Started this thread as it occurred to me while recalling our previous phone conversation.
You seem to have some misunderstanding about the insight of anatta... as you were equating what I have experienced with one of the earlier nana stages.
Years back, I think many years ago... I have already started to experience the early nana stages... there can be a sense of total non-duality where there is only mind and body, there were various perceptual shifts, bliss, equanimity, etc, there can be a sense of heightened awareness and visions of bright lights and so on. I have asked Daniel M. Ingram (whose free e-book I think was very well written anyway) years back - a qualified teacher in the Mahasi Sayadaw tradition asked to teach by Sayadaw U Pandita Jr, who have informed me that these were the nanas first to four.
They are very different from the insight of Anatta which I have gained last year in October... which is not a temporary nana stage, or a temporary shift of perception through a gradual Vipassana practice. Rather, it is a permanent realization - brought about by contemplating on Bahiya Sutta. This is a direct form of contemplation... not via a gradual path of practice such as that laid out in the Visudhimagga (along with its 16 stages of insight, aka nanas).
It is not a stage that I can enter or maintain or get out of... rather, it is a permanent realization about a fact that always is (in seeing always just the seen without seer, in hearing always just the heard without hearer), and is a process that has simply ended (the illusion of a self) - rather than needing effort to maintain.
Every moment of my life, this is a fact that is being realized, seen and experienced... whether I am thinking, not thinking, meditating, or walking, or talking. What is realized cannot be unrealized.
Another issue I have with is the 16 nanas... which are not actually from the suttas, but have their origins from Visuddhimagga which is a latter commentary.
While I know this is a valid path that many has walked... I do not agree that this is the only path.
There are two completely different paths. There is the gradual path, such as via noting, in which a practitioner observes impermanence and the three characteristics and gradually ascends the nanas, culminates in a fruition, and then cycles through again many times... more fruitions, more cycles, as he gradually ascends the paths (maggas), from sotapanna to arhatship.
In short, the gradual path is one of increase perceptual clarity (of dharmas, of the three seals) and transversing of nanas until realization occurs. The direct path is one of directly aiming at realization, yet without (initially) the gradual stability (strength of mindfulness and samadhi) that has been accumulated over the years of practice.
It should be noted... from those who have gone through this path, that what I define as the realization of anatta (not merely an increase perceptual clarity or experience of impersonality, or even non-duality, or even a temporary state of no-self - whatever experiences that are state-like or stage-like can clearly be ruled out as the realization of anatta as I call it is without entry and exiting)... have reported that the realization of anatta (defined by me as, 'in the seeing just the seen', in the hearing just the heard') hasn't occurred until much later. Means, under the technical (16 nanas model), even a supposed sotapanna hasn't realized Anatta (defined as realizing 'in seeing just the seen', etc) even though they have experienced the nanas and the resulting fruition/cessation! But the technical model (originated from Visudhimagga) is different from the fetter model (originated from Buddha). It should be noted that those who experienced so called sotapanna in the technical model still report that their daily experiences are mostly in a dualistic mode of perception, they still see themselves as a perceiving subject viewing the objective universe, even though they now have better intuition of the three characteristics. That is why Daniel M. Ingram and many practitioners ended up defining the realization of Anatta as Arhatship as it only occurred much later, traversing the 16 nanas countless times. I, for example, was labelled an Arhat by one of their moderators (from Dharma Overground)... however they did said that the definition of Arhat was one that was challenged after 2009, when they became more inclined to think of the 10 fetter model as being more accurate to the Buddha's original teachings, and after they have started to experience emotions being permanently stopped as being a distinct possibility. (so there are now different models of the stages) Daniel now states that what he calls 4th path* is actually Buddha's Sotapanna by the fetter model definition. I for example clearly do not think I am an Arhat under the 10 fetter model definition of things even though I am experiencing gradual emotional transformation since the initial realization of Anatta.
So much for the gradual path. There is another path which I said earlier is entirely different... which does not require traversing the 16 nanas at all. It is the path that Buddha taught Bahiya - simply contemplating 'in seeing just the seen' until realization into Anatta arises. The realization is permanent, without entry, without exiting.
As I wrote before,
First I do not see Anatta as merely a freeing from personality sort
of experience as you mentioned; I see it as that a self/agent, a doer, a
thinker, a watcher, etc, cannot be found apart from the moment to
moment flow of manifestation or as its commonly expressed as ‘the
observer is the observed’; there is no self apart from arising and
passing. A very important point here is that Anatta/No-Self is a Dharma
Seal, it is the nature of Reality all the time -- and not merely as a
state free from personality, ego or the ‘small self’ or a stage to
attain. This means that it does not depend on the level of achievement of a practitioner to experience anatta but Reality has always been Anatta and what is important here is the intuitive insight into it as the nature, characteristic, of phenomenon (dharma seal).
To put further emphasis on the importance of this point, I would like to borrow from the Bahiya Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.10.irel.html)
that ‘in the seeing, there is just the seen, no seer’, ‘in the hearing,
there is just the heard, no hearer’ as an illustration. When a person
says that I have gone beyond the experiences from ‘I hear sound’ to a
stage of ‘becoming sound’, he is mistaken. When it is taken to be a
stage, it is illusory. For in actual case, there is and always is only
sound when hearing; never was there a hearer to begin with. Nothing
attained for it is always so. This is the seal of no-self. Therefore to a
non dualist, the practice is in understanding the illusionary views of
the sense of self and the split. Before the awakening of prajna wisdom,
there will always be an unknowing attempt to maintain a purest state of
'presence'. This purest presence is the 'how' of a dualistic mind -- its
dualistic attempt to provide a solution due to its lack of clarity of
the spontaneous nature of the unconditioned. It is critical to note here
that both the doubts/confusions/searches and the solutions that are
created for these doubts/confusions/searches actually derive from the
same cause -- our karmic propensities of ever seeing things
dualistically
Another important issue is that those of the gradual approach dissolves the sense of self gradually through observing impermanence... yet the intensity of luminosity is not being directly realized and experienced until much later.
*Daniel's definition of 4th path:
I practiced zen, and after getting realization it felt that there is weight lifted off me which never return, so I agree that nanas was irrelevant to me at that time.
But after investigating dhyana states more after I heard of Daniel and Kenneth, I can see that nanas are a natural progression for meditators, and it helps if one knows about them.
I had serious dark night episodes before, if I had known about the maps at that time I wouldn't have gotten freaked out about it. Now in my meditation, I can discern the progression through nanas as I reach for jhanna state.
I don't know how nanas can lead to insight tho, because I haven't experienced what they described as fruition, and reading about the posts in their forums, it seem the practitioner are not firm in their insight as they keep looking for other practices like actualism.
Hi Jinlin,
What realizations are you talking about specifically, and how does the dhyana states help?
Incidentally, as gradual vipassana wasn't my style of practice, I have always been in the PCE mode ever since my initial insight of Anatta. The problem of "attention wave" and the switching between cycling and PCE mode as described by Daniel hasn't been a problem to me from the beginning, as I have never experienced cycle mode to begin with (and neither does Thusness as far as I understand), owing to my method and path of practice. The last time I hit nanas was probably years ago? Or over a year ago?
In the PCE mode I experience perfection and yes, cycling and all the rest do not happen, and I do not have desires for anything to happen because this moment is perfect as it is.
The aspect of PCE is what I and Thusness have found to be lacking in the MTCB approach, and without this aspect one will not be able to have complete insight into Anatta.
By the way what is your display name in DhO?
Oh by the way, I think their looking for actualism is in fact not a bad thing... because they lacked PCEs from their previous approach to insight. Even when Daniel has gotten his so called Arhantship, the PCE aspect was more like a short glimpse for him rather than a stabilized constant experience.
I did not need Actualism, because owing to my method and path of practice, PCE is already a constant and given for me and Thusness.
My understanding is that for those who haven't realized Anatta, the gradual path's cycling mode and the nanas will provide useful insights (if one chooses to walk this path)... but once you realized Anatta, then PCE becomes more important and you no longer need the cycling mode.
In fact in this PCE mode, cycling will not even happen:
Contrast (no-dog) with a PCE, in which affect except the subtle thrill and
wonder of the PCE is there but cycles seem not to be able to happen in
at all. Compare similarly to a PCE: both are remarkable, both feel like
they are complete and freeing, and both fade largely due to fear of them
vanishing. Both are also not the final answer, so it seems from this
vantage point. (Daniel)
PCE mode and Cycling mode is discussed in details here: http://dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message_boards/message/600967?doAsUserId=U4FYRpmIICQ%3D%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F10847%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F79754&_19_doAsUserId=U4FYRpmIICQ%3D%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F10847%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F79754&_19_doAsUserId=U4FYRpmIICQ%3D%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F10847%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F79754&_19_threadView=tree
I see myself as a yogi who has realization but still has lots of habitual energy that hold me back from putting it into practice all the time. By realization I meant that I can see and accept what Buddha and other teachers has written about, i.e: no self, impermanence, suffering.
I looked to dhyana states to further my practice as suggested by Thanissaro Bhikkhu in this teaching http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/paradoxofbecoming.pdf
From this teaching, I can see how being familiar in jhanna states is helpful in getting more detached to old habits, and from there hopefully I can progress further in my practice.
I have found that my concentration ability was not developed before and I see most people that succeed in actualism/pce already had ability to enter jhanna at will. So I wanted to develop this skill and so far I found it has been helpful to my practice.
important highlight/summary from page 8 of paradoxofbecoming.pdf
Thus to put an end to suffering, it’s necessary to put an end to becoming. And
to do that, it’s necessary to understand the process that gives rise to becoming,
so that the problem can be attacked at its cause. This is why the Buddha focused
on becoming as process.
...
Because any desire that produces becoming also produces suffering, the
Buddha was faced with a strategic challenge: how to put an end to suffering
when the desire to put an end to suffering would lead to renewed suffering.
...
Becoming could be allowed to end through creating a specific state of
becoming—the condition of mental absorption known as jhanna—watered by
specific types of craving and clinging. This type of becoming, together with its
appropriate causes, is what constitutes the path he later taught. Once the path
had done its work, he found, it could be abandoned through a process of
perceptual deconstruction
I see... then do continue your practice as I think it is helpful for you at the moment.
Hi AEN.I think it will be easier to talk and dicuss on these topics on one of your nites out days :)
To put further emphasis on the importance of this point, I would like to borrow from the Bahiya Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.10.irel.html) that ‘in the seeing, there is just the seen, no seer’, ‘in the hearing, there is just the heard, no hearer’ as an illustration.
"Herein, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: 'In the seen will be merely what is seen; in the heard will be merely what is heard; in the sensed will be merely what is sensed; in the cognized will be merely what is cognized.' In this way you should train yourself, Bahiya.
"When, Bahiya, for you in the seen is merely what is seen... in the cognized is merely what is cognized, then, Bahiya, you will not be 'with that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'with that,' then, Bahiya, you will not be 'in that.' When, Bahiya, you are not 'in that,' then, Bahiya, you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two. Just this is the end of suffering."
ah, the "seen, heard, sensed, cognized" is translated as "�闻觉知", isn't it.