Confidence in the ability to awaken

[Seeker of Wisdom]

I've been thinking recently about the idea that any actual stage of awakening is this incredible, mystical exalted thing that takes years/decades/lifetimes to attain. I'm trying to stop thinking in terms of hopefully achieving stream-entry at some point before I die - i.e. not any time soon.

 

Why should it take years to notice obvious things about existence? Judging by stuff like 'Gateless Gatecrashers' by Liberation Unleashed, a fairly normal person can realise no-self in a few weeks of sincere inquiry into plain direct experience. That's a good step that most people never reach.

 

While I keep on developing virtue and samadhi as before, I'm trying to let go of beliefs that aren't based on anything, including expectations of what awakening results in and what it's like. I'm getting back to the direct focus of just seeing reality naked, without metaphysical ideas getting in the way. I'm doing that with the development of insight through vipashyana (flavoured by Liberation Unleashed inquiry), whenever I'm not practicing shamatha, asleep or distracted.

 

The more I look into direct experience, the more it seems that there is thought, no thinker; action, no agent; awareness, no self that is aware - no central owner/controller/watcher of mental or physical processes, just the processes. It's possible I could realise no-self at any time. And from there, keep going.

 

Awakening is accessible in the present, and from now on, I practice with that attitude.

[Jeff]

So everything is just a "movie" in motion? No ability to "act" for you?

[Seeker of Wisdom]

So everything is just a "movie" in motion? No ability to "act" for you?

...[there is] action, no agent...

Do you see the distinction here? No-self doesn't deny any aspect or capacity of the mind or body, at all! What it denies is the idea of a central hub which owns and controls the mind and body as through it is independent from them.

 

Action happens, choice happens. These are processes which occur in the body/mind. But they are not 'self' or carried out by 'self'. So far, the more honestly and deeply I look to experience, the less there is anything on which to base that idea.

 

Raise and lower your arm. That decision was a real choice. The action is a real event. But were these carried out by some special, independent hub, or were they just points in a network of mental/physical processes? In direct experience there is just 'decision' and 'action', no 'me' or 'mine'.

 

Anyway, I don't want to debate no-self here. (See 'lessons in Buddhism' in my PPF for hopefully more clarity on this, and feel free to PM me. At this point my understanding is still more conceptual than gnosis, but I'm getting there.) I only referred to it because I feel it's what I'm closest to realising, so I'm emphasising it for now.

 

My key point in the OP was about trying not to think of awakening as some far-off mystical thing meant only for legendary superbeings, that the average person actually can get serious cultivation down, and thinking otherwise holds you back. What do people think of this?

[Jeff]

I definitely see the distinction, but was attempting to raise a point on your definition of "self" or looking for some "self". Does the one who is "paying attention" or "causing the arm to move up and down" ever disappear?

 

Is not that "mystical thing" beginning to be found when you move that "focus" beyond the local body-mind?

 

Inquiry is of the local body-mind and happens in the local body-mind.

 

Best wishes,

Jeff

[woodcarver]

Not sure what draws the line between awakened and not awakened but if there is one, it would be futile to dwell on it just like anything else. You can only do your best.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Not sure what draws the line between awakened and not awakened but if there is one, it would be futile to dwell on it just like anything else. You can only do your best.

Fair point, the expectation of changing in some way probably interferes with seeing truth. Better to just follow the insight where it leads and enjoy the process.

 

But at the same time, I think a lot of people - me, until recently - think that they won't get any real insight until they're divine beings far in the future. This holds them back from doing their best, whether or not they apply a perfect amount of effort, because the depths of their minds aren't open to insight right now.

 

If you don't believe you're capable of it, you won't do very well. Good to not dwell on awakening because you know you're doing fine, enjoying your unfolding as it occurs; bad to not dwell on it because, deep down, you think any achievement in cultivation is too majestic and special for someone like you to get?

[3bob]

enlightenment will never and can never be in any future time, that's the catch of it or to it, along with the hell of it when thinking about it.

[Bearded Dragon]

The idea of having/not having is a dualistic concept to get over.

 

The decision thing is an illusion by the way. You can think about it all you want but your brain will always crunch the numbers the same way. Your brain changes and situations change, so outcomes change. However in that instant of making a decision there is just the one outcome. This, I feel, helps to let go further. You can watch the autopilot go about its business in a deeper level of nondoing. This is confidence in the ability to be, without concern.

[Yasjua]

Unless you're the Buddha, stream-entry is a borrowed concept, and probably one that is distorted through the lens of assumptions you've constructed or absorbed. I'm generally aversive to conducting myself on the hypotheses and theories of others. I'm not sure if you're just sharing here, seeking engagement on this topic, or looking to test your path against the experiences of others. In any case, I'll share what I can from my own experiences.

 

I was present at Liberation Unleashed's conception, and nine months prior I was a very active member in the community that preceded and fathered the creation of LU. I think it's somewhat important to know that many of the original members of Ruthless Truth (the father organization) including its founder, Ciaran Healey, eventually disbanded and denounced the induction of the no-self realization through RT's methods. There's an important distinction that Liberation Unleashed made in its approach, in that it was founded not by an egomaniacal philosopher with a God/Saviour complex, but two very down-to-earth women (Elena and Ilona), who had cultivated themselves spiritually for many years prior to arriving at Ruthless Truth. I know that Elena practiced (and still practices) Vipassana for 20+ years before realizing no-self. In her case and in several other people, the effect on this inquiry was profound, transformational, and permanent in its effects.

 

But I think it's very important to understand that the majority of people who succeed in this inquiry do not experience the same permanence or profundity as others. I know because I experienced the no-self shift, and facilitated this awakening in six others, all of whom I later became very close friends with. None of us really subscribe to the belief that this insight or realization is enlightenment or essential to enlightenment. Many people who graduated from this school of thought turned into broken-records, haunting everyone on Facebook, calling everyone out for using the word "I" in their statements and thoughts, even though there isn't one. The scale of confusion and misunderstanding that ensued from this movement cannot be understated.

 

As for confidence: In my opinion, confidence is an important quality, which, as Bearded Dragon just pointed out, facilitates an ease of being. I personally experience confidence as having a magnetic effect on whatever it is that I want. I expect the things that I want to come easily to me and that generally works for me. I find it to be highly effective in conjunction with my interpretation of the law of attraction, which I use to cultivate states of being, and not to attain/obtain material or spiritual objects or states. In terms of 'practice' (although I don't use that word to describe what I do), I dwell confidently in the knowledge that enlightenment pervades me and the Universe, I align myself with that knowledge, and I receive it's benefits however they come.

 

I've been liking Wilber's model of the quadrants again lately. The interest in the thinker/thought dichotomy and the action/agent dichotomy is very much a top-left quadrant thought process. I've shifted quite a lot from thinking that this recognition is profoundly and utterly essential, to a recognition that it's simply important, but that there's far more to life than "realizing shit."

[woodcarver]

Confidence is an illusion, too.

 

Edit: confidence is defined as a belief in an ability. I think Mr Spock (or one of the vulcans) from Star trek said "I try not to believe anything".

Edited December 10, 2014 by woodcarver

[Seeker of Wisdom]

The idea of having/not having is a dualistic concept to get over...

Confidence is an illusion, too..."I try not to believe anything".

These sorts of statements feel to me like you're poor and there's treasure in the garden, but instead of digging it up to use it, you tell yourself about how you've actually always been rich - while nothing in your experience changes to match it! You're still living in poverty!

 

I don't understand why some people emphasise leaving behind the boat so much that they're afraid using it to cross the river will be too dualistic or attached or something. You use a match to start a fire, then you can burn the match too.

 

I get that this isn't about achieving anything, but climb off the nonduality tower for a moment and see that cultivation has some sort of beneficial outcome. No word tricks or mind games - if it didn't, there would be no point doing it. And confidence is better than believing you won't make any progress.

[C T]

 

These sorts of statements feel to me like you're poor and there's treasure in the garden, but instead of digging it up to use it, you tell yourself about how you've actually always been rich - while nothing in your experience changes to match it! You're still living in poverty!

 

I don't understand why some people emphasise leaving behind the boat so much that they're afraid using it to cross the river will be too dualistic or attached or something. You use a match to start a fire, then you can burn the match too.

 

I get that this isn't about achieving anything, but climb off the nonduality tower for a moment and see that cultivation has some sort of beneficial outcome. No word tricks or mind games - if it didn't, there would be no point doing it. And confidence is better than believing you won't make any progress.

Of course you are right. Without confidence in results, where is the yardstick for 'feeling' progress, or 'feeling' that bliss of breaking through some obstacle without the guilt and all of that? (Im careful not to use the word 'measurement' in place of 'feeling'). And to let it all go eventually would also require a degree of confidence, otherwise its so easy for the subtler clingy traits to seep in and weaken the foundation.

 

Its understandable that some would lump confidence and belief into one pile, but on looking deeper, they need not always be associated together.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Unless you're the Buddha, stream-entry is a borrowed concept, and probably one that is distorted through the lens of assumptions you've constructed or absorbed...

Yes, I'm trying more to just cultivate with less borrowed conceptual expectations.

 

...I think it's very important to understand that the majority of people who succeed in this inquiry do not experience the same permanence or profundity as others...

Yes, but I do feel I'm getting somewhere. The view of self is breaking down more, the more I look to plain experience rather than unquestioned ideas.

 

None of us really subscribe to the belief that this insight or realization is enlightenment or essential to enlightenment.

I don't think it is itself enlightenment, but if enlightenment is defined in terms of removing delusions, the delusion of self must have to go at some point. Unless no-self is false somehow.

 

Many people who graduated from this school of thought turned into broken-records, haunting everyone on Facebook, calling everyone out for using the word "I" in their statements and thoughts, even though there isn't one.

Well, one realisation isn't a magic bullet or panacea. And I can see how no-self might destabilise someone, especially in the context of a community with one focus and one method. I have other practices, and no-self is just what's prominent for me to go for right now, not the be-all-and-end-all.

 

I've been liking Wilber's model of the quadrants again lately. The interest in the thinker/thought dichotomy and the action/agent dichotomy is very much a top-left quadrant thought process. I've shifted quite a lot from thinking that this recognition is profoundly and utterly essential, to a recognition that it's simply important, but that there's far more to life than "realizing shit."

Of course there is, it's also important to engage in life skilfully. But better to be more skilful and less deluded than just more skilful.

[gatito]

There are those who say that it takes a thousand lifetimes.

 

I'd say: perhaps this is lifetime 1001?

[Owledge]

Trying to reach 'awakening' for the goal is probably pointless, at least based on what I think I have been shown by ayahuasca. It's all about the interesting journey, about setting a challenging goal and see whether you can achieve it. The extreme of awakening is of no benefit, because any concept of benefit falls away. It's basically like committing suicide in your head. You exit the game of life, wait until your body dies, then you re-enter it.

From what I can remember, on a certain level there is no beyond. It's an illusion. It's like a computer program trying to become the computer. It has always been a part of it, yet insubstantial, thus impossible to become anything.

 

Cherish every moment of your quest of attaining awakening, because the journey is the aim. If only you knew what big of a disappointment you're moving towards.

Then again... it will only feel like a disappointment if you drop out of that state again.

 

In blunt language, the endeavor of attaining full enlightenment is lunatic, but lunatic is interesting, and interesting is fun. With your endeavor, you're inspiring others to find good distractions from the discomforting ultimate truth. Because, ironically, the process of striving for that moment is distraction, too.

 

Sometimes I wish I hadn't forgotten so much. Sometimes I wish I had forgotten even more.

 

But... I might be partially out of the dark night of the soul, since I mostly only care for attaining success, fulfillment, happiness these days - very practical-minded.

Edited December 10, 2014 by Owledge

[woodcarver]

 

And confidence is better than believing you won't make any progress.

Yeah, temporarily.

[Owledge]

Yeah, temporarily.

Who knows? Some say, when you truly give up, you succeed. Others say the opposite.

You can have all the confidence in the world and have it betrayed again and again, which creates much more damage than if you didn't have any expectations.

Edited December 10, 2014 by Owledge

[woodcarver]

Who knows? Some say, when you truly give up, you succeed. Others say the opposite.

You can have all the confidence in the world and have it betrayed again and again, which creates much more damage than if you didn't have any expectations.

Exactly, you're better at this than me. Take it away Owledge!...

[3bob]

"The seeker who has confidence in the way will go beyond the way and find the end of suffering. The seeker who goes beyond the way enlightens the world, just as the moon shines as it passes from behind the clouds." from the Dhammapada

[Seeker of Wisdom]

...Some say, when you truly give up, you succeed...

The trouble is, you can't just choose to truly give up. Any decision will have a goal motivating it behind the scenes, with hope of getting it.

 

Deciding to truly give up is an oxymoron, attempting it is, in practice, just resting in an unawakened state without doing anything to remove the underlying dualistic and deluded frame of reference.

 

Unless someone truly is at a point of non-meditation, they are better off actively cultivating until their gnosis exposes the ridiculousness of it and it sloughs off by itself. Use the boat, then leave it behind. Start the fire, then throw in the match. When you succeed, you truly give up.

[C T]

Well said above, Seeker.

 

Moreover, the progress ideally should not be self-determined, otherwise it becomes conceitedly foolish. Thats why great practitioners never acknowledge/proclaim their own realisations - they leave it others to verify and make the proclamations, based on the activities and actions resulting from their fruit of cultivation. Im reminded here of Paltrul Rinpoche, who epitomised this in the most genuine sense. Let the results speak for themselves - all else is just noise.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

^^^ Maybe there's a difference between someone saying matter-of-factly, 'I have realised... Here's some tips' and claiming to be a [title for superior entity]. When I realise no-self, I may want to say something along the lines of 'I did this, you can achieve it by...' with the hope of encouraging and advising.

 

I think people treat any and all attainment as this mystical thing that's just so unattainable it doesn't really happen anymore, and treating it as a realistic achievable cause-and-effect thing (without being too reductionistic and devaluing it) would help reduce that view and increase confidence, as well as suit the modern mindset.

Edited December 11, 2014 by Seeker of Wisdom

[Jetsun]

Awakening is available to anyone at any time, the reason being that it is what you really are, so no authority can decide who gets to be who they are and who doesn't, and it isn't a matter of earning it like many of us are conditioned to believe. You already are it.

 

Many of our regular ego issues like lack of self worth or self esteem can create perceived blockages where we think that awakening is only for great rare individuals, but that is us projecting onto them as a means of maintaining our limited seperate self, another mechanism of veiling the truth of what we are from ourselves. Deferring our awakening to some other time in the future when we have achieved some level or state or earned enough karma is another way of veiling, which is why many spiritual methods can easily become ways of preventing awakening rather than moving towards it.

 

One of the barriers may be all the beliefs and concepts we have around what awakening or enlightenment even means, I studied Buddhism quite intensely for a while and as a result had all these beliefs about what the path was about and where it was going, then my life experience started to contradict those beliefs, so all those ideas had to go.

[gatito]

There are some very useful tools and concepts in Buddhism. However, like any tools or concepts, they can be misunderstood and/or misapplied.

[C T]

^^^ Maybe there's a difference between someone saying matter-of-factly, 'I have realised... Here's some tips' and claiming to be a [title for superior entity]. When I realise no-self, I may want to say something along the lines of 'I did this, you can achieve it by...' with the hope of encouraging and advising.

 

I think people treat any and all attainment as this mystical thing that's just so unattainable it doesn't really happen anymore, and treating it as a realistic achievable cause-and-effect thing (without being too reductionistic and devaluing it) would help reduce that view and increase confidence, as well as suit the modern mindset.

Apologies... what was said about 'noise'... its not to imply anything negative being discussed and shared here.

 

Such reflections are indeed valuable, and very much appreciated.