Retreat Experiences vs. Hard-Core Dharma

I am opening a new thread to discuss advice or admonitions people may have had from instructors out there in the world of western Buddhism. While on retreat at the Insight Meditation Society a couple of weeks ago, I referred to the progress of insight maps while consulting with one of the teachers, and got told that speculation about such things was a distraction and not helpful, that I should just regard all experiences in meditation with an attitude of openness, and not have expectations about what I might be experiencing at any given point. This attitude is so contrary to what we do here that I found myself thrown into confusion and doubt over the entire enterprise. Of course, on retreat a person tends to get highly sensitized to any kind of input at all, but now that I'm back in the world of daily life, I think it might be a good idea to toss this around.

People who are relatively new to practice, as I am, are particularly encouraged to respond, if they've had any such clashes occur in their experience. I know it's intimidating to post on this forum if you're not an advanced yogi, but we all learn from each other, regardless of what stage we're at. Experienced people get a chance to see how new people are processing all of the information they're getting from multiple sources, and other new people, present and future, learn from reading about others' paths.

(cont.) I want to expand a bit with some of the things I've been thinking about all of this. First of all, I recognize that KFD also discourages people from self-diagnosis, asking us instead to submit our experiences to the group in a practice thread. So my teacher at the retreat may have been at least partly trying to keep me from speculating on my own. However, he also told me that his tradition (Thai Forest) does not subscribe to the same maps that I was talking about, that there are all kinds of maps out there, that they all differ, and that a person can get sidetracked trying to figure things out. In other words, he was operating from a position of scepticism about conceptualizations of these experiences.

Part of what he told me makes sense to me: I don't think we can trace our responses both to meditation and within meditation to discernable causes all the time, and we can go nuts trying to do that. Stuff happens. Thinking about stuff that happens is thinking, and thinking drags us into the construction of the ego. Then we also get all excited about the experiences we're having, although I think that's natural (and he said as much to me as well). Plus there's the fact that Daniel and Kenneth will tell you that the maps manifest differently for different people, so it makes no sense to expect that everyone experiences the same things exactly. But the other side of the story, in defense of the maps, is that if people have no idea what to expect, when they get slammed by D.N. phenomena they may become discouraged, or worse, traumatized, and they may give up, which is the worst thing to do. So having a sense of how things unfold is not a bad idea.

(cont.) I have a few more remarks to make before I conclude. First, the teachers on this retreat were not encouraging people to carry on about content; they all demanded we discuss our experiences or feelings in terms of what was going on in the body, rather than talking loosely about fear or sadness, or whatever.

Second, while the term "awakening" popped up a lot, and the teachers were quite explicit about the Three Characteristics, there wasn't any talk about enlightenment. But then I picked up a copy of "Inquiring Mind" (Fall 2010) in the reception area, dedicated to the theme of "Enlightenment," and read it on the plane on the way home; lots of the contributors were sceptical of the entire concept (Ruth Denison, Stephen Batchelor in particular). So I know it's a loaded term.

Finally, because I have only been on one 3-day retreat previous to this one, I was put in a discussion group of beginners. I'm not sure what my discussions would have been like in a different group. Beginners talked about things like how do I deal with pain or how do I quiet the mind. No one else talked about shaking or vibrations or any of the kind of stuff I was experiencing. I think I might have been lost if I hadn't had this forum to fall back on. OTOH, teachers encouraged us to note everything, not to try to stop ourselves from thinking, but just to note all phenomena without judging, or note the judging. Their teachings in this regard were completely consistent with what I've encountered here.

Still, the net effect is that I'm a bit confused trying to pull all this together. I loved being on retreat, and would love to go back. I also benefited greatly from the dharma talks, and the instruction we got in the four foundations of mindfulness (with which I was familiar from KFD). I'm putting this out here for whatever benefit it can bring this forum. Thanks, Laurel

Laurel, do you think it's possible for you to hold this entire issue in limbo, essentially to reserve judgment, pending more practice? Or do you feel that you need to have an answer now to your question, which I am interpreting as, "Are detailed maps necessary on the path, are they helpful but not necessary, or are the detrimental?

<Just to reveal my own bias, I think this is a really complicated question that leads to a whole host of different answers depending on the tradition, the practice, and the practitioner.>

I'm thinking about retreats now, so pretty timely!

I also like the IMS practice space. Right now, based on a couple of retreats, I think IMSreally isn't set up for students that our outside of the standard IMS "ciriculum" -- by that I mean: several short retreats, a few longer retreats, the 1.5 or 3 month retreat, then time spent in the Forest Refuge on self retreats. The way IMS appears to work is the short retreats are there for folks to build interest, the longer retreats are to get folks interested in the 1.5/3 month retreats, and the 1.5/3 month retreat is where the "serious" work is supposed to take place. And the Forest Refuge is for folks who have done 5 weeks of shorter retreats or the 1.5/3 month retreat.

(Folks that know IMS better can correct this, this is my view after a couple retreats.)

As a progression that stands on its own, it makes sense. It is also a very safe to run things, it allows a lot of vetting before "serious" retreats.

It may not work well for folks already hungry for "serious" retreats. It seems to depend on the retreat, but the shorter retreats seem to be toned down and jocular. There isn't much expectation that folks will have insights. It's more about providing an opportunity for stuff to come up and getting comfortable with that. So if you show up, already with a strong home practice and maybe having upped your hours sitting before retreat... well the retreat may come off as being very remedial. Plus, the early interviews tend to be group interviews and so those conversations tend to be at the lowest common denominator --- well, in my case, I didn't feel comfortable talking about my practice in front of two folks that were going through a lot of emotional stuff at the time. I let them use the time.

(cont.)

As you said, on retreat a person tends to get highly sensitized, so it's hard to know how much of my assessment is real versus projected. Plus, in this sensitized state, I tend to feel uncomfortable/guilty deviating from schedule or instructions. So although I have skipped dharma talks to spend more time in silence... I never felt totally comfortable doing that.

IMS is a wonderful place for folks getting started, though. And it doesn't seem to suffer from wierdo personality cult stuff. So it's a really safe place to go.

"
Laurel, do you think it's possible for you to hold this entire issue in limbo, essentially to reserve judgment, pending more practice? Or do you feel that you need to have an answer now to your question, which I am interpreting as, "Are detailed maps necessary on the path, are they helpful but not necessary, or are the detrimental?

"

Chris,

I'm not currently in a state of deep questioning about it, as I was while on the retreat. I do want to know what other people's experiences are, if they're willing to share, and whether other people have felt confused or conflicted. Daniel's book goes into a lengthy complaint against "mushroom culture" and I found that some, but not all, of the things he criticized were in evidence here.

One item that came up over on DhO about a month or more ago, in a thread on clinical mindfulness that Daniel initiated: a researcher named Willoughby Britton, from Brown University, is concerned about people on retreat at the big meditation centers who run into teachers inexperienced in dealing with certain kinds of problems. She's working closely with Jack Kornfield on this issue, which is good. I am personally glad I had the advice of this forum before going.

But I concur with Betawave's comments here that the weeklong IMS retreat isn't necessarily the best fit for someone like me.

"As you said, on retreat a person tends to get highly sensitized, so it's hard to know how much of my assessment is real versus projected. Plus, in this sensitized state, I tend to feel uncomfortable/guilty deviating from schedule or instructions. So although I have skipped dharma talks to spend more time in silence... I never felt totally comfortable doing that.

"

I can second that assessment: I found myself feeling like a "bad girl" for wanting to talk about maps.

I am really dying to go on the 3-month retreat, though (not until my son is out of the house, which will be a long time off) or better yet, Forest Refuge (and I'm not sure they'll let me near that place for awhile). Pa Auk Sayadaw is doing a four-month retreat at Forest Refuge as we speak; I am green with envy.

But enough of that. One other thing: I found myself feeling intensely interested in knowing what was going on with other retreatants, just to have some kind of basis for comparison (which I know is wrong-headed, but there it is). I also get the impression that there are a lot of "retreat junkies" out there that just bounce from retreat to retreat to retreat. What are they doing it for? Aren't there more entertaining ways to get away from it all? But I guess is should just MYOB--only I can begin to get a sense of the temptation, just wish I understood it better. You get your three squares a day, and all your problems are elsewhere--that part I did figure out. Maybe that's all there is to it.

"I also get the impression that there are a lot of "retreat junkies" out there that just bounce from retreat to retreat to retreat. "

I forgot about that, but I know what you mean. There seemed to be folks that were there, but not THERE. Just going through the motions, so to speak.

Before you give up on IMS, it's worth knowing that the flavor of retreat can really vary with instructors.

I've been to two retreats and they were very different. At one, people were late sitting down, fast getting up even with the bell still ringing, and the dharma talks were jocular and not really about practice. At another, folks were seated and meditative before teachers arrived, they sat until (I can't remember this exactly) either the teachers got up and left the room or the bell tone finally fell silent , and the dharma talks talked about developing concentration in the first few days and then switching to vipassana in the latter few. The latter retreat had about 75% first time yogis. Interesting, eh?

Hi JLaurelC,
I come from the Soto Zen tradition, in which traditionally there is no talk about maps whatsoever. In my case, though, I found great benefit in reading Dan Ingram's "Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha" because the maps provided a very useful framework into which I could slot various experiences and insights I'd had in Zen, as well as offering ideas for particular practices that I had never tried before. With 15 years of Zen meditation practice already behind me when I read the book, I came to this with a lot of "ammunition" so to speak.

So here's my 2 cents worth about the maps: They are useful if held lightly. They are detrimental if clung to obsessively (with a desire to "know where I stand").

The one thing that MCTB and the maps told me that was useful (and it was REALLY useful) was: don't undervalue or dismiss your experiences. Before then, I had seven years of meditation with a variety if experiences that had been experienced by other people, but because I didn't know that, I dismissed them all and always felt I was at Square One.

Since reading MCTB (this is less than 1 year ago), I am sure I have made every mistake the IMS people are (rightly) concerned about [edited to add : AND I AM STILL MAKING THEM ]: scripting, having unrealistic expectations, taking the maps too literally. Yet... aren't these mistakes part of the path? Part of the confrontation we have to have with our instinct to know, control, and manipulate?

I think that teachers who dismiss these tools might have forgotten what it was like to experience capital-D Doubt. The maps may have fllaws, but they provide something tangible for that part of the path where one feels all at sea.

I would have quit if I didnt know about the maps - on the other hand it does add some extra thoughts to note...

If people could/would really just follow a practice and do so wholeheartedly with no evidence of the big E and no maps, then we probably wouldn't be here discussing this ;p

"So here's my 2 cents worth about the maps: They are useful if held lightly. They are detrimental if clung to obsessively (with a desire to "know where I stand")."

This is really good advice.

The more I talk to others about their practice, and the further that I get along in mine, the more I see the limitations of using maps and ignoring maps. They are actually both pretty problematic. But I have to say, in the balance of things, knowing the maps, or at least one of them that matches your practice, is simply better than not knowing. There is something so liberating about finally getting your hands on a map that matches your own experience.

This is why I have such a problem with the folks who are dismissive about it, particularly when you bring it up in a student-teacher relationship, like you did Laurel. You should have had that longing to understand validated, not dismissed. It can be a powerful ally on the path, and a heavy burden too.

"However, he also told me that his tradition (Thai Forest) does not subscribe to the same maps that I was talking about, that there are all kinds of maps out there, that they all differ, and that a person can get sidetracked trying to figure things out. In other words, he was operating from a position of scepticism about conceptualizations of these experiences.
"

Yes, I think there is some truth in what he is saying. I was out 4 a drink with a friend of mine who is a well known zen-master, practiced for 45 years, 22 in monastery/commune in the US and says he is completely sure that something like enlightenment does not exist. I asked him if he would choose the same path if he could. He said he is not sure, because it is difficult to find something in life that is worth living for and his life in monastery was sometimes more diffcult than later in the relationship with his wife. He is still suffering from a bad depression from time to time, even if other think of him to be enlightened. (cont)

cont:
So this is the result of practicing for 45 years and it is reality for him. I don'tknow if there is a map that displays his path. I think its better not to wait for the big achievments.
I practice because it makes every day a better day than it would be without practice. Maybe i am influenced by my tradition of shikantaza but In a little while our lifes will be over and everything we know will be taken from us. we are so vulnerable and therefore not in the position to call for something may it be a practiceresult or whatever. How to complain to the truck that overran you. we can be glad if we are allowed to look into someones eyes, find somebody to love and thats it. sittting on a cushion will never be more than sitting on a cushion.

I don't know if thats the whole truth, but it is a reliable attitude.

Hi Laurel.
I participate in a mainstream-oriented sangha, so I'm familiar with this feeling. It's kind of like you have one foot in the mainstream world and the other in KFD. I think you do have to hold multiple perspectives lightly. However, you also have to bear in mind that others often do not hold their own perspective lightly--they're sure that disavowing discussion of the states and stages is the right, proper and traditional thing to do. They're accustomed to seeing things through the lens of psychology more than phenomenology.

Here's an article I wrote for Buddhist Geeks. It's about all of the problems being caused in the mainstream dharma world by being excessively averse to discussing the maps.

www.buddhistgeeks.com/2010/04/the-practi...a-of-mahasi-sayadaw/

The modern insight tradition comes directly from Mahasi Sayadaw's lineage. That lineage grows directly out of the Visuddhimagga--the commentaries on the suttas written down about 900 years after the death of the Buddha. The progress of insight comes directly out of the Visuddhimagga.

The modern insight tradition has largely abandoned the noting practice originally taught by Mahasi Sayadaw (and patiently and enthusiastically re-taught and re-emphasized by saintly, heart-centered teachers such as Dipa Ma on trips to the west) and the pragmatic view of enlightenment as a physio-energetic process with predictable states and stages. But tradition, believe it or not, is actually on your side. It's a specific tradition--the path of insight out of the Visuddhimagga. (Pa Auk would be the path of tranquility.) As LocoAstriaco pointed out, other lineages, such as the Thai forest tradition, focus on the suttas with little emphasis on maps. Fine. But Kenneth and his teachers didn't make this stuff up. In Burma, it's OK to talk about states and stages in something other than hushed tones.

Just to continue...

If you go to Dharmaseed and listen to some of the Dipa Ma talks, they're very uncomfortable because she's laying out traditional teachings and is continually interrupted by bursts of laughter from the audience. People seemed to think she was saying this stuff with a twinkle in her eye and just letting people know what the tradition says for the sake of it when, in fact, she was completely serious about what she was teaching. The translator actually seems uncomfortable with the laughter. So Dipa Ma is teaching the noting practice but also talking about stuff like devas and rebirth, the attainment of stream entry and other paths, and so forth. My take was that the western students listening to her just couldn't handle this traditional material. Over time they seem to have lumped it all together so that stream entry and enlightenment are as magic/mythic as tales of nagas and devas. I can see how this might happen.

Yes, let me just add that I am interested in maps and find them useful also from a scientific point of view (3rd person), for myself as a practitioner (1st person) it is easier to just let go and experience things fresh without expectations.

(A teacher must have knowledge of maps like a therapist must have of psychopathology)

"

(A teacher must have knowledge of maps like a therapist must have of psychopathology, but a patient/student must not necessarily. He must have a therapist/teacher then.)"

The problem is that many students don't have a teacher per se. They go to a local group and read the dharma magazines.
I run into dark night yogis all the time. Recently, a midwife at a meeting I was attending described this ecstatic experience she had had long before doing any meditation at all. Apparently, she got up one morning and was just locked into a non-dual state that lasted all day, then faded. She explained that she understood for the first time that "we live in heaven, but we don't even realize it."
She described delivering a baby, talking with other people, driving on the interstate all as these unbelievable experiences of blissful suchness. She had tears in her eyes and said something to the effect of "in some respects, I believe I began meditating, in part, as an attempt to reconnect with that experience."

For her, the spiritual path is probably a personal, idiosyncratic journey worthy of a thousand storylines. (We've all been there.) But Kenneth would have said "crossed the A&P. dark night. NEXT!"

Wouldn't it help such a person to know the maps, to know that this feeling of going backwards is actually OK and is progress? I think so, though I certainly recognize the shadow side of map-charting, too. Of course, some kind of balance is necessary and it's easy to get out of balance. Just the other day I had a noting session dominated more by actual curiosity than by striving, and it made such a difference. Knowing the maps (I only do a little bit, I have to confess) isn't necessarily the key to letting go, but neither is NOT knowing the maps.

Without the maps I would still be stuck in the dark night! I crossed the A&P during a Goenka 10day retreat. I talked to the teacher and told him that I may have accessed a jhana (I wasn't sure) and he said that jhanas are far too difficult to attain that I most likely did not. I had just read MTCB before this retreat and I decided to ignore the teacher and keep noting (and not the goenka style vipassana), knowing that I may have reached an important point. I feel that I made great progress and, since I knew it was coming soon, was ready for the arrival of the dark night; even though it wasn't easy.

Maps are great for the long term view of things and when you get stuck. The downside is that you can sometimes get a little over-analytical about where you are at. I do this all the time.

Here is my current philosophy:
Know the maps but don't obsess about where you are on them. Keep practicing and stay consistent. Objectively write down what you experience in your practice thread. Make adjustments as needed for optimal progress. Wash, rinse, repeat.
.
Now, if I could only follow my own advice

"Knowing the maps (I only do a little bit, I have to confess) isn't necessarily the key to letting go, but neither is NOT knowing the maps. "

I contradict my statement and claim now confidently the opposite

Yes, honestly I think it would help the midwife you described. Even if her experience is not on the map at all, it would help her to have a mental framework around her experience. And if it is on the map so much better.
In the same way it helps if you have an uncurable disease, go to the doctor and he can tell you what it is. It doesn't really help you to cure the disease but it helps you to get along with your situation. And orientation is a basic factor for keeping a motivation and setting goals.

I think I was not so aware of how many people have no access to useable information.

I would be interested in your opinion if these maps from prescientific times were wrong (f.e.what if she had manic episode) or not complete (like not displaying all possibilities we have in modern times to solve problems, like therapy, even medication etc.) and lead into the wrong direction or don't respect your individual situation. Because I see the bigger problem there. I guess reformulating and updating these maps with the scientific knowledge of our time would make them more usable. Maybe we can continue later.

Interesting story Anthony - I've had a number of jhana style A&P's and it has helped me to realize once the dark night kicks in:
'Oh - that was an A&P, which means its unobtainium and I shouldnt worry about trying to get back there. On to the next sensation!'

Hi Laurel,

A great post. I have to confess I have had some advice regarding this path which has made me pull back for a bit. I was advised that the path of insight can be dangerous to ones mental stabiltiy, without first building a sufficient base of samatha, through practices such as metta and mindfulness of breathing. Almost all my buddhist friends have agreed on this point. That is not to say this path is bad, but that depending on your general state of mind more or less preperation might be nescersary.

I would have to confess that this resonates with me and makes sense. As such I have dropped the noting for a bit and re-connected with aspects of the dharma I had lost contact with. For example spiritual friendship, going for refuge and kindness. These are all things which I feel offer help to transform the whole of ones being, whilst being practiced along side meditation and insight.

However, I would say that my meditation and concentration developed at a much more rapid pace, using the practices suggested here than I might otherwise have achieved. Although gathering myself, im sure its a practice I will re-engage with..

I have booked a 10 day retreat in september and will be studying Living with Awareness by ************** and Mindfulness of Breathing for the serious beginer by buddhadasa. I am interested to see how I get on. There are great teachings on this site, however there is more to the dharma than The Satipattana. My own instinct suggests that a broader and more gradual approach will be best for me. However I have great respect for the more Hardcore practitioners who just get it done!

"For her, the spiritual path is probably a personal, idiosyncratic journey worthy of a thousand storylines. (We've all been there.) But Kenneth would have said "crossed the A&P. dark night. NEXT!""

Beautiful! The narrative is just one huge distraction. Thanks for pointing this out!

" There are great teachings on this site, however there is more to the dharma than The Satipattana."

Kenneth recognizes this. In a recent talk, he noted that mainstream dharma already does a great job of helping people cope with the everyday world and their personal difficulties. Why not have one foot in the mainstream, and another in this more particularized area? Seems like a good balance to me. One could go back and forth in emphasis as necessary (which actually sounds like your basic plan, Ed).