On the nature and utility of 'goal posts' in meditative and energetic practice

[-ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ-]

5 minutes ago, EFreethought said:

 

Got to start somewhere.

 

I’m sorry, that was rude of me.

[EFreethought]

1 minute ago, Pak_Satrio said:

I’m sorry, that was rude of me.

 

You did give me a new catchphrase, so I guess I can let this one go.

 

[forestofclarity]

17 minutes ago, freeform said:

Are you really trying to ‘debunk’ a friendly anecdote I told in passing?

 

My apologies--- I asked a serious question and thought I received a serious answer. 

 

[Taoist Texts]

There are two kinds of goalposts (called signs in ND): gradual ones and quantum ones.

E.g seeing just any old light is a gradual one because it can be strong or weak but does not lead to the next level in the ND process. In contrast seeing the lead-light is a quantum sign because it is immediately followed by  "the metal of lead".

Gradual signs are not secret - meaning their existence is known to and they themselves were  experienced by   the most of the dedicated practicers; quantum signs are secret - meaning their names might be known but they  themselves  are experienced by  literally one or two practicers in a generation.

Thats the reason why the quantum signs are shifted down in popular understanding to mean the gradual ones.

E.g in ND there is a quantum sign of the dew  ("amrita") followed by the MCO. And there is a gradual sign of  a changed regular salivation not followed by anything.

Gradual signs are generally a positive and impressive experience but they are not quantum ones.

How to discern the former from the latter? Simple. If it requires testing then it is not it. 

 

PS

Quote

 

@EFreethought

Per wikipedia, "amrita" means immortality. 

 

wiki is mistaken. Amrita in Sanskrit means 'an immortal-thing' . Immortality as a concept is amarata

https://www.shabdkosh.com/dictionary/sanskrit-english/अमरता/अमरता-meaning-in-english

[freeform]

1 hour ago, Taoist Texts said:

wiki is mistaken.

 

😱

How dare you question the canon of all knowledge! 

[Apech]

I may have come to this thread a bit late.  But for what it's worth I voted 'other' because although the textual descriptions of attainments are intended (mostly) to be literal (except when they are clearly metaphor) - if we are using the word 'literal' to mean 'actual or real' (which is not what it means of course but is how people use it) then the written descriptions cannot express the direct experience in its full sense.  So they cannot be literal.

 

I realise this is a completely unhelpful point to make ... but hey!

 

 

 

 

[Wilhelm]

19 minutes ago, Apech said:

if we are using the word 'literal' to mean 'actual or real' (which is not what it means of course but is how people use it)

Oops.  My dad still gives me shit about this.  English is in a multi-decade bear market, it seems

19 minutes ago, Apech said:

But for what it's worth I voted 'other' because although the textual descriptions of attainments are intended (mostly) to be literal (except when they are clearly metaphor) -

 

...

 

then the written descriptions cannot express the direct experience in its full sense.  So they cannot be literal.

You mean this in the sense that the rainbow body isn't "meteorological and optical phenomenon that is caused by reflection, refraction and dispersion of light in water droplets resulting in a spectrum of light appearing in the sky - Wikipedia"?

[Apech]

1 hour ago, Wilhelm said:

Oops.  My dad still gives me shit about this.  English is in a multi-decade bear market, it seems

You mean this in the sense that the rainbow body isn't "meteorological and optical phenomenon that is caused by reflection, refraction and dispersion of light in water droplets resulting in a spectrum of light appearing in the sky - Wikipedia"?

 

No I mean that whatever we can conceive as being a light or rainbow body in our minds ... is not the rainbow body.  I suggest it will be that once we achieve it we will be able to look back and say 'oh! that's what they meant!'.  I think it's the same with all realisations, that we work and study and make effort for years etc. with only a kind of shadowy understanding of what we are trying to achieve.  When we break through into actual experience or realisation it all clicks into place and we understand fully what the masters of the past were on about.  Until then we 50% question and 50% take on faith.

 

 

[dwai]

6 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

There are two kinds of goalposts (called signs in ND): gradual ones and quantum ones.

E.g seeing just any old light is a gradual one because it can be strong or weak but does not lead to the next level in the ND process. In contrast seeing the lead-light is a quantum sign because it is immediately followed by  "the metal of lead".

Gradual signs are not secret - meaning their existence is known to and they themselves were  experienced by   the most of the dedicated practicers; quantum signs are secret - meaning their names might be known but they  themselves  are experienced by  literally one or two practicers in a generation.

Thats the reason why the quantum signs are shifted down in popular understanding to mean the gradual ones.

E.g in ND there is a quantum sign of the dew  ("amrita") followed by the MCO. And there is a gradual sign of  a changed regular salivation not followed by anything.

Gradual signs are generally a positive and impressive experience but they are not quantum ones.

How to discern the former from the latter? Simple. If it requires testing then it is not it. 

 

PS

wiki is mistaken. Amrita in Sanskrit means 'an immortal-thing' . Immortality as a concept is amarata

https://www.shabdkosh.com/dictionary/sanskrit-english/अमरता/अमरता-meaning-in-english

To trace the etymology, Mrita means dead in sanskrit. So A-mrita literally means "not-dead". It generally used to refer to the substance that produces immortality. 

 

But being an Indian language, it may mean many things depending on context (and its derivatives). 

https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/apte_query.py?qs=अमृत&searchhws=yes&matchtype=exact

 

 

 

 

Edited February 3, 2023 by dwai

[Sahaja]

It’s interesting that in the tantric yoga tradition cultivation of the Amrita cycle is associated with khecari and avoiding  losing its benefits (by consumption by digestive Agni)  due to the inverted position of the tongue (position of tongue behind nasal passages both stimulates production and conserves it). In the nd traditions seems like same fluid/source but no apparent concern about losing its benefits through the digestive process.  Interesting conundrum. Perhaps beyond my pay grade to understand.

[freeform]

2 hours ago, Sahaja said:

avoiding  losing its benefits (by consumption by digestive Agni)

interesting. Does the inverted tongue position alter the digestive process? Or there’s some other methods?

 

Ive had some ‘khechari mudra’ tongue positions occur spontaneously over a period of time - though to me it seemed more related to the central channel - or some related energetic circuit rather than stimulating the Amrita…

[Sahaja]

 The way it’s been described to me is that the tongue in the inverted position closes off the throat allowing the Amrta to flow directly to the bottom of the mouth at the root of the tongue where there are three subtle channels that suck up the essence of the fluids.   The khecari mudra is central to the Nath process of “internal alchemy”. There is a lot more to it than just the amrta cycle or even just khecari mudra, of course. There is a new book available on Amazon that goes into quite a bit of detail on the overall Nath process called the Taranyali Tridha Dhyanam byShandor Remete. Due to the level of detail included I would think it would be an interesting reference book for those involved in Neidan to give them another perspective on self cultivation from an old tradition (Kanphata Naths) 

 

 

[Taoist Texts]

8 hours ago, Sahaja said:

those involved in Neidan to give them another perspective on self cultivation from an old tradition (Kanphata Naths) 

i love naths because they have a very colorful (and at times hilarious)  medieval epic   ‘Gorakh vijaya’ (‘Victory of Gorakṣa’) on their guru. However in that and other indian traditions they do not use the MCO, only the back half of it,  the Kundalini, which is an incomplete MCO. Because they cant complete it, the tongue curls in a spasm of the khechary-mudra. It is actually a deviation. Like any deviation of course it is also a sign of achieving something. 

 the MCO goes through the front teeth, thats where the tip of the tongue should be for the chest and back  halves of the MCO to connect.

 

11 hours ago, freeform said:

Does the inverted tongue position alter the digestive process?

the dew is supposed to be digested, just in a special way. because its a very;) special thing.

 

[freeform]

32 minutes ago, Taoist Texts said:

the dew is supposed to be digested, just in a special way. because its a very;) special thing.

It seems to be having the desired effects either way

 

Interesting to hear other perspectives from other tantric traditions.

[MIchael80]

1 hour ago, Taoist Texts said:

i love naths because they have a very colorful (and at times hilarious)  medieval epic   ‘Gorakh vijaya’ (‘Victory of Gorakṣa’) on their guru. However in that and other indian traditions they do not use the MCO, only the back half of it,  the Kundalini, which is an incomplete MCO. Because they cant complete it, the tongue curls in a spasm of the khechary-mudra. It is actually a deviation. Like any deviation of course it is also a sign of achieving something. 

 the MCO goes through the front teeth, thats where the tip of the tongue should be for the chest and back  halves of the MCO to connect.

 

the dew is supposed to be digested, just in a special way. because its a very;) special thing.

 

Hi! 

 

Your statement is not true.  Old indian traditions do have the mco (especially the Tamilsiddhas), they call it fire and water channel. 

[Taoist Texts]

8 minutes ago, MIchael80 said:

Hi! Your statement is not true.  Old indian traditions do have the mco (especially the Tamilsiddhas), they call it fire and water channel. 

Halo Michael. Thats good to know, thanks. I  am probably mistaken. Would you happen to know the names of the mco or the channel in the native languages?

[freeform]

1 hour ago, MIchael80 said:

Hi! 

 

Your statement is not true.  Old indian traditions do have the mco (especially the Tamilsiddhas), they call it fire and water channel. 

could you point me to some information from that tradition? (Books/teachers etc) - always curious about this stuff.

[MIchael80]

2 hours ago, freeform said:

could you point me to some information from that tradition? (Books/teachers etc) - always curious about this stuff.

 

4 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

Halo Michael. Thats good to know, thanks. I  am probably mistaken. Would you happen to know the names of the mco or the channel in the native languages?

Hi! 

 

@Taoisttext ... would have to look inside the book. Translation was fire (up the back) and water (down the front). 

 

Palpandian "siddhas - masters of nature".

 

It is on amazon. 

[Wilhelm]

1 hour ago, MIchael80 said:

 

Hi! 

 

@Taoisttext ... would have to look inside the book. Translation was fire (up the back) and water (down the front). 

 

Palpandian "siddhas - masters of nature".

 

It is on amazon. 

Cool book .  Thanks!

[Sahaja]

6 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

i love naths because they have a very colorful (and at times hilarious)  medieval epic   ‘Gorakh vijaya’ (‘Victory of Gorakṣa’) on their guru. However in that and other indian traditions they do not use the MCO, only the back half of it,  the Kundalini, which is an incomplete MCO. Because they cant complete it, the tongue curls in a spasm of the khechary-mudra. It is actually a deviation. Like any deviation of course it is also a sign of achieving something. 

 the MCO goes through the front teeth, thats where the tip of the tongue should be for the chest and back  halves of the MCO to connect.

 

the dew is supposed to be digested, just in a special way. because its a very;) special thing.

 

 A lot of people mistake experiences with Yang chi for kundalini. Yang chi manifestations are pretty common. Kundalini …hmm. 

[Gerard]

Signs of attainment:

 

1. Some are undeniable truths; eg.

 

-Mind creates reality. This world you live in right now is entirely a projection of your own soul.

-The subtle of the Yin & Yang forces which lie within all of us. Also the dynamics of the two in the form of the Five Changes which help to shape reality. 

-We live many lives and we retain knowledge of all of them buried under the layer of the thinking mind (Wood Force).

-We are eternal endless beings and all interrelated yet at different evolutionary levels. 

 

2. Stuff that might be or might be not true (in my opinion they are irrelevant) and here is where most spiritual powers come into play. The more you advance on this path the less you care and pay attention to them. 

 

Wisdom, self-realisation is what matters the most. You can read 100 books on the subject but until you don't realise the truths within yourself, you'll reincarnate/continue the vital cycle here or in another form until you do. 

 

Note: Buddhism is only a "human" understanding of a small aspect of reality geared towards the ultimate salvation but there is a lot more than that as we all know taking into account the minute and precise study over millennia of how reality really operates according to the ancient Chinese. So, Buddhism is not a perfect system especially if the body is blocked and unable to connect with the Mind. No Yin & Yang, not acknowledgment of the nature of constant change we are all subjected to? I wouldn't take a system like that too seriously especially TODAY. 

 

 

 

[Indiken]

5 hours ago, Gerard said:

Wisdom, self-realisation is what matters the most. You can read 100 books on the subject but until you don't realise the truths within yourself, you'll reincarnate/continue the vital cycle here or in another form until you do. 

 

Somehow misread "here or in another forum" 

[Mark Foote]

On 1/22/2023 at 3:55 PM, Wilhelm said:

Good point!  But not really what I'm getting at here.  Specifically I was hoping to talk to people who hold different interpretations of what the classics meant - and since the most commonly known accomplishments from the classics are the late stage ones I listed those as examples, but you could apply it to something as straightforward as mindfulness of breath (what is the literal interpretation, how is it metaphorically interpreted and what are the distinctions between the two approaches)
 

I haven't read the whole thread, I confess.  

I don't think there is "mindfulness of breath" in the Pali sermons.  There is the development of mindfulness in the four arisings of mindfulness, also translated as "concentration on in-breathing and out-breathing".  "Concentration on in-breathing and out-breathing" sounds very much like "mindfulness of breath", I know, but it turns out Gautama defined the concentration as (basically) the development of mindfulness in the four arisings of mindfulness, with sixteen elements.

Gautama said:

 

[The bad person] reflects thus: ‘I am an acquirer of the attainment of the first meditation.’ [Such a person] then exalts [him or her self] for that attainment of the first meditation and disparages others… But a good (person] reflects thus: ‘Lack of desire even for the attainment of the first meditation has been spoken of by [Gautama]; for whatever (one) imagines it to be, it is otherwise” [Similarly for the second, third, and fourth initial meditative states, and for the attainments of the first four further meditative states].
 

And again … a good [person], by passing quite beyond the plane of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, enters on and abides in the stopping of perception and feeling; and when [such a person] has seen by means of wisdom [their] cankers are caused to be destroyed. And… this [person] does not imagine [his or her self] to be aught or anywhere or in anything.

 

(MN III 42-45, Pali Text Society Vol III p 92-94)

 

 

He also said that he moved from the state of "neither-perception-nor-non-perception" to the stopping of perception and feeling by means of "lack of desire".

That doesn't say that there aren't gradations in concentration like the descriptions he provided, or that his descriptions aren't accurate.

I find his descriptions of the first four jhanas helpful, but only in passing, and for me things don't move exactly linearly.  Likewise, the notion that the further states begin with "the excellence of the heart's release" through the extension of the mind of compassion throughout the world has been helpful to me.

I think it's possible to arrive at a practice that includes the cessation of inhalation and exhalation on a regular basis, that cessation being the hallmark of the fourth jhana.  To expand what Gautama said in brief, that's the cessation of habit and volition in the activity of the body in inhalation and exhalation.  

The attainment of the cessation of perception and feeling is another matter.  Certainly, Gautama studied under two teachers who were respected in his day, and neither of them had come to such a cessation.  I would say that cessation precipitated Gautama's enlightenment, which was his insight into the four truths, and I don't expect I will attain that cessation (and with it, enlightenment).

Fortunately for me, Gautama encouraged his followers to practice "the development of mindfulness in the four arisings of mindfulness (with sixteen elements)", declaring it was his own way of living before and after enlightenment (in the "Chapter on In-Breathing and Out-Breathing", in Samyutta Nikaya volume V--his way of living when he was "yet the bodhisattva", and "the Tathagatha's way of living").  He said it was a thing perfect in itself, and a pleasant way of living, besides.

The fifteenth of the sixteen elements he outlined was:
 

Contemplating cessation I shall breathe in. Contemplating cessation I shall breathe out.

 

(SN V 312, Pali Text Society Vol V pg 275-276)

 

Also translated as:

 

I will breathe in… breathe out beholding stopping.

 

(MN III 82-83, Pali Text Society III pg 124)

 

So that's it, as long as you can arrive at beholding the cessation of habitual or voluntary activity in inhalation and exhalation, you can practice Gautama's way of living, as a thing perfect in itself.  Forget enlightenment. 

Unfortunately, no one can believe that it's possible for the movement of breath to place attention and simultaneously utilize the location of attention in the autonomic functioning of breath, without experiencing it:

 

It’s impossible to teach the meaning of sitting. You won’t believe it. Not because I say something wrong, but until you experience it and confirm it by yourself, you cannot believe it.

 

(Kobun Chino Otogawa, “Embracing Mind”, edited by Cosgrove & Hall, p 48)

 

Like falling off a log, metaphorically speaking.

 

 

Edited March 16, 2023 by Mark Foote

[Mark Foote]

On 1/24/2023 at 8:53 AM, Creation said:

Allow me to run something by you, a very thoughtful description of the permanent shift in perception that occurred for someone at the far end of the path Ingram teaches:

https://medium.com/@rogerthis/centrelessness-boundarylessness-phenomenology-and-freedom-from-the-cage-of-the-mind-4bccbf65c539

Would you let me know what you think of this, and what it has to do, if anything, with real Dharma as you understand it? 
 

Thisdell was partly on the right track here:
 

When I speak of centrelessness I don’t mean that there is a centre that can move around. Before the centre dropped away permanently, I could move the sense of the centre. By default, it was in the head behind the eyes, but I had learnt how to lower it to the chest or stomach if I wanted to.

 

 

His error is in thinking this is something he does.  In my experience, it's as Gautama said, in his description of the power of concentration:

 

Making self surrender the object of thought, one lays hold of concentration, one lays hold of one-pointedness of mind.

 

(SN V 200, Pali Text Society V 176)

 

And as koun Franz described it:

 

I wouldn’t recommend dedicating your life to it, but as an experiment, I recommend trying it, sitting in this posture and trying to feel what it’s like to let your mind, to let the base of your consciousness, move away from your head. One thing you’ll find, or that I have found, at least, is that you can’t will it to happen, because you’re willing it from your head. To the extent that you can do it, it’s an act of letting go–and a fascinating one.

 

(“No Struggle [Zazen Yojinki, Part 6]”, by Koun Franz, from the “Nyoho Zen” site
https://nyoho.com/2018/09/15/no-struggle-zazen-yojinki-part-6/)

 

 

Gautama said that after he spoke, he returned to that first characteristic of concentration in which he ever abided.  That implies two things:  1) when he spoke, he was not in a state of concentration; 2) there is a first characteristic of concentration, which must either be "making self-surrender the object of thought", or as seems more likely, "one-pointedness of mind" (Thisdell's "sense of the centre").

Oftentimes people quote the first part of Gautama's advice as he was dying:

Therefore… be ye lamps unto yourselves. Be ye a refuge unto yourselves. Betake yourselves to no external refuge. Hold fast to the Truth as a lamp. Hold fast as a refuge to the Truth. Look not for refuge to any one besides yourselves.

 

 

They ignore the larger context:

 

 

Therefore… be ye lamps unto yourselves. Be ye a refuge unto yourselves. Betake yourselves to no external refuge. Hold fast to the Truth as a lamp. Hold fast as a refuge to the Truth. Look not for refuge to any one besides yourselves. And how… is (one) to be a lamp unto (oneself), a refuge unto (oneself), betaking (oneself) to no external refuge, holding fast to the Truth as a lamp, holding fast as a refuge to the Truth, looking not for refuge to any one besides (oneself)?
 

Herein, … (one) continues, as to the body, so to look upon the body that (one) remains strenuous, self-possessed, and mindful, having overcome both the hankering and the dejection common in the world. As to feelings… moods… ideas, (one) continues so to look upon each that (one) remains strenuous, self-possessed, and mindful, having overcome both the hankering and the dejection common in the world.

 

(Digha Nikaya ii 100, Pali Text Society DN Vol. II p 108; Rhys Davids’ “body, feelings, moods, and ideas”, above, rendered by Horner as “body, feelings, mind, and mental states”)

 

He himself "looked upon" the body, the feelings, the mind, and the mental states in the way that he outlined in sixteen elements (I recount the sixteen here).

Did he sometimes move through the further states, to the cessation of (habit and volition in) feeling and perceiving?  I'm sure he did.  Was whatever perceptual shift occurred in the process permanent?  Maybe, but apparently it didn't change his way of living, as he said that was the same both before and after his enlightenment.   

I'll be impressed when those who claim permanent mental shifts for the better talk more about how to sit down and arrive at a mindfulness that includes cessation, as the practical application of their permanent shift (as Gautama did).  

 

Edited March 16, 2023 by Mark Foote