New Kenneth Folk Buddhist Geeks Podcast - BG 229

BG 229: Enlightenment for the Rest of Us

"'You can perform neurosurgery on yourself.' '“ Kenneth Folk

This week's episode comes from the recent Buddhist Geeks Conference, where meditation teacher Kenneth Folk spoke about his three pillars of pragmatic dharma: 1) awakening is possible, 2) I know because it happened to me, and 3) here's how.

Kenneth cycles through each of these pillars, going deeper each time, first exploring what enlightenment is'“highlighting the difference between a moment of awakening and enlightenment as human development. He also speaks about why he claims that it happened to him, challenging a taboo in Buddhist culture to not speak about one's personal experience of enlightenment. He then speaks about attention as the common denominator of all the technologies for awakening, exploring his particular approach to training attention, what he calls the 3-speed transmission."

www.buddhistgeeks.com/2011/08/bg-229-enl...-for-the-rest-of-us/

Awesome. Thanks, Jayson!

Great talk, as always. Although having done a lot of reflecting on the subject in the last few months I do have a question. I have been listening to a few talks by Ayya Khema, on Dharmaseed which I have really enjoyed. She talks about 'The Path of Purification' - She describes the Buddhist path as the systematic purification of the heart and mind. I guess this also relates to the idea of wisdom and compassion being the two wings of an eagle (flying towards enlightenment?).

Now kenneth's model of enlightenment seems to be a very mind based path. The use of the MRI descriptions seems to support this approach. If I train myself in this way, I will restructure my mind and voila tipping point.....or unconscious competence. The development of the heart, through metta, devotion, service......seems rather a waste of time, when looked at through this lenses of what enlightenment is. Good fun maybe, but not necessary. This is also echoed in the practice logs, no one talks about (or I have seen) efforts to be kinder, more generous, live a simpler life etc

So the question, arises, If we neglect to systematically develop a kind heart, is the suggestion that either a) It will naturally spring forth as a result of our neurological shift or b) It is neither necessary for this type of awakening, or a reliable indicator of the enlightened mind?

Might we end up as a rather lopsided eagle, that fly's round in circles....... is it possible that what this is, is only half of the picture in terms of the Buddhas Enlightenment?

I can only talk from my own experience, but I think that the purification of the heart happens naturally alongside the purification of the mind as we practice these techniques.

Have you heard the phrase "As above, so below"?

Why do you feel it's important for people to openly discuss metta practice, or efforts to be kinder, or more generous? What would the benefits be if you were to know this?

Personally, none of what you're calling "development of the heart" has ever seemed like a waste of time, regardless of the lens it's viewed through. As long as you're viewing it through a lens then you're not seeing it clearly, any lens only distorts what is already there.

Kenneth's model of enlightenment works because it's simple, effective and verifiable, the models which have been presented by dogmatic interpretations of what some guy said over 2500 years ago have turned enlightenment into something unattainable by normal people like you and me. When it comes down to it, the Buddha taught the three trainings, morality, concentration and insight, and morality always, always, always comes first, regardless of whether you consider yourself into the pragmatic dharma movement or the Pure Land folks.

The eagle learns to fly using both wings, it learns directly from those who have gone before and succeeded in learning how to fly. It doesn't imitate a camel.

Cheers Tommy,

I guess the reason I mention it is because, many teachers include development of the heart as a necersarry component in the path to enlightenment. Deep down, this makes sense to me. When I have practiced noting exclusively, I feel the absence of kindness towards myself and others. Not a lot, but a bit.

From Kenneths description of what enligthenment is.........namely a default level of present awareness, as oppposed to narrative focus, then it seems that metta practice isnt going to help towards that goal any more effectively than say kasina practice. If metta naturally springs forth from noting practice, then I can see why it doesent get much air time. However my exprerience is that, just like present awareness, developing metta and bringing it into daily life, requires effort, continuity of purpose and even (as a suppport) documentation in the form of journals or logs. I would even specualte that it has its own part of the brain as well that needs to be rewired and brought in to default mode.

Sorry got to work, or would expand on this a little.

One KFD yogi, after attaining Stream Entry, said something along the lines of "before I got SE, I was a really judgmental person. Now, it's like that tendency to judge people has just faded away." We've heard this kind of thing again and again. A big reduction in suffering leads to kinder treatment of others. How is this not development of the heart?

When you tell someone, tacitly or overtly, that he has to become a perfect person in order to wake up, and you deemphasize the techniques that amount to the practice of freedom, the effect is disempowering. (This may be one of the reasons why so many Asians just regard merit-making as all they can do. The thought is "I could never be a good enough person to actually get enlightened.") When you show a person how to disidentify from, say, judging thoughts in the moment, you've empowered that person. When that person sees himself judging another or himself, stops and quietly notes "judging, judging" in the moment, he is actually "becoming a better person," sans the self-improvement project that ego often creates.
When he disidentifies in this way, he likely does so automatically because, as a diligent practitioner, he feels in the body how painful it is to get sucked into a negative, judging storyline. The practice of freedom has taught him what the brahma viharas are all about. After all, can you really practice the brahma viharas properly when you're on autopilot?
If you ask me, Kenneth is teaching "the art of happiness" every bit as much as the Dalai Lama.

Reading the transcript of the podcast, and the reference to the ships in the harbor technique, reminded me of some more neurology. That technique reminds me somewhat of stalking, in the sense of a cat poised and alert, watching and waiting for its prey. When cats get into that still, alert mode, they are in sensorimotor (SMR) rhythm, which for humans is in the range of 12-15 Hz, slightly faster than the 8-12 Hz range for alpha.

Mahamudra practice does, to me, involve the heart. When my knee hurts, when worry comes up and so on, I feel (and note) compassion toward other living beings whose lives are not perfect either. I believe Kenneth mentions this use of compassion in mahamudra practice in one of his talks.

jack

"Cheers Tommy,

I guess the reason I mention it is because, many teachers include development of the heart as a necersarry component in the path to enlightenment. Deep down, this makes sense to me. When I have practiced noting exclusively, I feel the absence of kindness towards myself and others. Not a lot, but a bit.

From Kenneths description of what enligthenment is.........namely a default level of present awareness, as oppposed to narrative focus, then it seems that metta practice isnt going to help towards that goal any more effectively than say kasina practice. If metta naturally springs forth from noting practice, then I can see why it doesent get much air time. However my exprerience is that, just like present awareness, developing metta and bringing it into daily life, requires effort, continuity of purpose and even (as a suppport) documentation in the form of journals or logs. I would even specualte that it has its own part of the brain as well that needs to be rewired and brought in to default mode.

Sorry got to work, or would expand on this a little."

Ed: After seeing through myself it is hard to have my selfish desires be the motivation for continued practice. It has naturally unfolded for me that now compassion has to be my motivation or there would simply be no point.

How many of the teachers who espouse this emphasis on development of the heart have publicly discussed meditation practice in the way you see here?

How many of them have put their necks on the line and said "Yes, I became enlightened and here's how I did it." in a way which can be tested and verified?

I don't completely disagree with what you're saying, but my own experience of these practices has demonstrated, to me at least, that development on an emotional level occurs alongside psychological/spiritual/whatever development. It's a holistic process, there is no seperation and to do so is to miss something important about the entire thing, that's just my take on it. For me, noting brought about more compassion and a deep connection with my fellow human beings by showing me in real-time how we're all intrinsically connected.

Yes, developing metta and bringing it into daily life requires effort, no doubt about it, but that effort is a joy in itself! Noting, on the other hand, requires persistence and precision which may, outwardly, seem rather cold and clinical, but its necessary due to the potentially unpleasant experiences resulting from these practices. When it comes to talking about practice, I would much rather talk technical details which lead to progress through these stages than practices involving morality which, by and large, would be incredibly dull to read about.

The most important point is to do what works for YOU, so if you feel this is beneficial then do it!
Be pragmatic and be kind to yourself.

Peace. Now.

It's one thing to say "here's a technical hardcore noting practice that will lead to enlightenment and here's proof". But it's a bit of a shame if one of the fruits of this openness about enlightenment is that people for whom a technical hardcore noting practice seems way too cold and clinical feel like the alternative is not to experience enlightenment. After all, the mainstream dharma practices may not talk about it openly. Here are people talking about it openly (Yay! There's hope!) but they insist that there's one way to do it and that's to pretend you are a hacker at a tech conference, and don't bring up your feelings please! (Damn.)

A more open discussion of the natural and wholistic arising of compassion and so forth through practice might open up access to enlightenment to a wider audience (more women? less nerdy types?) and that would be a good thing, no?

That doesn't mean one has to go do the dwelling-in-psychology ****. But acknowledging the wholeness of the practice and its positive and wonderful impact on ones life is not dwelling. It's encouraging and motivating for some people. I know I started out motivated by Ingram et al, but soon found it rather appalling and wandered off. I'm not a nerdy guy, and I'm not a cold clinical person. That said, I was damn driven and hardcore. But I wanted something more whole. There may be many others who pass through these doors and are inspired, but then don't sustain their practice because of the coldness.

Ironically if you ask around (as has been done on several threads recently) most of the advanced and awakened yogis jump right in talking about the wonderful changes in their personal lives. I just don't think sharing that has to be a negative thing. Though maybe then it would scare off the tough guys.

It is wrong to think that only a technical or hardcore noting practice can lead to awakening. That practice is a choice, not a necessity.

There.

I said it.

:-0

"
"

Ayya Khema did talk about stages of insight and stream entry and things like that. I doubt she ever said that she was enlightened.

Well, looking at the response, it seems that the general consensus is that, metta naturally springs forth from insight and doesnt require specific training.

If the development of metta, is a joy in itself then I would have thought I would quite inspiring to hear about other peoples efforts to develop it in their lives. But then it might not be everyones cup of tea.

Ed, I understand your position here (I think!) because this past summer while on retreat I got an entirely different flavor of experience, with a lot of open discussion of morality and cultivating lovingkindness in the dharma talks, minimal discussion of technique, and no discussion of maps. My teacher at home is similar, and tends to the view that there's no rush to try to get enlightenment in this lifetime, that it may be four or five lifetimes before a person gets close. I love his dharma talks because they are inspirational and full of wonderful things to think about.

What I finally concluded, though, is that I can happily involve myself in both communities and both approaches, taking what I find valuable from each. It doesn't have to be either/or. If the hardcore dharma movement leaves you cold in some ways, then find a community that gives you what you need. I can sympathize with your desire to do that. On the other hand, without this forum, I'd probably be spending my time in a rather unfocused way; I might not even be practicing with much diligence, kicking myself for it, and going to events from time to time in an effort to get inspired again. So I need both, and I suggest you think about that possibility for your own practice. And while you're at it, please post about your metta practice on your thread. I certainly will be happy to read about it.

There was a thread not too long ago about the effects of this inner work off the cushion. A few people mentioned frustration with the lack of details about people's lives other than raw meditation data. I've been fleshing out my own thread a little more in response to that; you can feel free to do the same (as can others). Please don't leave the forum; stay and contribute, and post about the things that have meaning for you.

"What I finally concluded, though, is that I can happily involve myself in both communities and both approaches, taking what I find valuable from each."

Having one foot in both cultures works just fine--so long as you have a sense of humor and hold the different perspectives lightly.
Absent that, you run the risk of constantly feeling intense doubt and irritation at one side or the other. You're rolling your eyes at the mushy Tara Brach talk one day and wishing the techy nerds would stop talking about nothing but vipassana jhanas or AF the next. It is kind of funny, isn't it?
Anyway, Kenneth has been pretty open about the need to soften the culture, talk about values and so forth, and recent posts here such as Chris's "Practicing for Life" show how seriously people on this forum actually take these issues. It's the intersection, in fact, that is really interesting.

"
It is wrong to think that only a technical or hardcore noting practice can lead to awakening. That practice is a choice, not a necessity.

There.

I said it.

:-0

"

Thank You!
Couldn't agree more!

Cheers Folks,

Some good stuff there and very encouraging.

JLaurelC - Im not really sure what my motivation is here. I have felt that the path as it is presented by Kenneth and Daniel etc is so valuable and useful that I have given members of my local sangha a bit of a hard time with questions such as; Do you really believe in Stream Entry, when are you going to get it, how are you going to achieve it, why dont you read daniels book, listen to kenneths talks, start noting etc etc Some are interested, some are indifferent, some of them question, how would I know if any of these people are what they claim to be etc.....have I met any of them, is a question I am often asked.

Basically, I feel that in light of of what is taught here, they (my local triratna sangha) are offering an incomplete template for awakening. However, in the spirit of fairness, I am applying the same thing to the Hardcore Dharma movement. Looking at what it appears to leave out. At first I was so taken with the 'good news' of enlightenment is possible, that I overlooked some of these absences. No doubt much of Buddhist practice, is simply a support for insight practice. However I think if you strip it down too far, there is danger of losing the spirit of the thing and you end up with this very technical, left brain, approach.

(cont)

The sort of thing I am talking about is going for refuge, devotional practices, reflection on conditionality, 4 Noble truths, right livelihood, even looking at the archetypal Buddhas and that sort of thing. Yes these things might only be supports, but they also chip away at the sense of self. Instead of destroying the narrative focus, they employ this part of the brain as a powerful tool in the task.

The reason I want a unified path of practice, as opposed to dipping in and out of specialist groups, is that I feel both groups are weakened by what they leave out. The Buddha taught all this stuff, and used skillful means to adapt his understandings to the different levels of his listeners. He didn't just teach 4 foundations and noting. Granted the power of this teaching was obviously lost in translation and its a real gift to have them brought to life again....but that doesn't mean the other stuff is just baggage.

I think the pragmatic strategy of pulling in support from other traditions is probably the simplest way - and clearly several people here are doing just that. I think it can cause its own difficulties - frustration with contradictions or incongruent beliefs (such as Ed is describing), for example. In my own practice I at times attended, for example, a Tendai buddhist center where although much of the elaborate ritual was about enlightenment, it was rarely talked about openly. I asked one priest and he said he thought westerners were so driven and goal oriented, it was a good balance for them to ease up and just learn to be in the moment, and let the sangha be a place where they don't have to be competitive and aggressive. He also said enlightenment was such a gradual and ongoing process it was deceptive to draw a line and say "that's the goal you have to reach" especially if the next phrase was going to be "or you are a failure". That was not official opinion, just his own.

In any case, nonetheless, I found the people fun, the rituals very beautiful, and the teachings often relevant. One can be taught by a mote of dust, a tree in the forest, ones car breaking down or crabby supermarket clerk - there is something to learn from every moment. So I took it with that kind of attitude. I liked the big group dinners, too.

I did similarly with other traditions. I just see in a couple of friends who are beginners that they can end up with dogma overload, and not be good at sorting out what's useful and what's not.

" The sort of thing I am talking about is going for refuge, devotional practices, reflection on conditionality, 4 Noble truths, right livelihood, even looking at the archetypal Buddhas and that sort of thing. Yes these things might only be supports, but they also chip away at the sense of self. Instead of destroying the narrative focus, they employ this part of the brain as a powerful tool in the task.

The reason I want a unified path of practice, as opposed to dipping in and out of specialist groups, is that I feel both groups are weakened by what they leave out. The Buddha taught all this stuff, and used skillful means to adapt his understandings to the different levels of his listeners. He didn't just teach 4 foundations and noting. Granted the power of this teaching was obviously lost in translation and its a real gift to have them brought to life again....but that doesn't mean the other stuff is just baggage."

Nicely said, Ed.

" The sort of thing I am talking about is going for refuge, devotional practices, reflection on conditionality, 4 Noble truths, right livelihood, even looking at the archetypal Buddhas and that sort of thing. Yes these things might only be supports, but they also chip away at the sense of self. Instead of destroying the narrative focus, they employ this part of the brain as a powerful tool in the task.
"

I spent 8 years in the Goenka tradition observing the 5 sila meticulously, practicing a lot of metta after every hour sitting 2 times every day, maybe more, sat course after course and served many more. Read and read a lot of Buddhist material. Was very devoted, bowed three times every time I sat, chanted pali before I meditated, took refuge three times in pali every time I sat chanted usually the mangala sutta by heart in pali, went to India to study pali where Goenka lived at the time, purified my mind to a great degree, became a monk for very short stint in Burma, lived like a devoted lay buddhist for a long time dressed in white indian cotton clothes and meditation shawl draped around my body. Theravadan buddhism and all the associated practices was the base from which I jumped. It conditioned the way the mind took on the practices and motivated drive that ultimately led to fast progress through the technical paths, easy access to jhanas/nanas, heightened awareness of the subtler realities of mind and body. I don't think I'd be where I am currently without not having done all the above.

I was expecting a longer discussion on three speed transmission -- but rather than being disappointed, I was suprised how much I liked this talk. Simple, straightforward... and I like how it ended on the note that the room was full of people that knew how to teach this.

Did others at BG2011 echo that there was a tipping point and it was possible to get there? (And any other "confessions" of having reached that tipping point?)

"
It is wrong to think that only a technical or hardcore noting practice can lead to awakening. That practice is a choice, not a necessity.

There.

I said it.

:-0

"

Oh no he didn't!

I totally agree - awakening is a human thing and it can happen to people in all kinds of traditions and with a lot of different methods.

The problem is that people can get into the trap of thinking that being something (being a Buddhist, being "nice", being "good", etc) is the same as doing something. And so they really don't have a practice per se, just a view. This is the trap that A LOT of people fall into.

That being said, hardcore noting is what worked for me, along with a good strong dose of metta practice. Without cultivating some caring and warmth toward myself, the rougher stages of insight might have been intolerable, and I might not have given myself that critical last little bit of permission to wake up to my life if I was at war with it... IMHO metta is a crucial part of the path. Especially if you are the type of person who is grouchy or self-critical.

"Mahamudra practice does, to me, involve the heart. When my knee hurts, when worry comes up and so on, I feel (and note) compassion toward other living beings whose lives are not perfect either. I believe Kenneth mentions this use of compassion in mahamudra practice in one of his talks.

jack"

Mahamudra metta practice:

alohadharma.wordpress.com/loving-kindness-meditation/