Devotion and awakening

For the folks who are engaged with Christian practice to some degree I HIGHLY recommend an amazing book about awakening by a Belgian Carmelite monk. It's very short. The guy is Wilfred Stinissen and the title is "Into Your Hands, Father". He talks about the utter surrender of the ego, letting go of all attachments, and so on in a very clear way. It's one of the few modern books on Christian Mysticism that is aimed above the beginner's level and (I thought) very relevant for anyone in advanced stages or even post awakening.

"Some level of engagement with the Buddha (whether as a supernatural, historical or inspirational figure), some level of engagement with the traditional Buddhist texts (as guidance, teaching material, study material, etc.), and some level of method from Buddhist traditions, in combination, would probably be a bare minimum. How many here would say "I'm a Buddhist" versus "I meditate" or "I meditate using some techniques based loosely on Buddhist methods"?"

I agree, giragirasol. I don't think it is important whether I think of myself as a Buddhist. But, I do follow all three of your criterian. The 8-Fold Path is my model and I don't see anything there about devotion.

I was raised Lutheran and left because I thought that church at that time was secular. It was entirely about community and devotion but had no sense of the sacred, becoming better human beings or of doing good in the world. I have seen that same orientation in the local Thai and Sri Lankan Buddhist centers not that I think that is wrong.

I read that article as saying meditation orientated Western Buddhists are lonely, isolated people without community. I am not lonely or isolated. I am a member of many communities. Some are social. Some are orientated toward cultivating a sense of the sacred. Some are about psychological sharing. Some are intellectual. Some are orientated at bhavana, mental cultivation through meditation. I would feel limited if my communities only included Buddhist ones.
jack

It does seem (as Loco hinted above) that there are different implications to the word "devotion." Or, that is, a person can do a devotional practice (prayer or ritual offerings to deity/ies) because it's what they do (rote habit, custom, tradition, culture), or because it's aspirational (they hope some result such as good luck, positive outcomes, spiritual deepening) might happen if they do it), or as an affirmation (a way of enacting the reverence and awe they have discovered through their spiritual practice, for example). Thoughts?

And as an icon, that is pointing one toward something ineffable, no-thing. I think that can be a practice in itself.

jack

*Dhammanerd alert!

I think if one is not devoted to the objective of awakening in this very lifetime (eg. to be fully free of mental dissatisfaction), then one isn't going to get that far in my opinion.

One may develop and cultivate qualities that do serve this ultimate purpose, but without turning one's whole being towards that goal, devoting one's whole being, I think one is simply trimming the leaves as opposed to going directly for the roots. And this 'turning one's whole being' may look different from person to person. One is inspired to light candles and place them at the (statue of) Buddha's feet. Another may visit the local temple consistently to give alms to monks. One may sit at home in their pajamas on the bed with a pile of dhamma books to the side, and delve deep within.

Devotion to Buddha as a historical, religious or cosmic image within the mind can provide the constant push to keep going if it is combined with the devotion to the objective of awakening in this very life. Devotion to the community or sangha can also fuel this same motivation. Though for this goal, devotion to Dhamma, the truth of one's own experience, is what should always take centre stage. This is a devotion that should not be set aside if awakening is the goal. The others are in a sense playing to specific self narratives, a specific personality motivated by such things.

Paraphrasing and adding lib to Goenkaji, one is not taking refuge in the historical Buddha, but in one's own innate possibility of awakening, the quality of Buddha. One is not taking refuge in awakened community (sangha), but in the quality of that awakening. And Dhamma,the realizing of the path to awakening, is taking refuge in one's experience of the wisdom born of practice.

What do they all have in common? A 'devotion' to awakening, the quality and the realising of it.

"*Dhammanerd alert!
"

Can't have been that nerdy, as I actually understood it.

"
Grace may be part of how the universe is but it is best understood as a way to act in the world.

"

The grace I'm referring to has nothing to with action.

Pure Land Buddhism, as I understand it, is the devotional arm of Buddhism; contemplative practices like meditation are not emphasized at all. So, it should be no surprise that Darmavidya David Brazier, "head of the Amida Order, an international Pure Land community based in Europe," criticizes meditation and advocates devotion.

The fact that this thread has drawn so much interest, though, must mean that Brazier has something for us; he has struck a nerve in our community because we intuitively recognize that meditation and even awakening, by themselves, aren't enough. Who cares how enlightened I am if my emotional life is shallow, my relationships are dysfunctional, and my only concern is for myself? For me, the real value of David Brazier's article is the emphasis on community as part of a life well-lived. Through community, I can learn to be a complete human being.

As cmarti pointed out upthread, pragmatic dharma is focused on what works. I emphasize meditation practice because it helps people through a developmental process that we call awakening or enlightenment. If it turns out that devotion works better to this end, I will instantly shift my emphasis to devotion and encourage everybody to meditate less. For better or worse, though, I don't see any evidence for that. In fact, it isn't even close. As Brazier points out, Asia is overflowing with cultural Buddhists. So what? Cultural Buddhism is fine, probably no better and no worse than cultural Christianity. Not interesting, IMHO. What interests me about Buddhism is that it gives us technologies for awakening. And meditation works to that end. This is why we can even talk about secular meditation; it works in verifiable ways. Devotion is beautiful and valuable, but may or may not lead to awakening. It is good to be clear.

As part of a recipe for a life well-lived, devotion may have its place, perhaps a distant third behind meditation and community.

"One more thought -- I have always liked the word "pragmatic" as applied to dharma. But in my mind the word pragmatic means "what is effective, what works." "

Seconded. Devotion to a historical Buddha, a cosmic Buddha, some high ideal about the end of suffering, some image in the mind's eye of whatever triggering the motivation to move in the direction of awakening as defined by each person. Whatever works. This is the essence of pragmatic.

Devotional behaviour of my own:

* devoted 2 years all up to living in vipassana retreat centres, devoting time working, constructing, cooking, serving and meditating course after course which all led to cultivating conducive mental qualities.
* devoted 6 months to studying pali, pali chanting, cleaning Goenka's place of residence and meditating in the pagoda cells further cultivating conducive mental qualities.
* became extremely devoted to the 3 gems and went on pilgrimage a few times and meditated at powerfully motivating places in India, Nepal and Myanmar, and took robes for a very short period, cultivating even more of the same conducive mental qualities.
* became so devoted, I felt tremendous joy at visiting monks while at university to give alms and teach English to and meditate with.
* became so devoted, I would chant pali suttas before and after meditating an hour at a time.
* became so devoted, it became the main driving passion in my life to the detriment of cultivating any sort of 'career' and led to heaps more meditating.
* became so devoted to seeing the end of my own suffering due to all the mentioned past conditioning, I insisted on seeing what lay further ahead than what was professed by the pragmatic crowd only a number of years ago concerning what was possible.

What does such devotional behaviour have in common? It all led to meditating a hell of a lot and continued progress.

"
What does such devotional behaviour have in common? It all led to meditating a hell of a lot and continued progress."

My point is it all led to 'meditating a hell of a lot' and thus 'continued progress' and cultivation of 'conducive mental qualities' that led to discernment while meditating. One's own path may not entail all those 'devotional' like activities I did myself but whatever gets you to 'meditate a hell of a lot' and 'continue to progress' is a good thing.

Nick

"For me, the real value of David Brazier's article is the emphasis on community as part of a life well-lived. Through community, I can learn to be a complete human being."

For those interested in the more geeky side of community, check out the psychological take on community with the McMillan and Chavis theory:

www.wright-house.com/psychology/sense-of-community.html

Outside of meditation, this is is the topic that captivates me most and I can get pretty obsessive about community. The McMillan and Chavis theory was the topic of my dissertation.

As I said before, I love community, that is why I worked to become a community psychologist, but the author's concept of a community based on devotional practice, that de-emphasizes meditation practice, just doesn't sit right with me.

"The roots of this community are in MCTB and Dan Ingram's critique of traditional Buddhism as practiced at places like IMS." -cmarti

Actually, the roots of this community are in the teachings of Bill Hamilton. After my first 3-month retreat at Insight Meditation Society in 1991, Bill quipped, "They treated you like a mushroom... kept you in the dark and fed you ****." Then Bill proceeded to explain to me, in very clear terms, the stages I had gone through during the retreat, none of which my IMS teachers had seen fit to mention.

This was a remarkable moment for me, a rude awakening. I pondered this for a long time, came to think of it as the "mushroom effect," and later shared the concept with my good friend and erstwhile protege Daniel Ingram, who published it many years later in MCTB with vague and misleading attribution (page 127 of the Aeon Books print copy).

I'm trying to learn to be more honest about my own narcissistic injury at being systematically written out of history by my closest friend of many years.

Thank you, Kenneth, for coming out with the true story of how "the Mushroom Effect" idea originated and was propagated.

Also, of course, it's good to hear about your experience with IMS and the clarification and explanations provided by Bill Hamilton.

One more thing from me, for now, about devotion: Rather than being a substitute for meditation, or vice versa, I assert that devotion, or love, is an essential ingredient for our growth, when properly understood. Someone may say that he or she "loves" a book or somesuch, but no one takes that expression to be equivalent to the love one feels for a Realizer (living or dead). Similarly, dedication to chanting or service is not the same as devotion by this definition. Love, or devotion, is all about relationship. And relationship is the opposite of egoic contraction upon an illusory self. One can attain to fantastic degrees of concentration and access to pure states of awareness without devotion. But can that take us "all the way"?

In mundane life, what do people seek more than anything else, but relationship, love? This is what impels us. Bring that deep urge into the realm of spiritual practice and it can take us beyond where we might otherwise dare to go. To get a feeling for this, simply read the words of (someone I rarely quote with approval), Saul of Tarsus, also known as St Paul in his Letter to the Corinthians 12:31- 13:8. Notice the feelings his sentiments evoke. Now imagine how those feelings can move one's energies and attention.

Love,
Mike "Gozen"

"Rather than being a substitute for meditation, or vice versa, I assert that devotion, or love, is an essential ingredient for our growth... Love, or devotion, is all about relationship." -Gozen

Oh, yes, I like this very much! It has occurred to me lately that all the social emotions, e.g., love, hate, shame, compassion, envy, sympathetic joy, resentment, caring, nurturing, and all the rest, can only exist in relationship. They are exclusively 2nd person phenomena. In order to feel love, there must be someone to love. We can also love ourselves by splitting into an "I" who loves and a "me" who is loved. This love for others and for ourselves is normal and healthy. It's one of the most beautiful experiences a human can have. And it's all about relationship.

Unfortunately, one of the ways we can get into trouble as contemplatives, especially Buddhists, is to overemphasize another perspective: the no-self. Also normal and healthy, the no-self is the highest ideal of some contemplative schools. Old school Theravada is almost exclusively about attaining this ideal, with everything else a means to that end. The Buddha himself was said to exemplify this ideal by leaving his wife, child, (and sangha!) to meditate alone in the forest. The Pali Buddha, however, is old news. Most of us have no desire to abandon our families or our lives in the pursuit of awakening. For us, in our culture, in the 21st century, old school Buddhism isn't good enough. Our awakening must fit our culture and our time. And what we need now is balance. Rather than retrace the history of the 3 Turnings of the Wheel to see how this has evolved, though, I'll offer an example of what I mean.

edit: Thanks to Owen Becker for teaching me the K. Wilber 3,2,1 practice described below.

cont...

cont from above...

The following is cut and pasted from a letter I wrote this morning to a dharma friend:

I've been working on integrating 3 major points of view, using Wilber's 3,2,1 practice. I may have told you about it last time we talked. It's been almost unimaginably rich over the last couple of weeks.

3rd person: "What's happening?" This gets me touch with all the shameful human emotions like aversion, shame, envy, hatred, despair, as well as the nice ones. Also, from here I can note "pressure, coolness, headache," etc. But the big benefit is in the fact that since it's 3rd person, it doesn't set up a mental conflict with my Buddhist presuppositions of no-self. Assuming that this is all happening to someone else neatly sidesteps the expert Buddhist box.

2nd person: "What would you say to it?" Entering into a relationship with what just came up in the 3rd person exercise allows the balm of compassion and love. It is OK to feel how you feel! I'm noticing that social emotions only exist in relationship. Seems obvious on hindsight, but I'd never thought of it before.

1st person: "How do I feel?" This is the quintessential no-self perspective. I don't feel any way at all; there is no one here to feel anything. Ironically, this leads to great peace and relief.

A mistake I have often made is to privilege the no-self (1st person) perspective over all others, using it as a club to beat down and invalidate the others. Somehow, the 3,2,1 exercise gives license to experience the whole range of phenomena, leading to a much more integrated whole of human experience. I would recommend this highly to anyone as a way to go beyond narrow interpretations of awakening. (I have been leading the narrow interpretation of awakening charge for years, but no longer find it interesting or fulfilling.)

Metta,

Kenneth

Interesting discussion, many insightful posts. =] It seems to me that Buddha-hood is not possible without deep and profound devotion. Devotion has played a large, and growing, essential role in my practice / life as a human being. It could not be otherwise. It is only through the intense devotion, compassion, effort, and sacrifice of others that I am so fortunate to receive the wisdom of others.

I am always deeply moved by the efforts of teachers and fellow yogi's to lead, inspire, and motivate... I am often moved to tears and overcome with gratitude by their words. I want nothing more than to be able to give the same gift to others. I am inspired by the deep devotion of teachers to their own teachers, the deep love and gratitude they express for them.

One book in particular that really showed me the profound power and value of devotion is "The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying" by Sogyal Rinpoche. The value of the section on devotion only really struck me within the last year, the second time I read the book, since my practice has deepened.

A large part of my practice has been a sort of growth focusing on opening my own heart. It became clearer and clearer to me as my insight deeped how deficient I was at loving others, and expressing that love in a genuine, open and honest way. Since my practice has deepend this has really blossomed, and become so much more natural and honest. Devotion has really been key in this process for me personally. I find myself doing more and more metta practice, it really helps to devote one's efforts to others, to practice for the sake of all beings. In traditional terms, devotional practice develops bodhicitta, which seems essential for realization / awakening to me. It seems an obvious part of the deepening of anatta realization and letting go of self centered attitudes and conditioning.

( cont )

( cont )

Deep devotion, love, and gratitude seem to have precipitated some initial experiences of "presence" and other aspects of deeper, more integrated non-dual experiences for me personally. With devotion and surrender came such a profound loving understanding; of my own nature but seemingly luminously reflected back to me... As someone mentioned earlier... grace seems like a good word. I must admit, I have not read the article this thread is about yet, but was inspired to chime in thanks to all the great responses.

The predominant curiosity that arose in my mind regarding the article was, what would be the authors take on seeking an efficient and direct path to awakening, FOR the benefit of all beings, to be of greatest service and benefit to everyone asap. This seems to be in the spirit of many pragmatic dharma practitioners from what I've seen.

For me personally, the focus on pragmatic, or practical dharma is devotional itself, because for me seeking such a path is done with an intention of devotion to seek awakening as quickly as possible for the benefit of all, and with the intention to help others as long as it takes, as many lifetimes as that may be. A heartfelt thank you and *gratitude* for all the efforts of the great folks here at KFD! ^__^

metta!

Justin

Not that I understand it, but they (Kornfield/RamDass) are talking about it:

Kenneth, my apologies for getting the foundations of this community wrong. No excuses. That was just bad.

And thank you, with all my heart, for this comment:

"A mistake I have often made is to privilege the no-self (1st person) perspective over all others, using it as a club to beat down and invalidate the others. Somehow, the 3,2,1 exercise gives license to experience the whole range of phenomena, leading to a much more integrated whole of human experience. I would recommend this highly to anyone as a way to go beyond narrow interpretations of awakening. (I have been leading the narrow interpretation of awakening charge for years, but no longer find it interesting or fulfilling.)"

I've been mulling over why Chris and I have disagreed more than usual here, and I think I've been missing his point...

Chris, you reacted to a couple of brief FB posts with a lot of concern, and that makes we wonder if there isn't more going on that concerns you. The underlying issue that seems to concern you is (and please correct me if I'm not understanding you) whether or not we are becoming intolerant here in pragmatic dharma as a community of the more mainstream dharma community (represented by outlets like Tricycle).

Chris, if that is your concern, then given your position as moderator here it probably has a lot more behind it than a couple of FB posts, and likely deserves a lot more discussion as a community...

Am I getting you right?

"To get a good idea of what a brick and mortar pragmatic community might look like, come to the buddhist geeks conference! "

I definitely would if I could. But wouldn't it be nice if you could go to the Pragmatic Dharma center every Sunday morning just as you can go to the Zen center or the Shambala center?

"The underlying issue that seems to concern you is (and please correct me if I'm not understanding you) whether or not we are becoming intolerant here in pragmatic dharma as a community of the more mainstream dharma community (represented by outlets like Tricycle)." -- Ron


Yes, you're getting me, Ron. I'm not holding anything back, though.

My concerns have been posted here on this topic publicly. I do think we all need to be more tolerant of others' ways. This community has at times leaned more toward throwing the baby our with the bath water on certain issues outside what is normally considered "practical dharma.". Based on what I'm reading on this topic, though, that's not really the case any more, so I'm happy.

I read Kenneth's comment in #64 and #65 as evidence of this turnaround, just as I view what Nick and others are saying here as evidence. I think we need to be able to learn from each other regardless of where we come from, who we are or how we practice. That's **practical.**

Does that answer you question? If not, ping me back!

@ Chris - glad we're in agreement. What I was wondering though was whether it really was about just this article and my and another person's reaction to it on Facebook, or whether it is a trend you see all around, in other threads, journals, posts. You seem to be saying that is the case, and that concerns me too.

People here are becoming enlightened, but are they also becoming isolated or cut off from mainstream buddhism?

"I definitely would if I could. But wouldn't it be nice if you could go to the Pragmatic Dharma center every Sunday morning just as you can go to the Zen center or the Shambala center? "

It just might happen! It will take a cultural shift though, and I suspect it is going on as we speak. These online communities might be the start of a larger change, but it will take some nudging along by discussing the pragmatic viewpoint outside of these forums. Some of us have started doing that (with significant blowback), and I've seen people's interest perk up in even the most traditional forums and centers. We're on to something here.

"Some of us have started doing that (with significant blowback)... "

Details... ?