Jhanon's Blog

[Jhanon]

Why are Enlightened Teachers So Repetitive?

Have you ever wondered this!? Why are all the authentically enlightened teachers so repetitive? You ask one question and they say "It is as it is", you ask a completely different, like where's the bathroom, and "It is as it is." Or in the case of our beloved guide/teacher here, "rigorous, self-aware, contemplative life." Now listen. I'm writing this with a smile of friendship on my face. I mean no insult at all. Instead, I show my compliments, as you will see.

The Initial Elation of Intuitive Insight
For the last week or two, I've developed a system of meditation, walking and writing that has proven very efficacious for me. I found if I go on meditative walks, or what I call "intuitive walking", I experience insight after insight into dhamma. I began jotting down the comprehensive summaries of these insights on my phone, and then continue walking until something more compelling arose. It's a remarkable experience, because numerous coincidences and/or synchronicity between the internal and external experience that generate a strong draw--perhaps more aptly "gravity."

The Growing Burden of Insight
I would go home, and write for hours as the intuitive stream continued. They really began to pile up. Soon, on these walks, these insights that I hadn't seen expressed anywhere before began to interconnect with well-known ancient knowledges, and then modern interpretations of the ancient knowledge. And, well, you get the idea. The web became larger and larger until I just couldn't figure out how to focus the book. In honesty, I want the book to contain ALL OF IT in all it's splendor, but I am beginning to feel like there will be no end to this. Which is half my point about teacher providing short or repetitive answers.

The Ultimate Question
I began looking for ways to concisely express the most important knowledge, because I'm fairly certain no one will be able to read through what would be a bible-length book once finished. Which brings us back to our repetitive teachers. "Presence" this, "self-aware contemplative" that. I think, maybe like it is beginning to feel like my experience, they see TOO much. Perhaps to the tipping point, where the constant stream of insight is no longer as palpable as tranquility and peace.

After years, decades of explaining and teaching, do you think they would eventually just roll it all back in? I liked how the Buddha did it. He had only the most important information, as carefully organized and expressed as possible.

The Fool Inside Still Lives
And yet, there is a part inside me--probably the intellect becoming addicted to the intuitive conscience--that wants to spend the rest of this life putting the compelling inter-connectivity of the Dhamma down on paper so that a generation full of intellects can have their minds blown, the hearts uplifted, and their consciousness liberated.

[Jhanananda]

It is true, Jhanon, that wisdom is endless, so one gets to a point that one finds stillness is better than a constant stream of insight, so one learns to turn it off most of the time, and turns it back on when needed.

I think it is a good thing that you write down your insights, and work to organize your insights in book form, so perhaps one day your book will take form, when the time to publish it. 

Also, the world needs mystics to contextualize their wisdom by showing how it is like past mystics.  So, before your book will be complete, you will need to build a collection of quotes from a range of mystics that support your premises.

[Jhanon]

It is true, Jhanon, that wisdom is endless, so one gets to a point that one finds stillness is better than a constant stream of insight, so one learns to turn it off most of the time, and turns it back on when needed.

I think it is a good thing that you write down your insights, and work to organize your insights in book form, so perhaps one day your book will take form, when the time to publish it. 

Also, the world needs mystics to contextualize their wisdom by showing how it is like past mystics.  So, before your book will be complete, you will need to build a collection of quotes from a range of mystics that support your premises.

Well, Jhananda, I have found the ability to turn it off....sometimes. Okay, when I'm exhausted--hahaha! But, I'm really experiencing a tremendous amount of ecstasy, fulfillment, bliss, refinement of conscience, insight, and I feel like I'm doing exactly what I'm supposed to be doing. Guided, accommodated, at almost every step. It's like walking in rhythm with devas of creation--I suppose.

And, I'm sorry if I've ignored attending to other matters on here. I'm learning to prioritize, or at the least, I've learned to keep track of not only the entries of original words of inspiration--BUT THE INSPIRATION ITSELF. I come back, and re-enter the state I was in. I will not claim to be St. John of the Cross, but is it not so that he would lock himself away and his important writings simply poured out? That is really quite humbling to consider.

This is a wondrous life, the life of a mystic, all alone in a room for days on end--and absolutely fulfilled. I intend to talk about that side of it more on here, or in the book.

[Jhanon]

Also, I intend to share some, when it is ready. I've learned to restrain myself when the really profound insights come. And let them flow at their own pace. Waiting to know they are finished.

[Jhanananda]

Insight is a good thing.  It does need to be tempered by critical thinking, and a great deal of reading.  Because, when you think that you have figured something out that no one else, is when you need to balance that insight with critical thinking, and a great deal of reading. When you do so, is when you will know whether you have come up with some truly new and unique, or something that every mystic in the past has expressed, or something that is just manic-delusional.

[Jhanon]

Insight is a good thing.  It does need to be tempered by critical thinking, and a great deal of reading.  Because, when you think that you have figured something out that no one else, is when you need to balance that insight with critical thinking, and a great deal of reading. When you do so, is when you will know whether you have come up with some truly new and unique, or something that every mystic in the past has expressed, or something that is just manic-delusional.

I humbly agree.

[Jhanon]

There's always 7, while the eighth is all of them, and the ninth one is ineffable: Nibanna

~ Chakras: the eighth one is culmination of all, and the ninth one being nibanna.
~ N8P: the 8th (right absorption) one is culmination of all, and the ninth one being nibanna.
~ Stages of Samadhi: the eighth one is culmination of all, and the ninth one being nibanna.
~ Factors of Enlightenment: the eighth one is culmination of all, and the ninth one being nibanna.
~ Stages: Ordinary, Awakened, Stream, Once-Returner, Non-Returner, Arahant, Deathless, Nibanna

Just writing outloud. Don't mind it. I don't have access to my digital journal or PC. Please so not misinterpret this content as a claim.

[Jhanon]

I apologize for not being around on here lately. I've been making a steady rate of progress that I've chosen to absorb into. I've recorded mostly everything which interestingly increased the rate of progress further. Then people starting asking for and seeking guidance spontaneously. I accommodated the best i could which made progress even more rapid.

In short, I am finding there are definable mind-archetypes of those in the stream, with specific affinities which when followed and developed consciously, arouse the factors of enlightenment. When I have a free moment for formal meditation, the rapidity and insights into the arising of factors of enlightenment in samadhi is profound. It reminds me of how Neo from the Matrix learned things directly and rapidly. I want to share this gist and that I am recording as much as possible in hopes it will benefit many more.

The initial cause which eventually prompted this post:

Ignorance and negligence is EXHAUSTING. I have found i must limit the amount of interaction with the kind of individuals, for example, those who cling to religious doctrine or any doctrine.

However, If they are willing to question everything they think they know, then it is energizing.

In the case of the former, I notice an interesting and unique inner-sense. It's difficult to put in words.

This fails to express it adequately, but I will risk seeming arrogant and say that Jhananda I understand now why you sometimes are "short" with someone or something. That was the first insight into it I had, but I did not want to appear presumptuous.

I am so sorry for what you've had to endure for the likes of me and the precious few. Or at least, I thank you for being patient--exceedingly patient

[Jhanananda]

Good to hear from you again, Jhanon.  The suttas describe people who, in your words, "cling to religious doctrine or any doctrine."  They are said to suffer from the hindrance of fixed views.  In English we would say they are dogmatic. 

The devout tend to obsess over their religious doctrine, without ever asking whether it is properly translated, or understood. This is why they rarely become contemplatives; and if they rarely become contemplatives, then they even more rarely become mystics. 

In fact the history of mystics shows that most of them were marginalized.  Who would marginalize a mystic?  It would be the devout.  So I recommend avoiding the devout and working with people who have enough self inquiry to become contemplatives, and who apply sufficient effort in the contemplative arts to begin to become mystics.

While my writing here might seem to be short with people, I do not find myself so.  I just have to keep reminding the members of this forum that just because someone is a Buddhist monk or nun does not mean he or she ever meditated, or learned to meditate skillfully.  Just because a Buddhist monk or nun translated some suttas, and got them published does not mean that their translations are not deeply flawed by bias.  Just because someone published a book or chart describing the experience of deep meditation, or as it is known in the suttas as samadhi or jhana, does not mean that person knows anything about deep meditation (samadhi or jhana) from direct experience.  Just because someone claiming to be a scientist who did some research on deep meditation does not mean that "scientist" even bothered to find out whether his or her subjects properly understood what deep meditation (samadhi or jhana) was, or ever had such an experience.  Just because a religious person is well liked, or loved, by thousands, millions, or billions of people does not mean that person is even a contemplative, let alone a mystic.  In fact it is more likely that individual is most probably not even a contemplative, let alone a mystic, because historically mystics have been marginalized in every religion.

[Michel]

"Right View" must be derived and proven from direct experience. Sounds like a pretty dogmatic statement, LOL...

The Buddha of the early discourses often refers to the negative effect of attachment to speculative or fixed views, dogmatic opinions, or even correct views if not personally known to be true. In describing the highly diverse intellectual landscape of his day, he is said to have referred to "the wrangling of views, the jungle of views."[6] He assumed an unsympathetic attitude toward speculative and religious thought in general...

Sorry I couldn't come up with a better source than Wiki. But it's food for thought.

[Jhanon]

I agree, Jhananda. I was trying to say the strength and frequency with which you communicate these things is by no means unjustified or excessive as might appear to some. Actually, having been attacked with copy/pasted doctrine in an attempt to marginalize what I've stated--that instead illustrates what I stated--is maddening. This is what the individual did.

The various forms of lunacy in such an act is enough to drive one insane.

"Right View" must be derived and proven from direct experience. Sounds like a pretty dogmatic statement, LOL...

The Buddha of the early discourses often refers to the negative effect of attachment to speculative or fixed views, dogmatic opinions, or even correct views if not personally known to be true. In describing the highly diverse intellectual landscape of his day, he is said to have referred to "the wrangling of views, the jungle of views."[6] He assumed an unsympathetic attitude toward speculative and religious thought in general...

Sorry I couldn't come up with a better source than Wiki. But it's food for thought.

Michel, the bold phrase you provided, let's imagine it was directed at me as admonishment--that would be a perfect example of what I just described. LOL!

It's good to see you back from retreat! You seemed to have increased Energy and Invesrigation, among other factors, just before you went on retreat, and in my repeat experience, if that is sustained while meditating, it leads to terrifyingly ecstatic samadhi. Did you record some samadhi experiences? I would love to read some

[Jhanananda]

I agree, Jhananda. I was trying to say the strength and frequency with which you communicate these things is by no means unjustified or excessive as might appear to some. Actually, having been attacked with copy/pasted doctrine in an attempt to marginalize what I've stated--that instead illustrates what I stated--is maddening. This is what the individual did.

The various forms of lunacy in such an act is enough to drive one insane.

Yes, it is quite maddening when I found every where I go I am attacked for expressing myself.  This is why I have retreated back to my own 2 forums, and do not go onto other forums any more.

"Right View" must be derived and proven from direct experience. Sounds like a pretty dogmatic statement, LOL...

The Buddha of the early discourses often refers to the negative effect of attachment to speculative or fixed views, dogmatic opinions, or even correct views if not personally known to be true. In describing the highly diverse intellectual landscape of his day, he is said to have referred to "the wrangling of views, the jungle of views."[6] He assumed an unsympathetic attitude toward speculative and religious thought in general...

Sorry I couldn't come up with a better source than Wiki. But it's food for thought.

Thanks, Michel, for the interesting quote.  I wonder if the term that is being translated as "speculative view" could also be translated, or interpreted, as a belief system which is not supported by direct experience?  Because, most religions, including Buddhism today, depend upon blind faith in a belief system; whereas, the suttas really do not offer, nor expect, faith in a belief system. 

The suttas really offer a cogent and logically true philosophical system, critical thinking, an ethical system, a contemplative practice strategy that does not require any faith or devotion to a religious system, and an excellent description of the meditation experience.  In fact I have been reflecting recently that what the suttas offer could be embraced by any person regardless of their religion or culture, without the individual having to renounce their religion or culture.  This means a Christian, or Jew, or Muslim, or Hindu, or Taoist, etc. could embrace the philosophical system, critical thinking, ethical system, contemplative practice strategy, and description of the meditation experience found in the suttas without renouncing, or violating, any part of their religion.

[Michel]

I agree, Jhananda. I was trying to say the strength and frequency with which you communicate these things is by no means unjustified or excessive as might appear to some. Actually, having been attacked with copy/pasted doctrine in an attempt to marginalize what I've stated--that instead illustrates what I stated--is maddening. This is what the individual did.

The various forms of lunacy in such an act is enough to drive one insane.

"Right View" must be derived and proven from direct experience. Sounds like a pretty dogmatic statement, LOL...

The Buddha of the early discourses often refers to the negative effect of attachment to speculative or fixed views, dogmatic opinions, or even correct views if not personally known to be true. In describing the highly diverse intellectual landscape of his day, he is said to have referred to "the wrangling of views, the jungle of views."[6] He assumed an unsympathetic attitude toward speculative and religious thought in general...

Sorry I couldn't come up with a better source than Wiki. But it's food for thought.

Michel, the bold phrase you provided, let's imagine it was directed at me as admonishment--that would be a perfect example of what I just described. LOL!

Hahaha. No, it wasn't directed at you, Jhanon. But forgive me, I do love to copy and paste. I hope it doesn't drive to lunacy.

It's good to see you back from retreat! You seemed to have increased Energy and Invesrigation, among other factors, just before you went on retreat, and in my repeat experience, if that is sustained while meditating, it leads to terrifyingly ecstatic samadhi. Did you record some samadhi experiences? I would love to read some

Well I'm still on my solo retreat. I may remain on retreat until the spring where Ill emerge from hibernation like all the other creatures that keep a low profile for the winter months. It's the dead of winter here in the North Country. It's very quiet.  I'm blessed to have all this time to myself with so very few responsibilities. So it's perfect.

My meditations are more intense and deeper. I'm learning different approaches. Will tell you my findings later. But wish to keep a low profile for now. I couldn't resist posting on this subject of views. It's so important to understand what we are discussing here.

[Michel]

...In fact I have been reflecting recently that what the suttas offer could be embraced by any person regardless of their religion or culture, without the individual having to renounce their religion or culture.  This means a Christian, or Jew, or Muslim, or Hindu, or Taoist, etc. could embrace the philosophical system, critical thinking, ethical system, contemplative practice strategy, and description of the meditation experience found in the suttas without renouncing, or violating, any part of their religion.

Well said, and thank-you, Jhananda.

It's coincidental, since in the last few months I have been thinking something similar. I think that if you are of a different faith or belief system, and you are considering the Buddhist path as described in the Pali suttas, you might very well have initial skeptical doubt about "Right View" of the N8P. So take away kamma and rebirth and leave in the Four Nobile Truths. Some would call this secular Buddhism. But I agree that there should be no problem for any religious group to practice the N8P without violating their faith. But Buddhism is perceived as a religion because some groups have turned it into one. What we see in the suttas is to me a method of practice, a philosophy, that will lead one to realize through direct experience various knowledges such as kamma and rebirth, culminating in final liberation. The Buddha beckons us to find out for ourselves, to prove for ourselves, if his approach works. So if my understanding is correct these knowledges are the fruits of Jhana.

I agree with you, if I understand you correctly, what is presented in the suttas is not a religious doctrine at all.

[Jhanananda]

The Buddha beckons us to find out for ourselves, to prove for ourselves, if his approach works. So if my understanding is correct these knowledges are the fruits of Jhana.

Yes, that has been my experience.  This is why I encourage people to meditate deeply, because I have found all of the other fruit come just from learning to meditate deeply.

Yes, I also agree that not much has to be taken out of the N8P to "sanitize" it for another culture and religion.

Funny I have developed a friendship with a local biologist, who happens to be a Jehovah's Witness.  He thinks he is converting me to his belief system.  In our conversation last week he got onto the topic of suffering.  He said there was not much in the bible on the subject.  He gave me a quote to look up, first Timothy 3:16

Beyond all question, the mystery from which true godliness springs is great: He appeared in the flesh, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.

Indeed, the sacred secret of this godly devotion is admittedly great: ‘He was made manifest in flesh,+ was declared righteous in spirit,+ appeared to angels,+ was preached about among nations,+ was believed upon in the world,+ was received up in glory.’

Well, his quote does not do much for me.  I see that he goal, as it is for most Christians, is to obsess over one mystic, and seek the fantastic. I prefer the practicality, and cogency, of the 4 Noble Truths.

I told the Jehovah's Witness biologist about the 4 Noble Truths.  He was clearly offended.