McMindfulness meditation dangers

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote:I'm talking about when a practitioner first gets a real experiential glimpse of anatta. That generally seems to be quite traumatic.
I take it you mean glimpse, as in discernment then (as distinct to "experience")?
SN 22.59 wrote:"Any kind of consciousness whatever, whether past, future or presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near must, with right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self.'

"Bhikkhus, when a noble follower who has heard (the truth) sees thus, he finds estrangement in form, he finds estrangement in feeling, he finds estrangement in perception, he finds estrangement in determinations, he finds estrangement in consciousness.
SN 25.5 wrote:"One who, after pondering with a modicum of discernment, has accepted that these phenomena are this way is called a Dhamma-follower: one who has entered the orderliness of rightness, entered the plane of people of integrity, transcended the plane of the run-of-the-mill. He is incapable of doing any deed by which he might be reborn in hell, in the animal womb, or in the realm of hungry shades. He is incapable of passing away until he has realized the fruit of stream-entry.

"One who knows and sees that these phenomena are this way is called a stream-enterer, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening."
Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by mikenz66 »

retrofuturist wrote: I take it you mean glimpse, as in discernment then (as distinct to "experience")?
I don't see any distinction.

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by mikenz66 »

Here is a description by a Buddhist Teacher of the sort of experience I'm talking about, and I'm sure is being talked about in the OP talk.
Chanmyay Sayadaw wrote:When I conducted a meditation retreat in England at the Manjusri Tibetan Monastery, the Manjusri Institute in northern England near the border of Scotland, one of the meditators had put much effort into his practise both sitting as well as walking, and awareness of the activities too. So after about four days meditation he came to me and asked a question. ''Venerable Sir, my meditation is getting worse and worse,' he said. 'Now what happen to your meditation?' I asked him. Then he said, 'When I am walking one day, Venerable Sir, then gradually I am not aware of myself. The foot itself had lifted, and it itself pushed forward, and then dropped down by itself. There's no I or no me, no self, no myself. Sometimes though I control my foot, the foot doesn't stay with the ground. It lifted by itself. Sometimes it pushed forward very long. I couldn't control it. Then sometimes it's getting down by itself. So my meditation is getting worse and worse. What should I do?' Then eventually he said, 'I think I have gone mad.' Such an experience was very amazing.

http://buddhanet.net/vmed_4.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,
retrofuturist wrote:I take it you mean glimpse, as in discernment then (as distinct to "experience")?
mikenz66 wrote:I don't see any distinction.
Everything you experience is not-self... you have been experiencing not-self since the day you were born (and potentially beyond that). Experiencing dhammas that are not-self doesn't bring enlightenment, it is discernment of those dhammas as not-self which brings enlightenment.

Likewise dukkha... if someone kicks you in the privates, you experience dukkha, but that does not mean you discern dukkha correctly. There is no special technique required to bring dukkha to manifestation, because sabba sankhara dukkha already.

It is discernment that constitutes the "glimpse", not some kind of "special moment of deep, deep not-self-ness" that we need to find. Sabbe dhamma anatta - none more special, enlightening, meaningful or significant than the last. Thus, we need simply to discern that whatever formations are experienced presently... are anicca, anatta and dukkha.

At least, that is how I understand the distinction between discernment and experience.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by chownah »

Retrofutuist,
When you say, "It is discernment that constitutes the "glimpse", not some kind of "special moment of deep, deep not-self-ness" that we need to find." I think that this is perfect and is the real essence of what you are saying....Your statements about everyone experienceing anatta but actually needing to discern it makes sense within that context but somehow it seems a bit odd....I'm not sure why....I think that to say that everyone experiences not self is like defining everything as having a quality called "not self" and to me it seems a bit like a doctrine of self...but I don't know....can one experience a quality that is not there?....do we all expereince not santa claus?.....what do you think? I do absolutely agree with the sentence of yours which I quoted and think that this is something that people could misconstrue in the way you mention so its good to keep that aspect clear.
I sort of like the fact that your statements (that everyone expereinces anatta but needs to discern it ) seems to have some lose part because it makes me think about it in a more focused way to try to find the lose part....
chownah
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by daverupa »

Hmm. This is from the article:
And even though we have made the program secular in the core content, I’m finding that people are coming back and reporting experiences that I only know how to respond to with Buddhist ideas.
He then says they are having profound experiences of Buddhist ideas. I think they are having fairly neutral experiences, and he is salting the mine unknowingly. Or they are not unfamiliar with Buddhist ideas in the first place.

It's why anecdotes are useless as data. Variables like this aren't controlled for.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by tiltbillings »

daverupa wrote:Hmm. This is from the article:
And even though we have made the program secular in the core content, I’m finding that people are coming back and reporting experiences that I only know how to respond to with Buddhist ideas.
He then says they are having profound experiences of Buddhist ideas. I think they are having fairly neutral experiences, and he is salting the mine unknowingly.
You don't know that, and the he is a she.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Retro,
retrofuturist wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:I don't see any distinction.
Everything you experience is not-self... you have been experiencing not-self since the day you were born (and potentially beyond that). Experiencing dhammas that are not-self doesn't bring enlightenment, it is discernment of those dhammas as not-self which brings enlightenment....
Sorry, I should have used a smiley and saved you some typing... I was quite aware that you were making a distinction based on clever word play. :reading:

Now, can we get past terminology and back to the question of how McPractitioner and BudPractitioners experience/discern/whatever anatta? And how to progress based on that...
Chanmyay Sayadaw wrote: '... Sometimes though I control my foot, the foot doesn't stay with the ground. It lifted by itself. Sometimes it pushed forward very long. I couldn't control it. Then sometimes it's getting down by itself. So my meditation is getting worse and worse. What should I do?' Then eventually he said, 'I think I have gone mad.' ...
http://buddhanet.net/vmed_4.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Buddha wrote:"Bhikkhus, form is not-self. Were form self, then this form would not lead to affliction, and one could have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.' And since form is not-self, so it leads to affliction, and none can have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.'
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nymo.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Buddha wrote: [7] "'The perception of not-self in what is stressful, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end': Thus was it said. In reference to what was it said?

"When a monk's awareness often remains steeped in the perception of not-self in what is stressful, his heart is devoid of I-making & my-making with regard to this conscious body and externally with regard to all themes, has transcended pride, is at peace, and is well-released. If, when a monk's awareness often remains steeped in the perception of not-self in what is stressful, his heart is not devoid of I-making & my-making with regard to this conscious body and externally with regard to all themes, has not transcended pride, is not at peace, and is not well-released, then he should realize, 'I have not developed the perception of not-self in what is stressful; there is no step-by-step distinction in me; I have not arrived at the fruit of [mental] development.' In that way he is alert there. But if, when a monk's awareness often remains steeped in the perception of not-self in what is stressful, his heart is devoid of I-making & my-making with regard to this conscious body and externally with regard to all themes, has transcended pride, is at peace, and is well-released, then he should realize, 'I have developed the perception of not-self in what is stressful; there is a step-by-step distinction in me; I have arrived at the fruit of [mental] development.' In that way he is alert there.

"'The perception of not-self in what is stressful, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end': Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4528
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by Dan74 »

I am sorry to butt in, Gentlemen, but is it really controversial that people have insights that are compatible with the Dhamma without ever having heard of the Dhamma?

I mean there are even the self-awakened ones, so why not the many more self-progressed-along-the-path-to-awakening-ones? Especially when exposed to parts of Dhamma?

To me this is completely self-evident. Is this what the debate is about or have I missed something again?
_/|\_
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by Ben »

Greetings Dan,
Within the tradition, there can be no self-awakened ones unless one is referring to Sammasambuddhas and Paccekabuddhas who arise at the time when a Buddha's dispensaton has not arisen in the world or after it has been completely forgotten. Since we are at the beginning of the second Sasana of Gotama Buddha, there can be no self-awakened ones let alone sammasambuddhas and paccekabuddhas.
kind regards,

Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by daverupa »

tiltbillings wrote:
daverupa wrote:Hmm. This is from the article:
And even though we have made the program secular in the core content, I’m finding that people are coming back and reporting experiences that I only know how to respond to with Buddhist ideas.
He then says they are having profound experiences of Buddhist ideas. I think they are having fairly neutral experiences, and he is salting the mine unknowingly.
You don't know that, and the he is a she.
The point is that this could explain it, and hasn't been ruled out.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by mikenz66 »

Dan74 wrote:I am sorry to butt in, Gentlemen, but is it really controversial that people have insights that are compatible with the Dhamma without ever having heard of the Dhamma?
I didn't think so. Especially when said people are following instructions derived originally from Dhamma teachings, so various Dhamma ideas will probably be transmitted implicitly.

It seems odd to me that on the one hand Dhamma is commonly said to involve investigating for oneself, but that on the other hand some progress (we're not talking about awakening here, we're talking about very small steps) towards understanding the Dhamma is not possible unless one grasps all of the technicalities.

As I have said several times, the interesting question to me is:
What would need to be added to make the participants of such programmes "Dharma Practitioners"?

For the sake of argument, I'll throw out this opinion:
  • Entry-level Dhamma Practice would add a few sessions discussing Noble Truths, Aggregates, Characteristics.
    [And Sila, but that's not specifically Buddhist.]
:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4528
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by Dan74 »

It always astounds me that with all the stories of arahats who awakened with minimal instruction, with all the historical examples of highly cultivated moral and wise people that had never heard of the Buddhadhamma, there seems to still be an insistence that without the proper textual basis you cannot get anywhere.

To say that solid textual basis is preferable in most cases needs no argument but to maintain that anything short of that will never lead to any progress on the path is incompatible with the evidence, IMO.

Quite the contrary, I would argue that very little is needed in order to lay proper foundations for practice. Ethics, Dependent Origination, Meditation Instuctions with advice not to attach to anything that arises can already take people far along the path and some even manage with less. They work out the rest as they go along.
_______________

Ben, what is the source of this view that you stated above? Canonical or postcanonical?
_/|\_
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by daverupa »

Dan74 wrote:Ethics, Dependent Origination, Meditation Instuctions
Very good. Here we have Sila, we have Panna, we have Samadhi.

For morality and meditation, I expect there's a nuanced variability of which much may be of benefit. But other than the SuttaVinaya, I don't see Panna.
sabbe sankhara anicca
sabbe sankhara dukkha
sabbe dhamma anatta
Where else can such a thing as this be found?
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4528
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: McMindfulness meditation dangers

Post by Dan74 »

Same place the Buddha found it - insight.

But I am not talking about liberation even, just progress.
_/|\_
Post Reply