Devotion and awakening

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

Ron, this is a whole topic in itself but again, I think a good start on this is to read Kenneth's comments in #64 and #65. Those nail the issues, IMHO. The view of awakening used here has at times been too narrow in my view but I do not think opening up a bunch of old wounds and disagreements is wise. So I plan to rest where we are right now in this conversation and be happy.

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

"

The question then arises, what is mainstream Buddhism and what can we learn, if anything, from them? A disturbing event happened here recently. A senior Sri Lanka monk came to the states 7-8 years ago. He had never meditated before and learned while here. Recently he was reprimanded by more senior monks for his wasting time meditating even though he wasn't meditating over 1 hour a day. His job was supposed to be just performing rites and rituals for his flock.
A western born monk who had spent over 15 years in Thailand told me that mainstream Buddhism as represented by the city Buddhist temples were only interested in rites and rituals. For money they would bless lottery numbers, for instance. Only the forest monasteries paid attention to the whole 8-Fold Path and meditated.
I have been told only 4% of Buddhist monks meditate. I would that is only a guess but the number is quite low. I think most religions tend to go away from the teachings of their founder and reduce down to community and rites and rituals. Christianity has certainly gone that way. But there are always those outliers in any religion who are out of the mainstream ,trying to follow what their founder taught and have some sort of practice.

jack

It's interesting, though, how people's paths can wander in diverse ways. I am reminded of a sangha I used to attend regularly where there were basically two audiences. There were people who came because it was a comfort to them to have a social community, learn to apply some basic teachings about patience and compassion to their lives, meditate to relieve stress, to have dinner, etc. Some others were there pursuing a deeper level of practice, attending retreats, taking refuge, studying and meditating more deeply. The deeper practice was not a secret they weren't told about. Some simply weren't looking for that, at least not at that moment. In my own practice I have wondered how different things might have been if I'd stumbled on pragmatic dharma when I was 20 years old instead of 40. Fact is, it's quite possible I might have read a bit, rolled my eyes, and yawned. It might not have grabbed me the way it did later, when I was in crisis and hurting badly and seeking some relief from the pain. And the years pre-practice were not, from my current perspective, wasted time, really. I grew and learned and traveled through life, and when the moment was right, I saw the door and walked through it. This to say, I suppose, that it is never a bad thing to share what has benefited oneself or what was harmful to oneself, but not everyone is ready or interested in hearing things, and it's okay (from my view) for people to enjoy the gentler consolations (or lack thereof) of "mainstream" practices if that's what is currently satisfying to them.

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

Details... ?

"

I won't go into a lot of detail, but I got a chilly reception when I tried talking about my practice in a short-lived dedicated practitioner's group that I and a friend tried to establish at a local center. We were rather rudely shouted down by a devotee of Ajahn Brahm who thought Kenneth Folk was a menace and his practice a dangerous divergence from the Buddha's teaching. While such shrillness represents kind of an extreme, we also experienced skepticism and a more nuanced dismissal from others as well, who wanted nothing to do with a practice that seemed to involve "too much work."

I agree with gira that many people do not want the transformative aspects of this practice, but rather want a low-level meditation practice to support their mental and physical health, and a supportive community. Cultural Buddhism has many qualities that are attractive to certain kinds of people. Last summer, when I ran into this resistance, I was both angry and contemptuous of these others; I've calmed down a lot since and I have to say that the practice we do really is very demanding, in ways one can hardly imagine at the outset, and so I have no quarrel with those who do not wish to get involved.

I have gotten both support and skepticism from IMS types, most of whom won't engage in discussion of maps, and some of whom seem to be more interested in helping people improve their lives than in actual awakening. However, my local teacher knows something about Kenneth (although he's never heard of Daniel, so Kenneth, your fame hasn't been completely put in the shade!), and considers pragmatic dharma to be a valid approach. When I've spoken with him about some of my own experiences, he's been knowledgeable and supportive. He offers a strong program that is aimed not just at self-improvement but at awakening.

@Laurel, #79

Thanks for sharing that, Laurel. I have discussed spiritual practice with a few friends/family in the past, and they have received information about the progress of insight and whatnot with interest. However, as my practice has deepened I'm no longer so forthcoming. This is because I sense that my correspondents are either just not ready, willing, or able to go further in this discussion. And that's fine, it seems awakening may not be for everyone...and I find myself in a different kind of relationship with others now - witnessing and "being there" for them, if that makes sense. I still learn from all kinds of people though, not just other yogis. Common sense and practical wisdom is by no means the sole preserve of the enlightened.

I started a thread about creating pragmatic dharma communities in the real world here: dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussio...ards/message/3206264

Why Dharma Overground? Why not here, where the conversation started?

Just curious.....

"
Why Dharma Overground? Why not here, where the conversation started?

Just curious.....

"

Just trying to open the question to a broader group. No slight intended.

I think it's all envy related to competition. Yet nobody owns awareness. I think various methods for different personalities will accomodate more people and in turn help more people. By actually avoiding rituals and getting too stuck in Buddhist conceptualization I could learn more by actual practice. I'm sad at the divide between traditional methods, KFD and DhO, but I'm not surprised. Any competition will lead to some fragmentation. I think this fragmentation is natural and a reason why communes never work. There's always a leader. The Mushroom effect is exactly what I would expect. I also know that many people (including family and friends) that are quite turned off with dealing with Pali terminology and find the traditional dogmas unscientific and rigid. They immediately jump to Eckhart Tolle precisely to avoid this. As soon as they hear about future lives and past lives they will throw out the baby with the bathwater and judge the entire practice as shamanism. By being pragmatic and allowing people to see for themselves makes meditation practice more accessible to modern secular Westerners.

I agree: "envy".

The article is crap. I'm not going to go quote by quote or write a thesis on this. Bottom line: meditation is a practice of seeing other in self, compassion is seeing self in other. They catalyze each other all the way not to some kind of "-ism", but into this life.

Community doesn't exist outside of how you relate to the next person. Meditation doesn't exist outside of how you relate to the objectivity of your subjectivity.

Blah, blah, blah...

Okay, one more point. Saying that devotion is necessary is a truism of course. Of course it's true that until we can point our compassion fearlessly at the world, we're going to NEED to point it at something safe. It could be that we need a purely good entity. It could be we need to cook up in a jhana. But to say it needs to be a purely good entity of someone's parent's choosing is like saying we never take off training wheels. The point is not devotion itself, it's devotion manifest as actual compassion.

"The article is crap."

Don't hold back now, Betawave

"But to say it needs to be a purely good entity of someone's parent's choosing is like saying we never take off training wheels. The point is not devotion itself, it's devotion manifest as actual compassion." -betawave

Nicely phrased!

Thanks. But hopefully people can hear the humor in my extreme stance. I'm kinda mirroring the rather extreme stance of the author who seems pretty sure about what people need or are missing in their practice.

What makes any practice "training wheels" is when someone else puts them on our bike. Pretty much any practice that combines insight into experience and compassion for other is potent. Devotion can help this mix of investigation/action, it can mask it in a haze of vague intentions, or it can be used to manipulate people.

Having the right nouns in our practice is important, but practice is ultimately more of a verb.

Edit: It just struck me how funny the term "practice" is. I mean practice is the biggest sense, not just what someone looking at our lives would say "oh, that's buddhist stuff".

Okay, so..... I'd like to see us take this discussion to a the next step. Can we talk about how we in the practical dharma community really are different, and why that matters, and how to address the rest of the meditation/Buddhist communities out there?

I'll start:

1. We believe in the notion of "progress" using meditation - that meditation has accretive effects over time - it works and you can actually get somewhere with it
2. We believe that one can awaken in this lifetime (and we get on with that, like, right now)
3. We practice what works (thus the word "pragmatic")
4. We don't waste time on what doesn't work (this may include religious trappings, but YMMV, 'cause that works for some people)
5. We are predominantly secular - but not all of us
6. We are predominantly humanistic - but not all of us

Fair?

Second "next" issue -- how do we approach the traditional Buddhist/practice community?

This is a tough question because the inclination is to ignore them (or maybe to insult them) because we think they're wasting their time on silly, ineffective stuff. We think they dismiss us as kooks for believing in progress and awakening. They might be jealous of us. Simply put, we have issues between us.

So... do we want to engage with them, or not? I think we do. So the question becomes, "How do we engage without compromising our values yet get them to actually listen to us?"

Thoughts?

Does this even matter?

"So... do we want to engage with them, or not? I think we do. So the question becomes, "How do we engage without compromising our values yet get them to actually listen to us?"
Does this even matter?

"

First things first, don't preach. It never works. It more than not comes off as arrogant and may not meet the 'ideals' of those you are communicating with thus triggering often impenetrable affective barriers in the audience with which everything else you then say may be filtered through. First impressions are important for some people and may be held onto for a long time. I think the whole 'preaching' angle or trying to convey what the pragmatic movement is all about to those who are not often attracted to how they perceive it is simply fueling more obstacles for mutual understanding and respect. I guess from experience (and past mistakes), I see it best to understand the motivations behind someone's own self narrative and then play to that, avoiding outright linking any advice or simply chatting dharma to 'pragmatic dharma'. That might mean talking about aspects of practice that might not be talked of in pragmatic dharma circles but may entail giving it a twist that is pragmatic at its core.

Even though i nowadays only speak with people who approach me themselves (as this often means some determination and autonomy within that person), I wouldn't really engage in a place that isn't outright welcoming of Pragmatic Dh ideals. Though, if invited to share one's experience or you or 'pragmatic dharma' are the topic of discussion, then you can use that as the opener to speak about PDh and where you are coming from. Talk about similarities. If on their turf, use their 'maps', terminology, based within the context of how they are motivated to practice relating it to how you practice. A fairly good example by Ron:
www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=12455

From Wikipedia on Buddhism:

"Estimates of the number of Buddhists in the United States vary between 0.5%[4] and 0.9%,[16] with 0.7% reported by both the CIA[5] and PEW.[6]"

...and most of these are likely immigrant/ethnic Buddhists.

I'm guessing there are FAR more people in western countries interested in secular mind training than becoming Buddhists. I think we just keep doing our own thing and it will be the right thing for the right people.

"How do we engage without compromising our values yet get them to actually listen to us?"

You know the old saying, 'you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink'. This is starting to remind me of the Buddha's misgivings about teaching.

There has to interest. (Sorry for stating the obvious!). It seems that even though Buddhism is obviously all about waking up (to us at least), many who are attracted to it, and who attend endless dharma talks and guided meditations, are not going to actually go for it. Perhaps some who are sincere just give up for lack of good information and guidance. Maybe the best thing for people here is to not identify so strongly with being 'pragmatic dharma' yogis, and just present the teachings and their experience as best they can, to any audience who'll listen '“ should you want to do that.

Books can be a good way to reach people. As far as I know Daniel is the only person from this scene who has written one. I stumbled across MCTB while browsing on Amazon, and that's how I ended up here. My practice wouldn't be what it is without that book and this community. There seem to be a good number of very experienced yogis here with good communication skills... There are also venues like YouTube, etc.

I read quite a bit of the thread that Nikolai linked to, in which Ron very patiently responds to a lot of criticism and skeptical questioning. It really opened my eyes to just how far afield my practice (and yours) has gone from "mainstream Buddhism," whatever that is. I really had no idea. I thought everybody would want to get enlightened. Kudos to Ron for his patience and ability to be articulate in unfavorable conditions.

"
Books can be a good way to reach people. As far as I know Daniel is the only person from this scene who has written one. I stumbled across MCTB while browsing on Amazon, and that's how I ended up here. My practice wouldn't be what it is without that book and this community. There seem to be a good number of very experienced yogis here with good communication skills... There are also venues like YouTube, etc.

"

There are also blogs, which are easily found by people searching for information. Blogs offering your own experiences, suggested reading, links to forums and other websites that are helpful, recommended teachers or retreat centers etc. The more the merrier! It's cheap and easy to start a blog and not terribly time consuming to maintain...

"1. We believe in the notion of "progress" using meditation - that meditation has accretive effects over time - it works and you can actually get somewhere with it
"

It's clear from the retreat I was just at that the teachers believe in progress. They even have stages of enlightenment, but the stages seem to be based on the 10 fetters model. I say "seems" because they weren't very forthcoming about it, and because there appears to be some disagreement in the community about it.

It seems like anything above 2nd path is mystified, and they say things like, "Maybe some night 30 years from now you'll mindfully turn off a lamp and achieve complete liberation." And there are vague hints about "enlightened people" somewhere in the world.

My guess is that they believe in progress and stages, they just think stream-entry is what we'd call 4th path, and maybe sakadagami is what Kenneth would call stage 6. But I don't know.

But there are traditions that don't seem to speak about attainments at all. So you'd probably get better traction starting with talking to people who at least believe in attainments and then figuring out where their stages match up with yours.

I think there are ways to approach just about anyone and open their eyes to the possibility of awakening. I think some will dig it, and of course some won't. I think people need to be presented with some facts, too, so a grounding in the science (neuroscience) and the current and ever growing number of studies about meditation and its effects on the brain and behavior are important. Most of all, I think it's critical to give people space and time to think about this stuff. It takes time to drop all the stories about enlightenment, and what folks THINK it is as opposed to what it really is. Most of the time people are reacting to, negating or refusing to believe a story about enlightenment that's just not close to being accurate. The truth is better than the stories and it's actually easier to believe because it's testable, replicable, viable and more and more people are seeing the truth and doing it.

Never give up on anyone, even un-awake and insecure IMS teachers

"Most of the time people are reacting to, negating or refusing to believe a story about enlightenment that's just not close to being accurate."

Isn't part of the problem, though, that no one really knows what enlightenment is (or at least FULL enlightenment)?

I'm totally down with basing our theories in neuroscience and experience. The problem is that we don't have enough of a brain-based understanding yet to say, "Okay, these is what full awakening consists in, and these are the discrete stages between here and there."

"The problem is that we don't have enough of a brain-based understanding yet to say, "Okay, these is what full awakening consists in, and these are the discrete stages between here and there."

I think we have enough experience pretty deep into the thing, and plenty of people posting here with that experience, to describe awakening pretty well. We've done it before. I'll find the thread and post it. As for "full enlightenment" I don't even know what that means, frankly, and I don't think it's relevant. I suspect that notion, too, is part of a mistaken story