Design and the Language of AF

This thread is not intended to discuss AF practices, which are obviously important to some people, but rather the design of the language used.

I have been thinking a lot about the path of awakening and design theory lately. Basically, the best design meets people exactly where they are with the conceptual models they already have. With the exception of some jargon such as "jhana", "nana", etc. Kenneth has done a fantastic job of Design in his teaching. Concepts such as embeddedness, objectification, noting and the insistence on concrete experiential reports all work really well.

I think part of our collective role in this group is to promote good Design with our language and practices so that these forums can be beneficial for the widest audience of awakening people as possible.

For me, personally, the Actual Freedom language is far too metaphorical, fantastical, and I interpret the linguistic aesthetic to be, frankly, creepy. To be concrete, I have no clue, in my experience, what these words really mean: "apperception, felicity, sensuousness, affect, actual". Ideas like "Excellent Experiences" and "Pure Consciousness Experiences" seem to raise more questions than they resolve and thus diminish our natural right to be awake in this moment. Right _now_ I have a happiness that does not depend on conditions, but if I walk around asking "Oh crud, am I experiencing enough wonder?", then I've obviously lost it.

One could point out that *my* emotional reaction to these words is purely subjective and *my* problem since *I* am contracting an emotional state around them. However, there remains the objective fact that my emotional reaction to this language is due to it not meeting me where I am. The extent to which my emotional reaction is shared by others is an objective measure of the poor quality of Design in AF language.

(contd..)

Again - my intent is not to bash the *practices* of AF at all - guys like Nikolai have obviously gotten exactly what they wanted from it. Please treat my opinion and emotional reaction as just one small data point.

I just want to promote the importance of good design and hear how others in this community feel that we can best serve the wider audience of awakening people.

Thanks,

-Justin

If I could reply more broadly, I think this language issue applies to many traditions. If I pick up a hardcore book on Tibetan Buddhism or Kabbalah, my brain ties itself in a knot trying to comprehend the bizarre technical language. Much as it may point to Truth (and to aspects of Truth that are totally familiar to me) I have no bloody idea what the heck they are talking about. The same is true if I try to read some works of philosophy or physics. Now a person schooled in those subjects for years may find the complexity, geekiness and highly technical vocab to be accurate, profound and transformative of their understanding of reality.

The same, I might say, pushed me away from some aspects of hardcore dharma, which initially was a huge incentive and motivation to my practice. I've never been in a band. I have no idea what 40Hz is. I don't count vibrations per second. I have done noting practice extensively, and seen things break down into pulses and vibrations, but there came a point when reading hardcore dharma stuff felt like I was at a hackers conference listening to people talking about coding their own operating system: right over my head.

So I think the Design that works for each individual is going to be very different. There are Designs that reach a broader audience, and Designs that suit niche audiences. From what I've read about AF, for me it tends to fall into the "appeals to a niche audience" category for exactly the reasons you describe. The language is strange, stilted and cold, to me, though in some of the conversations on this forum I see glimpses that one can use other language to point to similar things, and when that happens, it makes more sense. But, I think, there's no harm in there being many ways to talk about the same thing. Some ways will just be obscure and hard to understand for more people than others.

Prelude: I don't mean to bash anyone or incite anything, here... so if it is taken in that way, apologies! The aim of this post is to help seal the rift between 'AF' and 'insight' or whatnot, as it doesn't seem useful.

It does seem like the presentation of AF has caused lots of turmoil. Whether that was due more to the particular language (meaning it could have been presented in a way which would have had at least its experiential results, if not its ideas, taken more seriously[1]) or to the attachments of those to whom it was presented (meaning any presentation of its ideas would have been met with resistance), I'm not sure.. and I'm not sure it matters. But it is interesting that, for example, I think Antero reported he just wasn't interested in 'AF practice' a few weeks/a month ago, yet he seems to have reached a place that might be that very one (without doing 'AF practice' that is). Needless to say, nirvana is beyond concepts... however you get there, you get there. I doubt there are two or more 'nirvanas' (i.e. end goals of developmental enlightenment), and the Buddha said the very same thing (e.g. with phrases like (paraphrasing): 'and there is no release greater than this').

[1] for example, by linking to a Buddhist essay such as www.thezensite.com/ZenTeachings/Miscella..._seals_of_dharma.pdf , which in its 2nd point indicates "all emotions are painful", taking care to include love in the very second paragraph... which was a point of contention on a few threads here.

What I do think is useful is separating the AF attainment from the particular language actualists use to describe it... once what actualism actually is is understood as not an insidious assault or an evangelical enterprise, but simply as a pragmatic practice to end suffering, with AF being not a diabolical dead-end but release from said suffering, then one could more readily look at that particular language and see just what it's pointing to, instead of being turned away[2], perhaps using its ideas to inform other practices, like Nick did with the actualizing jhana approach.

One useful thing I think has resulted from the introduction of Richard's writing to the world is that it has resulted in a few people in the pragmatic dharma community becoming totally released... which people could then look at Buddhist suttas and writing in a different way than Richard did (who understood it as just another 'spiritual' practice) and to tease out what I think was the actual meaning of the Buddha's words... thus helping those with a more Buddhist tint see what the Buddha actually meant, and leading to release via different approaches (like the jhana approach that Nick + Owen used to be released)... in my humble opinion/worldview, Actualism has helped revived Buddhism.

[2] this is a common progression of reactions to the AF site (myself included): this is crazy! he doesn't know what he's talking about. he doesn't understand the world. he doesn't understand emotions. oh wait... hmm... hmm.... maybe... ah! that's interesting. some of it makes sense. hmm actually a lot of it makes sense... oh it all makes sense! that's actually quite useful.

So, to sum up: if the AF language doesn't work for you, then try something else[3]... I have a feeling more and more approaches will be discovered as the months + years go by, with more and more of us being released... what a wonderful time to be alive indeed!

[3] e.g. Owen's or Nick's or Antero's approaches.

orasis, about you not understanding certain actualist terms, Owen's post #518 might be useful:

"aperception --- bare attention
felicity

---

joy or rapture (piti)
actual world .... reality as it is (yatha bhuta)
pure intent ..... right intention
sensiousness .... right mindfulness"

kennethfolkdharma.wetpaint.com/thread/41...et=500&maxResults=20

"... I have a feeling more and more approaches will be discovered..."

I'm sorry to do this but I think you really mean to say "rediscovered," don't you? Does anyone believe any of this is really new? To keep this in the language of design and marketing, these practices, all of them, have been rediscovered many, many times over the course of human history and re-packaged and re-marketed over and over and over again so that they fit into the predominant culture of a certain time, or fit well into a certain group, broad or narrow.

WARNING! Attempt at humour.

Possible terminological changes:

Apperception

* D.O. cutting bare awareness. The type of awareness that cuts the sequence of dependent origination
* Super vipassana (vi=intensifier, passana=seeing)
* Vi-vi-vipassana
* The magnifying glass
* base level cognition (base level meaning the point of contact of an object with a sense door)
* base level awareness
* base contact awareness (with sense doors and objects)
* The wisdom eye
* The DO sequence cutter
* Ignorance blaster
* Microscope eyes

PCE

* Complete cessation of becoming while conscious
* Becoming-free (temporary)
* possible Ayya Kema path and fruition moment/s
* S.B.D.M (subdued becoming direct mode)

Excellent Experience

* TOSOS (Thinned out sense of 'selfing')
* TOSOB (Thinned out state of becoming)
* HRMOB (Highly refined mode of becoming)
* (ACAYCGTBFWBBF) As close as you can get to becoming-free without it becoming becoming-free.

Actuality

* Suchness


Oof! Difficult stuff.

"
"... I have a feeling more and more approaches will be discovered..."

I'm sorry to do this but I think you really mean to say "rediscovered," don't you? Does anyone believe any of this is really new? To keep this in the language of design and marketing, these practices, all of them, have been rediscovered many, many times over the course of human history and re-packaged and re-marketed over and over and over again so that they fit into the predominant culture of a certain time, or fit well into a certain group, broad or narrow.

"

Well, as the end state is the same (IMO), that is being re-discovered. But the actualist approach seems pretty different than anything found in the suttas, which stress using jhana to stabilize 'being' instead of using sensuality (which one is cut off from in the very 1st jhana - 'quite withdrawn from sensuality') skillfully (e.g. via felicity, sensuousness).

That being said, since the internet wasn't around back in the day, we have no idea what those homeless monk dudes chatted about all day... so perhaps they did find all sorts of ways to do it including more actualist-like approaches.

Practically speaking, it doesn't matter... the end of suffering is the end of suffering, however you get there, and the more ways the better.

You do offer a good reason why one might take up a more actualist-like approach instead of a more buddhist one, in that it might fit a non-accomplished practitioner's western culture and mindset more easily than Buddhism.

And you say re-packaged, but look at what people did with Buddhism, not taking it all the way to10-fetter arahat, and people no longer talking openly about attainments (vs. the suttas where it was very common place) and not even thinking it's possible in this lifetime anymore. That's not just a re-packaging, that's a significant loss of meaning.

"Well, as the end state is the same (IMO), that is being re-discovered. But the actualist approach seems pretty different than anything found in the suttas, which stress using jhana to stabilize 'being' instead of using sensuality (which one is cut off from in the very 1st jhana - 'quite withdrawn from sensuality') skillfully (e.g. via felicity, sensuousness).

That being said, since the internet wasn't around back in the day, we have no idea what those homeless monk dudes chatted about all day... so perhaps they did find all sorts of ways to do it including more actualist-like approaches.

Practically speaking, it doesn't matter... the end of suffering is the end of suffering, however you get there, and the more ways the better. "

Are you equating sensuousness and sensuality? I am assuming sensuality refers to sensual desire which is one of the 5 hinderances. In my experience, the cultivation of a highly refined sense of wellbeing (HRSOWB also known as felicity) led to the subduing of those 5 hinderances. It acted just like the jhanas do. Sensuousness is just being aware of the point of contact of an object and its corresponding sense door (eyes (visual), ears (sound), tongue (taste), body (touch), nose (smells), mind (thoughts)).

Both felicity and jhana are perfect jumping boards to practicing the Bahiya sutta instructions.

"Are you equating sensuousness and sensuality? I am assuming sensuality refers to sensual desire which is one of the 5 hinderances. In my experience, the cultivation of a highly refined sense of wellbeing (HRSOWB also known as felicity) led to the subduing of those 5 hinderances. It acted just like the jhanas do. "

Ah yes, my mistake... doh! What I meant to say was, the Buddha listed 3 forms of becoming (got that from the paradox of becoming essay): sensual-becoming (no jhana), form-becoming (rupa jhana), and formless-becoming (arupa jhana). it seems like the suttas focus on overcoming the 1st in favor of stabilizing 'being' in the 2nd + 3rd, while actualism focuses on stabilizing 'being' in the 1st - no rupa jhanas seem to appear in the actualist practice. though, seeing how much formless jhanas are tied with actuality, perhaps that isn't entirely accurate...

"
"... I have a feeling more and more approaches will be discovered..."

I'm sorry to do this but I think you really mean to say "rediscovered," don't you? Does anyone believe any of this is really new? To keep this in the language of design and marketing, these practices, all of them, have been rediscovered many, many times over the course of human history and re-packaged and re-marketed over and over and over again so that they fit into the predominant culture of a certain time, or fit well into a certain group, broad or narrow.

"

Seconded. Talked to a rather senior Rinzai student about all this recently. Once we got through the language differences she was totally non-suprised, even about the emotion issue. I got some really good practice pointers from her when I was in what AF would refer to as a virtual freedom.

"... redacted ..."

... redacted ...

Some quick thoughts:
I don't think we should over-relativize this issue. There are actually better and worse ways to describe a given practice, in more ways than one. One major point is that the AF language seems specifically and intentionally alien to the "spiritual traditions" (180 degrees opposed to, et cetera). This seems to go for both the terms used and the overall worldview, in my limited experience with reading the site.
AF terminology further seems to specifically avoid the use of terms that could be understood in an everyday way. While this tends to clarify things once on is inside the tradition, "bridges of understanding" are also lost in this way.
To add to this, the website seems, at first impression, like some sort of mad/cultish ramblings. This perception seems like a very very common *first impression*.
The logical consequence of this would seem to a community generally seperated from larger society, which can't understand what is being talked about, and when referred to the website, runs away in horror. Further, it would seem to be a tradition specifically seperate from and hard to integrate with the "spiritual" traditions, something the encounter with pragmatic dharma would tend to verify.

So, while the language seems to hit home with some people, i don't think we can say it is just a question of taste. I suspect there are other problematic elements of the language and resultant culture in AF (as in pragmatic dharma, to a lesser degree, imo). But let's see what you say to what i've already written.

Nikolai: Actually, that was a pretty useful stab at clarifying - thank you.

Chris: I agree with you 100% and I believe that the concepts and packaging are totally malleable is a good thing. The book "Mindfulness in Plain English" is by far the best packaging I have seen of a lot of the basic and profound concepts. Kenneth's packaging does a great job of filling in even more gaps. Whereever there are fuzzy areas in people's descriptions of their practices I think we can do even better.

In re Richard and Actual Freedom:

I suspect a human being can be deeply and profoundly awake and yet as looney as Daffy Duck and as immature as a five year old. I suspect a human being can be buried deep in a samsaric existence and yet to all outside appearances be as deeply awakened as the first person I mentioned and a truly responsible, mature adult.

Think about it.

villum sez: "There are actually better and worse ways to describe a given practice, in more ways than one." - Yes, I agree completely.

"
In re Richard and Actual Freedom:

I suspect a human being can be deeply and profoundly awake and yet as looney as Daffy Duck and as immature as a five year old. I suspect a human being can be buried deep in a samsaric existence and yet to all outside appearances be as deeply awakened as the first person I mentioned and a truly responsible, mature adult.

Think about it.

"

Well, there you are. I suspect a large part of my own reaction to (or against) AF has to do with personal reactions to individuals. Not particularly mature on my part, I freely admit, but I'm not enlightened yet, so I'm still grasping at my little egotistical claim to whatever. But the conversation on here over the past couple of months has opened things up considerably, mainly thanks to Nikolai. And I recognize my egotistical grasping for what it is. There are certain people, and certain ways of saying things, that make me "comfortable," whereas certain other individuals do not.

I'll say something else: I was (and to an extent remain) scared to death over the AF focus on the total, permanent elimination of all emotion. People since last June have rightly pointed out parallels to Buddhist enlightenment, but it's hard for someone beginning a practice to take in all at once. I suspect some of us (me at least) begin practice because we're suffering and want to stop suffering, then we panic when we think our whole world may be coming to an end. Well, duh! But it has to unfold gradually, over time, work itself out. Others may be more willing to jump right in. In case you're wondering, I get into a swimming pool inch by suffering inch also

HRMOB

hahahaha

"Well, there you are. I suspect a large part of my own reaction to (or against) AF has to do with personal reactions to individuals. Not particularly mature on my part, I freely admit, but I'm not enlightened yet, so I'm still grasping at my little egotistical claim to whatever. But the conversation on here over the past couple of months has opened things up considerably, mainly thanks to Nikolai. And I recognize my egotistical grasping for what it is. There are certain people, and certain ways of saying things, that make me "comfortable," whereas certain other individuals do not.

I'll say something else: I was (and to an extent remain) scared to death over the AF focus on the total, permanent elimination of all emotion. People since last June have rightly pointed out parallels to Buddhist enlightenment, but it's hard for someone beginning a practice to take in all at once. I suspect some of us (me at least) begin practice because we're suffering and want to stop suffering, then we panic when we think our whole world may be coming to an end. Well, duh! But it has to unfold gradually, over time, work itself out. Others may be more willing to jump right in. In case you're wondering, I get into a swimming pool inch by suffering inch also "

"permanent elimination of all emotion...it's hard for someone beginning a practice to take in all at once."

No kidding. And this is after obliterating the self. Sounds like fun eh? Anyone have fear arising?

Or wait, is this just more language and concepts? Is this self obliterated or is there just a realization that everything is phenomena? Are emotions destroyed or are they interpreted more finely as information-carrying vibrations in the body? If some of those vibrations were self-oriented do they need to continue transmitting? Is Owen now a robot made out of meat or has part of the unfolding universe become aware of itself?

"I'll say something else: I was (and to an extent remain) scared to death over the AF focus on the total, permanent elimination of all emotion. People since last June have rightly pointed out parallels to Buddhist enlightenment, but it's hard for someone beginning a practice to take in all at once. I suspect some of us (me at least) begin practice because we're suffering and want to stop suffering, then we panic when we think our whole world may be coming to an end. Well, duh! But it has to unfold gradually, over time, work itself out. Others may be more willing to jump right in. In case you're wondering, I get into a swimming pool inch by suffering inch also "

When reflecting on stuff like this, it's important to keep in mind that nothing will go away unless 'you' are willing to let it go away. neither stream entry[1] nor an emotion[2] nor AF[3]. that is the nature of attachment. so you have nothing to worry about - nothing will happen without 'you' letting it. one step at a time is the right approach as it's the only way to do it!

[1] that's what equanimity nyana is about: you become ok with letting all that dark night stuff just happen without 'me' interfering in it. as you get to high equanimity you see that any attempt for 'me' to do anything just causes suffering. then the mind sets up and.. boom! stream entry happens of its own accord
[2] if you are angry and see no reason to stop being angry, and like being angry, guess what? you will be angry! i thought anger would be an easy one to talk about dropping, with my friends, but even that one they are attached to! much less love (i don't want to get into it here but the key to that one is realizing that the alternative to love and not-love is far more intimate than love can be)...
[3] 'you' have to be totally ok with it happening for it to happen

I just ran across this way back in Owen's journal. This is the kind of stuff that is conceptually concrete, useful, and obviously effective:

"Quick reminder, if you can see it, it isn't you. If you can see enough things that are not you, you will become enlightened.

Quit with the philosophy, quit wandering around from practice to practice and just NOTE! This is too good not to experience. It is hard to do, but it is simple and if you can be dumb enough to just follow directions, you can do it! GET IT DONE! WAKE UP!"

The challenge is a classic one. When something is lost and misunderstood and then rediscovered do you: 1) try to keep the existing syntax and try to address the misunderstanding by communicating the meaning better, or 2) invent new syntax, untainted by past misunderstanding. Either approach is valid.

There is another saying that comes to mind: the priests argue but the monks agree.

Let's all get this done (at a pace and to the extent we are inspired). Teamsport!


(p.s. Owen, I was happy to see you bring back the "teamsport" expression on your practice thread!)

"When reflecting on stuff like this, it's important to keep in mind that nothing will go away unless 'you' are willing to let it go away. neither stream entry[1] nor an emotion[2] nor AF[3]. that is the nature of attachment. so you have nothing to worry about - nothing will happen without 'you' letting it. one step at a time is the right approach as it's the only way to do it!
"

Thanks for this reminder. On Saturday I was almost in tears, asking the teacher at our local sangha, "Will I still love music?" and he looked at me patiently and said, "You don't have to do this, you know." A lightbulb went off--off course I don't! But my way of loving music involves craving, clinging, and then a whole lot of nasty aversive reactions in the wake of that. So, I am certainly willing to let that go away.

Hi Laurel,

I love music! Radiohead is my favourite band. I am not as obsessive at listening to music every waking moment like before but I sure can sing a song I know when it comes on the radio. I am not looking for the next best tune, but damn I can appreciate whatever has hit the eardrum.

I also like watching HBO shows. Just finished a marathon run of the entire 5 seasons of The Wire. Omar is king! I am now watching and thoroughly enjoying Curb Your Enthusiasm. I laugh my head off at this show. I am also taking salsa lessons every week with my wife and love it. We are putting on a show in December so we are preparing for it. Got a huge routine to learn from now to then.

I enjoy reading comics. I have been reading the latest from The Walking Dead. Awesome zombie comic which has been made into another HBO series, of which I am patiently awaiting the second season. I enjoy all of this without craving nor aversion. I also have no sense of self.

(real actual smile)

Nick