The still mind as freedom; Gunaratana and Jhananda

[Alexander]

I wanted to explore very briefly some of the implications of the still mind. This is quite weird to explore as it is a domain of psychology that has been not at all investigated.

(1) If one is able to still the mind, this implies many other things. It means that one can, in general, (a) control the flow of one's thoughts, (b) stop the thoughts, and (c) set one's thoughts on a particular subject.

(2) Since the majority of human beings -cannot- still their minds, this means, implicitly, that they (a) cannot control the flow of their thoughts, (b) cannot stop their thoughts, and, honestly, (c) cannot set their thoughts on a particular subject.

What this leads to is the fact that anyone who cannot still their mind (i.e., most of humanity) is really -not- in control of themselves. As to be in control of yourself means to be -in control of your mind-.

edited title since we talk about Gunaratana

[Jhanananda]

You have made some good points, aglorincz.  I have been told over the years by people who seemed to think they knew a lot more about meditation than I do, "it is impossible to still your mind."  My response was, "I do.  Why can't you?"

When I told a Bhikkhu at Wat Promkunaram, Phoenix, AZ, USA, when I was on a retreat there that I could still my mind.  He laughed in my face.  But, then, I found the monks there could not even sit still in meditation for 5 minutes.  And, the Wat has been implicated in heroine trafficking.

When I told Gunaratana that I could still my mind, while on retreat with him in Orange County, CA, USA, he crossed his arms, and leaned back in his chair and said, "You are so arrogant."

So, being a Buddhist monk sure does not mean you can still your mind.  Stilling the mind is the 2nd jhana, and jhana is the definition of the 8th fold of the Noble Eightfold Path, so few Buddhist monks can get to the 2nd jhana, therefore few Buddhist monks are even practicing an 8 Fold Path.

[Alexander]

When I told Gunaratana that I could still my mind, while on retreat with him in Orange County, CA, USA, he crossed his arms, and leaned back in his chair and said, "You are so arrogant."

Gunaratana called you arrogant because it is just so inconceivable for him as a layperson to imagine that you have the power to still the mind. Still, it was probably a good experience to have. As it is an aspect of not looking for outward recognition of our accomplishments (siddhis). All these people cannot accept that we may have discovered this thing or that. God has made the holy life so it is genuinely about breaking out of all the outward show. Then the real progress starts.

[Jhanananda]

Gunaratana called you arrogant because it is just so inconceivable for him as a layperson to imagine that you have the power to still the mind.

Alright, so if Gunaratana can still his mind, then why would it be inconceivable for him to believe a layperson can still his or her mind?  He had been teaching meditation for decades to lay and monastic students, so he must have run into others who claimed that they could.

If I can still my mind, then it seems reasonable to me to believe others can as well; and the case histories here prove that.

Gunaratana not believing others can still their mind, only suggests to me that he cannot still his mind, and that is why it is inconceivable for him to believe a layperson can still his or her mind

Still, it was probably a good experience to have. As it is an aspect of not looking for outward recognition of our accomplishments (siddhis). All these people cannot accept that we may have discovered this thing or that. God has made the holy life so it is genuinely about breaking out of all the outward show. Then the real progress starts.

Now this is an interesting comment.  Do you believe that I was looking for outward recognition for my contemplative accomplishments (siddhis) when I told Gunaratana in a private interview at a meditation retreat that he was leading that I could still my mind?

This also suggests that you believe that I am looking for outward recognition for my contemplative accomplishments (siddhis) by running this forum.  If that is true, then why would you even be here.  I know I would not bother with dialog on a forum where I was sure that the forum administrator was just neurotically seeking validation.

The bottom line is, everyone seeking to learn something must be validated by the person that they are learning from, or otherwise they cannot learn whatever it is they want to learn.  It does not matter what one is learning.

So, coming from Gurdjieff and Ouspensky, who were notorious for invalidating their students, I can see why you believe that it is important for a seeker to be invalidated.  The problem is neither Gurdjieff nor Ouspensky demonstrated that they stilled their mind, or had a non-duel experience, or any other religious experiences.  They were just introductory spiritual teachers, at best, or frauds at worst; and religion is the biggest show on earth, which is full of hocus pocus and aggressive marketing.

[Alexander]

Alright, so if Gunaratana can still his mind, then why would it be inconceivable for him to believe a layperson can still his or her mind?  He had been teaching meditation for decades to lay and monastic students, so he must have run into others who claimed that they could.

If I can still my mind, then it seems reasonable to me to believe others can as well; and the case histories here prove that.

Gunaratana not believing others can still their mind, only suggests to me that he cannot still his mind, and that is why it is inconceivable for him to believe a layperson can still his or her mind

I think the confusion here was my fault, because when I used the word "layperson" I was calling -Gunaratana- a layperson. In other words, despite him wearing robes, if he is not one of the four noble people then he is a layman; i.e., he has no experience of the spiritual life proper.

Additionally, you did not seem to get that I was implying that OBVIOUSLY Gunaratana CANNOT still his mind. For some reason you think I believe Gunaratana can still his mind.

Now this is an interesting comment.  Do you believe that I was looking for outward recognition for my contemplative accomplishments (siddhis) when I told Gunaratana in a private interview at a meditation retreat that he was leading that I could still my mind?

This also suggests that you believe that I am looking for outward recognition for my contemplative accomplishments (siddhis) by running this forum.  If that is true, then why would you even be here.  I know I would not bother with dialog on a forum where I was sure that the forum administrator was just neurotically seeking validation.

The bottom line is, everyone seeking to learn something must be validated by the person that they are learning from, or otherwise they cannot learn whatever it is they want to learn.  It does not matter what one is learning.

I am not using "recognition" in an egoic sense. In other words, I am saying it was a long journey for you to go from sitting in the student's seat to having the confidence to be able to recognize yourself -by yourself-. Then, having more confidence to be able to teach others.

[stugandolf]

Having met and talked with Bhante G several times over the years, all I can say about him is I like his nice smile.  I have never found much interest in what he says.  Stu

[Jhanananda]

Thank-you Stu for posting your support.

I think the confusion here was my fault, because when I used the word "layperson" I was calling -Gunaratana- a layperson. In other words, despite him wearing robes, if he is not one of the four noble people then he is a layman; i.e., he has no experience of the spiritual life proper.

Additionally, you did not seem to get that I was implying that OBVIOUSLY Gunaratana CANNOT still his mind. For some reason you think I believe Gunaratana can still his mind.

OK, I get that we had some confusion in the use of terminology.  It happens.

Laity
In religious organizations, the laity consists of all members who are not a part of the clergy, whether they are or are not members of religious institutes...The word lay derives from the Anglo-French lai (from Late Latin laicus, from the Greek λαϊκός, laikos, of the people, from λαός, laos, the people at large).

I suppose we could come up with a term that suits us all better here.  I prefer, "fraud."

Fraud is a deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain (adjectival form fraudulent; to defraud is the verb)

I am not using "recognition" in an egoic sense. In other words, I am saying it was a long journey for you to go from sitting in the student's seat to having the confidence to be able to recognize yourself -by yourself-. Then, having more confidence to be able to teach others.

It is true.  I was painfully shy most of my life.  So, I had to overcome my shyness to accept the teaching roll.

[Michel]

...  I was painfully shy most of my life.  So, I had to overcome my shyness to accept the teaching roll.

I am painfully shy as well. I'm working on overcoming this shyness through insight and cultivating the deep jhanas states.  I have this very strong intuition that the jhanas and the practice of the N8P are key to healing all neurosis and other mental illnesses. Negative early childhood experiences caused unhealthy thought patterns that I've had throughout my entire life. I take full responsibility for these thought patterns. I blame no one for them. I am working on changing them. It is also interesting that when I've been manic, I forget these thought patterns and acquire new ones that are far healthier. There's also a complete change in personality where one is capable of deep altruistic love for others. Despite the delusional frenzy of manic states, there is a very healthy component to them. I've learned a lot from my manic experiences.

How did you overcome your shyness, Jhananda?

[Jhanananda]

How did you overcome your shyness, Jhananda?

It was my experience that by cultivating the jhanas, through following the N8P, were key to healing all neurosis, addictions and other mental illnesses that I had; therefore I am confident that you will find the same healing.

[Michel]

It was my experience that by cultivating the jhanas, through following the N8P, were key to healing all neurosis, addictions and other mental illnesses that I had; therefore I am confident that you will find the same healing.

At what point in your spiritual practice did you begin to shed your shyness?

[Michel]

I wanted to explore very briefly some of the implications of the still mind. This is quite weird to explore as it is a domain of psychology that has been not at all investigated.

(1) If one is able to still the mind, this implies many other things. It means that one can, in general, (a) control the flow of one's thoughts, (b) stop the thoughts, and (c) set one's thoughts on a particular subject.

(2) Since the majority of human beings -cannot- still their minds, this means, implicitly, that they (a) cannot control the flow of their thoughts, (b) cannot stop their thoughts, and, honestly, (c) cannot set their thoughts on a particular subject.

What this leads to is the fact that anyone who cannot still their mind (i.e., most of humanity) is really -not- in control of themselves. As to be in control of yourself means to be -in control of your mind-.

Brilliant post, aglorincz. Stilling the mind is a - great accomplishment - for anyone who manages to do so, for they become the master of their own mind.

[Alexander]

Brilliant post, aglorincz. Stilling the mind is a - great accomplishment - for anyone who manages to do so, for they become the master of their own mind.

Excellent, I am very happy you understood my post. Sometimes I wonder if anyone here does. And, it is not only your mind: because, if you can master your mind, it means you are the master of yourself.

[Jhanananda]

At what point in your spiritual practice did you begin to shed your shyness?

It was probably when I began to develop the immaterial attainments to the 8th samadhi.

aglorincz, just because one has what appears to be intuitive, revelatory insight, into something is insufficient to argue in support of.  One must balance critical thinking with intuitive, revelatory insight, or other wise, in my experience, one can all too easily be misled.

[Cal]

At what point in your spiritual practice did you begin to shed your shyness?

It was probably when I began to develop the immaterial attainments to the 8th samadhi.

aglorincz, just because one has what appears to be intuitive, revelatory insight, into something is insufficient to argue in support of.  One must balance critical thinking with intuitive, revelatory insight, or other wise, in my experience, one can all too easily be misled.

Listen to your teacher?

Thank-you Stu for posting your support.

I think the confusion here was my fault, because when I used the word "layperson" I was calling -Gunaratana- a layperson. In other words, despite him wearing robes, if he is not one of the four noble people then he is a layman; i.e., he has no experience of the spiritual life proper.

Additionally, you did not seem to get that I was implying that OBVIOUSLY Gunaratana CANNOT still his mind. For some reason you think I believe Gunaratana can still his mind.

OK, I get that we had some confusion in the use of terminology.  It happens.

Laity
In religious organizations, the laity consists of all members who are not a part of the clergy, whether they are or are not members of religious institutes...The word lay derives from the Anglo-French lai (from Late Latin laicus, from the Greek λαϊκός, laikos, of the people, from λαός, laos, the people at large).

I suppose we could come up with a term that suits us all better here.  I prefer, "fraud."

LOLOLOLOL!! My belly hurts from out bursting so hard! So sorry my intention is not to be insensitive, Alexander, it's just Jhanananda has an irrefutable way about him. My laughter is only directed at jhanananda choice of term being fraud. His way to call things precisely what they are.

[Alexander]

Yes, I should not have used the word "layman" here. It was not appropriate. I will also let you off for laughing at me. But, just this once. :)