-
Confusion with the Stages
It may be the case that I am having trouble with the maps and seeing their value besides as a helpful indicator of progress or the lack thereof, but I have some questions:
1. Those who aren't stream-enterers will essentially start at zero, though their degree of "samadhi" and conditions may speed them through to their current full capability on the progress of insight? So even though specific phenomena might manifest (e.g., goddamn recurring spontaneous physical movements, unusual energetic phenomena or difficult mind-states) as markers of progress, anyone will slip and slide forwards and backwards in a given sitting, and likewise the stages themselves have a seeming "fractal" or cyclical nature?
2. The way one needs to treat the chosen object varies somewhat in each stage? If I understand, this means to avoid artificially solidifying the pleasant broadness of the first vipassana jhana, avoiding turning the kundalini/rapidity of the second v. jhana into a solid state, and broadening the object in the third?
It may be obvious that I feel like I am playing snakes and ladders here, but I've got a lot of consternation with these issues.
Posted:
Jun 26 2008, 1:05 PM EDT by
-
Emptier-than-Thou
Wow!
Okay, soapbox please:
I've been re-reading Daniels book these days, and for this discussion, I suggest (to those who find the book helpful) to re-read the chapters on "Morality, the First and Last Training", and "A Clear Goal". Let's also resolve to be honest as well as frank (like Michael and Daniel have been so far), and to take the time to let a post mature before sending it. For flame-wars I can easily go to usenet, where I can use a comfy newsreader instead of a web-forum.
(climbs off soapbox)
So, the reason I suggested the "clear goal" chapter was that the way I understand Daniel he's saying that a good goal is practice-oriented, and practice takes place in the present, because this is what we can be mindful of. And without mindfulness, practice is not possible.
And Michael seems to be coming from the other direction, from "no goal, nothing to attain" towards "mindfulness of the present", though I that's what I conjecture from his posts and his website.
Now, I'm not suggesting they are saying the same thing when they obviously aren't. But any teaching, be it the Buddha's, Daniel's, Michael's, should be approached with the question "how do I pick this up?"
Cheers,
Florian
Posted:
Mar 8 2008, 8:00 AM EST by
-
Maps of Meditation
Here is a place to post pages, comments, treads, debates and experiences related to the maps of meditation, be they jhanas , ñanas , stages, sta...
Last updated:
Sep 16 2008, 2:46 PM EDT by
-
Understanding the Maps Part 1
The maps are a good help to go the way but you need a lot of faith to follow it. For me I need an
modern understanding to get the needable faith because I am very sceptical and I want know what
will happen with me too.
I am a "Buddhist" because I could find there a description of some of my experiences (A&P-Event).
Especially in the Theravada-Abhidhamma I could find some good explanations. Unfortunately the
Abhidamma is full of antiquated things.
Therefore I tried to make an easy new model what the parts of the maps are and what will happen
with you if you are enlightenment and what not. Maybe it can help someone.
First an comparison for the A&P-Event.
Not only men have an A&P-Event. Your Computer has an "A&P-Event" too.
If you look on the Screen you see some Windows. These Windows result from software. if you rip
these Programs you come to the operating system, then the basic input/output system (BIOS) and then
the "A&P-Event" happens. In the computer it is an Stream of 1 and 0 (10000100, 10000100 etc.). If
you see this. There are no static windows. It seem that there is an chaotic stream of data (but it
is not chaotic, the stream is interdependent). The "ultimate reality" (I don' t liken this calling)
of a computer is this stream. The "concepts" are made of software. This software interprets the
stream (build the necessary abtstraction layers) and we will get the nice windows.
Are the windows real? The windows are an interpretation of the interdependent stream.
Posted:
Jun 21 2008, 6:49 AM EDT by Paticca
|
|
