flag and declare the victory, it is possible to use these parking spaces of attention to deliberately pull the rug from under 'I' and keep it from entrenching itself."

the interesting thing being that in a PCE, none of those things are experienced, and it's the complete lack of any of those things being experienced that is (part of) what is so delightful. freedom, indeed.

"the interesting thing being that in a PCE, none of those things are experienced, and it's the complete lack of any of those things being experienced that is (part of) what is so delightful. freedom, indeed."

Beoman, just to be explicit, your claim from your own experience is that attention has no "shape bubble" (no rapid bouncing between object and various parts of the body) in a PCE?

Just to throw this out there to no one in particular...I have been interested in the Magandiya sutta for a long time, because I literally could never make any sense of it (during my vipassana questing for technical 4th path), and yet it seemed to be the sort of thing that Buddhism was "really about" (pointing to some typically Buddhist view about the world that was crucial for understanding the goal of Buddhism and the reason one should pursue it). The PCE really clarifies this sutta. I absolutely hang my hat on this as a description of what every non-PCE non-EE experience has been like for me:

"...when beings are not free from passion for sensual pleasures '” devoured by sensual craving, burning with sensual fever '” their faculties are impaired, which is why, even though sensual pleasures are actually painful to the touch, they have the skewed perception of 'pleasant.'

Now suppose that there was a leper covered with sores & infections, devoured by worms, picking the scabs off the openings of his wounds with his nails, cauterizing his body over a pit of glowing embers. The more he cauterized his body over the pit of glowing embers, the more disgusting, foul-smelling, & putrid the openings of his wounds would become, and yet he would feel a modicum of enjoyment & satisfaction because of the itchiness of his wounds. In the same way, beings not free from passion for sensual pleasures '” devoured by sensual craving, burning with sensual fever '” indulge in sensual pleasures. The more they indulge in sensual pleasures, the more their sensual craving increases and the more they burn with sensual fever, and yet they feel a modicum of enjoyment & satisfaction dependent on the five strings of sensuality."

www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.075x.than.html

Magandiya must have been very insightful, to get the gist just via linguistic explanation. More than I ever was!

This also mirrors what I thought, post-PCE:

"Magandiya, it's just as if there were a man blind from birth...now suppose that a certain man were to take a grimy, oil-stained rag and fool him, saying, 'Here, my good man, is a white cloth '” beautiful, spotless, & clean.' The blind man would take it and put it on.

Then his friends, companions, & relatives would take him to a doctor. The doctor would concoct medicine for him....and thanks to the medicine his eyesight would appear & grow clear. Then together with the arising of his eyesight, he would abandon whatever passion & delight he felt for that grimy, oil-stained rag. And he would regard that man as an enemy & no friend at all, and think that he deserved to be killed. 'My gosh, how long have I been fooled, cheated, & deceived by that man & his grimy, oil-stained rag! [who had said to him] "Here, my good man, is a white cloth '” beautiful, spotless, & clean.

In the same way, Magandiya, if I were to teach you the Dhamma '” 'This is that freedom from Disease; this is that Unbinding' '” and you on your part were to know that freedom from Disease and see that Unbinding, then together with the arising of your eyesight you would abandon whatever passion & delight you felt with regard for the five clinging-aggregates. And it would occur to you, 'My gosh, how long have I been fooled, cheated, & deceived by this mind! For in clinging, it was just form that I was clinging to... it was just feeling... just perception... just fabrications... just consciousness that I was clinging to. With my clinging as a requisite condition, there arises becoming... birth... aging & death... sorrow, lamentation, pains, distresses, & despairs. And thus is the origin of this entire mass of stress.'"

"the interesting thing being that in a PCE, none of those things are experienced, and it's the complete lack of any of those things being experienced that is (part of) what is so delightful. freedom, indeed.

- beoman"

I don't agree with you, beoman. At one point in my practise I realized that the spontaneous occurrences of PCEs were directly related to energy moving to the base of the spine and draining away from circulation. There is a technique to induce PCE by consciously manipulating the energy to the base of the spine. The sentence that was quoted from my practise journal earlier

'Base of the spine
Energy going down, draining out, small muscles in the face relax, all tension going away, clearness, pure silence, absence of vibration and affection, polite aloofness, clarity'

describes this process of vibrational quality disappearing and taking the affect with it. With the affect missing there is a different relationship to other people, missing intimacy, a bit detached but polite.

In my experience choosing PCE limits the experience when compared to choosing all of the mentioned ways of experiencing from the base of the spine to the top of the head.

And (again to no one in particular) here's something from Thanissaro which sort-of describes a PCE, though not in words that match modern sensibilities:

"Just as all phenomena are rooted in desire, consciousness localizes itself through passion. Passion is what creates the "there" on which consciousness can land or get established, whether the "there" is a form, feeling, perception, thought-construct, or a type of consciousness itself. Once consciousness gets established on any of these aggregates, it becomes attached and then proliferates, feeding on everything around it and creating all sorts of havoc. Wherever there's attachment, that's where you get defined as a being. You create an identity there, and in so doing you're limited there. Even if the "there" is an infinite sense of awareness grounding, surrounding, or permeating everything else, it's still limited, for "grounding" and so forth are aspects of place. Wherever there's place, no matter how subtle, passion lies latent, looking for more food to feed on.

If, however, the passion can be removed, there's no more "there" there. One sutta illustrates this with a simile: the sun shining through the eastern wall of a house and landing on the western wall. If the western wall, the ground beneath it, and the waters beneath the ground were all removed, the sunlight wouldn't land. In the same way, if passion for form, etc., could be removed, consciousness would have no "where" to land, and so would become unestablished. This doesn't mean that consciousness would be annihilated, simply that '” like the sunlight '” it would now have no locality. With no locality, it would no longer be defined."

"I don't agree with you, beoman. At one point in my practise I realized that the spontaneous occurrences of PCEs were directly related to energy moving to the base of the spine and draining away from circulation. There is a technique to induce PCE by consciously manipulating the energy to the base of the spine."

Hi Antero,

Just to clarify (I don't know about your current practice), would you consider the experience you're calling a PCE that you attained this way to be something that a reasonable person might describe as "perfection," "nirvana," "the meaning of life," etc. if they weren't exaggerating or being dramatic?

"Just to clarify (I don't know about your current practice), would you consider the experience you're calling a PCE that you attained this way to be something that a reasonable person might describe as "perfection," "nirvana," "the meaning of life," etc. if they weren't exaggerating or being dramatic?

- EndInSight"

In my experience the attention moving to the base of the spine (causing PCE) is just one way experiencing Silence, which is the end of the journey in all contemplative practices. There are many ways to experience it as I discovered when I wrote the list that Orasis quoted in his posts #162-163 and each way has its peculiar flavours. I personally came to the conclusion that it is kind of arbitrary to favour any of those and instead chose to integrate all of them. If you want to know how this unfolded for me, please read my practise journal from the following link onwards.

The whole original post can be found here (to help to put it context it was wrote):

kennethfolkdharma.wetpaint.com/thread/44...et=160&maxResults=20

"Beoman, just to be explicit, your claim from your own experience is that attention has no "shape bubble" (no rapid bouncing between object and various parts of the body) in a PCE?"

yes. i only had one really clear PCE, and many many very very close encounters, but in each of them, the senses start to get integrated. visually, everything is just there, all at once. tactile sensations are just there. the sensations of my foot on the ground and my fingers rubbing together are in separate places, but they aren't perceived separately - it's like it's all perceived at once. there's no need for rapid bouncing at all, and it doesn't happen.

what i meant, though, was that none of the qualities in any of those places are present in a PCE. for example: Exhilaration, enthusiasm, energetic, a lot of vibrations and rising energy currents, rigidness in social situations, feeling of tension, feeling of presence, Openness, joy, friendliness, warm buzzing vibrations, flowing outward, vulnerability, seeking contact with others, affection, relaxation, empathy, energy going down, draining out, polite aloofness, Top of the head opening, streaming upward, luminosity, feeling of union, connecting heaven and earth, sublime joy, transcendence, Unpleasant distracting vibrations, lump at the throat, doubt, uncertainty, no silence, face twisting, difficulty of communicating, feeling self conscious, awkwardness, Heaviness, silence of a mountain, immovable like a rock, merging with the chair, breathing very shallow, hard to think, Localized sense of being, Concentration, there is a pulling feeling to body, etc.

i do have to qualify some of them: joy, friendliness, and social ease do happen, but it's not an affectively tinged joy, and not a friendliness as in wanting to connect, but as in a full actual intimacy with no agenda. i will reply to the 'base of the spine' qualities more directly to Antero.

"With the affect missing there is a different relationship to other people, missing intimacy, a bit detached but polite."

it does sound similar to a PCE in terms of clearness, absence of vibration and affection, relaxation, lack of tension, etc. however, i don't agree that there is missing intimacy or detachment from others. in the PCE, or really close to it, i find i have no agenda, nothing to fear, nothing to want out of the other person, so there can be a free exchange of conversation and ideas that is delightful and not quite detached at all. it sounds like the state you reach by doing that is a close affective imitation but not quite there.

moving energy towards that part of the body does help induce a PCE, but it's not usually the root of the spine. more particularly it's the 'seat of naivete', between the sex center (top of genitals) and the lower dan'tien/hara. what happens if you try moving energy there?

One more thing to throw out, and then I'm going to stay away from the forum for the rest of the day so as not to distract me from work.

The core thing that AF "gets," which I have not seen a very clear treatment of anywhere else, is 'I' am 'my' feelings and 'my' feelings are 'me'. In other words, every affect is identical with the perception of a self that experiences, desires, or relishes it if it's a positive affect, or identical with the perception of a self that experiences, hates, and is averse to it if it's a negative affect, or identical with the perception of a self that experiences, has no opinion about, and forms various delusions about if it's an neutral affect.

This means that thinking one can be dispassionate and not cling to or not be averse to affect is wrong view. Any affect that one *could* cling to or be averse to is something that one *always* clings to or is averse to. The clinging, the aversion, is the affect. Cultivating equanimity towards affect is skillful means, but is *not* the ideal; there is no ultimate equanimity towards affect; equanimity is when there's no affect to have equanimity towards.

The Pali suttas get this, because they say sensual pleasure is suffering, and nirvana is where sensual desire (its cause) ends. But they don't explain it clearly, via their inseparability.

The dzogchen stuff that I've read, emphasizing the essential nature of mind underlying phenomena, gives the strong impression that the essential nature of mind underlies affect too and can be recognized during affective experience as during any other experience. My reading may be wrong but it seems like the most obvious reading for Westerners who aren't scholars.

What is good about the suttas / AF is the clear, uncompromising rejection of affect / sensual pleasure as good. No qualifications. We need to hear that.

"I ask because, for someone following the path to an actual freedom, by the time the point is reached where PCEs are a regular occurrence, they are almost done"

beoman: One possibility is that it is simply a matter of motivation. It seems like a lot of these guys talking about needing to get rid of their 'self' are hellbent on it and its their top priority in their life.

before debating more on the merits of your approach, Antero, I'll have to read your journal, so i won't comment on that just yet.

Antero: "There are many ways to experience [Silence] as I discovered when I wrote the list that Orasis quoted in his posts #162-163 and each way has its peculiar flavours."

the throat one didn't sound very pleasant (or Silence-like) at all:

"Throat: Unpleasant distracting vibrations, lump at the throat, thoughts of doubt and uncertainty, no silence, face twisting, difficulty of communicating, feeling self conscious, awkwardness"

in fact you mentioned 'no silence' in particular. can you go into why that might be the case? how is 'no silence' a manifestation of silence? also, do you think that is peculiar to you (you have some 'blockage' in the throat or what-not) or that is just what happens if you focus at the throat?

for what it's worth, the throat/back of neck seems to be where the self is really quite knotted + jumbled up, and i hear that's one of the last places to clear up (to start perceiving clearly) on the path to actual freedom. i didn't remember to explicitly feel that area out in the PCE i had so i can't comment.

IN OTHER WORDS...any pleasure that one can ever cling to is impossible to experience and not cling to. Salvation can't be experiencing such pleasures (and pains) without any judgment of or passion towards them. The pleasures are inseparable from the passion. Salvation is when such pleasures (and such pains, and neutral affect) simply *aren't*.

At least, that's my view, based on my own experience so far.

"What is impersonal compassion?"

EndInSight: Here is how I experience it. First, find a way to be solidly present. Then try including both your chest area and the entire world outside simultaneously within attention. Acknowledge that all things within your field of attention are arising in this moment - this includes your experience as well as all the rocks, trees, buildings, and people that are around you. You are all arising together and there is zero difference between yourself and everything else that exists in this moment. If attention is still including the chest area as well as everything else, you may feel an experience of selfless compassion or love. It may also help to walk around so there is a feeling of change in the outside experience while keeping attention including the chest area.

Now, the tricky question for me is whether doing that is just a stupid human trick or is authentic compassion. Dunno.

"for what it's worth, the throat/back of neck seems to be where the self is really quite knotted + jumbled up, and i hear that's one of the last places to clear up (to start perceiving clearly) on the path to actual freedom. i didn't remember to explicitly feel that area out in the PCE i had so i can't comment.

-beoman"

I don't know beoman why the throat is different from others. I have not heard of any contemplative practice that has taken the throat as the final destination of the attention, perhaps there is a reason for that? Also I am not an expert in this field anyway as I have done only a few dozen PCEs to see what this fuss is all about and presently I do not have desire to pursue that path further.