5 ms·

> Once we have crossed the Arising and Passing Away (and if we don’t suddenly die or get severe brain damage due to some unfortunate life circumstances), we sha

by andai 4y ago

> Once we have crossed the Arising and Passing Away (and if we don’t suddenly die or get severe brain damage due to some unfortunate life circumstances), we shall enter insight stages five through ten regardless of whether we want to. It doesn’t matter if we practice from this point on; once we cross the A&P, we are in the Dark Night to some degree and become what is sometimes called a “Dark Night yogi”, or simply “darknighter”, until we figure out how to get through it. If we do get through it without getting to the first stage of enlightenment, we will have to go through it again and again until we do. I mean this in the most absolute terms. It appears to be a hardwired part of human physiology as far as I can tell. I have a very large and growing body of case studies and a wealth of shared experiences among meditation friends and acquaintances to back this up, and I am not alone. Tens of thousands of meditators have noticed these stages in their own practice and countless teachers have noticed them also. Daniel Ingram, Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha https://www.mctb.org/mctb2/table-of-contents/part-iv-insight/30-the-progress-of-insight/5-dissolution-entrance-to-the-dark-night/ https://www.mctb.org/mctb2/table-of-contents/part-iv-insight...

wirrbel 4y ago
It should be noted that Daniel Ingram is following the Mahasi sayadaw method and is a bit from of a fringe Buddhist subculture promoting (if I am not confusing things „dry insight“ meditation). Maybe the cultivation of the non-dry aspects is actually helpful.
- andai 4y ago
  I am a noob, does dry insight mean no concentration practices? The book says a significant amount of concentration practice is necessary before it is possible to make any progress with insight practice, and also recommends continuing concentration practice as a stabilizing and comforting influence against the destabilizing and often unpleasant insight journey.
  - zozbot234 4y ago
    I assume that's a reference to reaching awareness of the three characteristics by "noting" perceptions and sensations in the mind as if blasting enemies in a video game. That's a very intense vipassana practice and while it apparently makes for quick progress towards full awakening, one could argue that it's not for everyone.
  - wirrbel 4y ago
    I guess I am also a noob and I am not an expert on the Mahasi method, but in general buddhist meditation has like 3 pillars, metta (loving-kindness meditation, also features self-love), samatha: (tranquility or calm abiding), vipassana (insight). Samatha and vipassana would be preconditions to awakening (bodhi). samatha contains sati [mindfulness], samadhi [stable attention], piti [joy], passaddhi [tranquility], upekkha [equanimy]). vipassana is insight (among others) into anicca [impermanence], sunnata [emptyness], dukkha [stress], paticcasamuppada [interdependence of phenomena], anatta [no-observable self],.... The meditative states of jhana (dhyana in sanskrit, chan in chinese, Zen in japanese although the meaning has changed while the term traveled further east) originate from samatha practice. Overall most Theravāda traditions or traditions that take the pali canon as a source kind of use this metta, samatha/sati, vipassana classification and acknowledge jhanas as meditative states. However, the meditation practice in the theravāda tradition was revived in the 19th/20th century only, so there is in the theravāda tradition no continuous meditation teaching lineage, so people had to make sense of the Pali canon source texts, which aren't exactly a meditation manual as we expect it today and there are concurrent approaches. I am just a casual meditator (like 2-3 times per week) but overall an avid reader so I have seen quite a few different takes on how metta, mindfulness and insight meditation relate, most aren't dismissing one of these practices entirely, but the order and emphasis on when to practice what differ greatly. "dry-insight" is a I think to be understood as a counterpoint to voices that stated that a buddhist needs to practice concentration first and potentially even reach the jhanas before practicing Vipassana. So concentration / sati is not entirely dismissed. The idea of "dry-insight" is, that fewer meditation hours practicing concentration may be enough to develop insights and it is thus also advertised as a "quicker way" to awakening. Overall, when reading or listening to meditation teachers, I am cautious about claims to "speed", which makes me a bit reserved about the Mahasi noting method crowd. What made sense to me was: Laypeople should practice Metta meditation in any case. Practicing Sati (mindfulness) and Samādhi (concentration) is like taking your brain to the gym & spa, it should also help you a lot in dealing with stressful emotions, if your meditation object are your senses (breath, feet in walking meditation, hands while washing dishes) this seems to be a rather well-grounded activity and not inherently dangerous (unless maybe you have a serious psychological condition). Proficient enough in Sati (mindfulness) and Samādhi (concentration), the route could go to practicing samatha and vipassana. Now my assumption would be that if you directly overemphasize vipassana and your skills for concentration, tranquility and equanimity aren't sufficient to contain reactions when 'insight' hits you. That being said, Vipassana covers a wide range of stuff. Like "Body Scans" as done in Mindfulness based Stress reduction (MBSR) are thought of IIRC as vipassana practices, and IMHO they could just as well be thought of as sati practice.
wirrbel 4y ago
btw. Daniel Ingram refers to himself as an Aharat/aharant and it is kind of a no-no in buddhism to talk about your own "awakening-status". That's a serious red-flag.
- nprateem 4y ago
  Either that or it's a cultural difference and he doesn't see the point of hiding it.
  - wirrbel 4y ago
    Any other instance that comes to my mind is cult leaders. As in I am not aware of a western theravāda teacher referring to himself as an arhant
    - andai 4y ago
      He covers the motivation for this in the book (as well as other departures from traditions of not talking about things he considers important to talk about). Basically there's a tradition of people keeping people in the dark about things that he thinks does more harm than good. I'm not qualified to comment on the wisdom of either approach, just pointing out that it's covered in the first part of the book, and other parts, e.g. "Mushroom Factor".

by andai 4y ago

wirrbel 4y ago

It should be noted that Daniel Ingram is following the Mahasi sayadaw method and is a bit from of a fringe Buddhist subculture promoting (if I am not confusing things „dry insight“ meditation). Maybe the cultivation of the non-dry aspects is actually helpful.

andai 4y ago
I am a noob, does dry insight mean no concentration practices? The book says a significant amount of concentration practice is necessary before it is possible to make any progress with insight practice, and also recommends continuing concentration practice as a stabilizing and comforting influence against the destabilizing and often unpleasant insight journey.
- zozbot234 4y ago
  I assume that's a reference to reaching awareness of the three characteristics by "noting" perceptions and sensations in the mind as if blasting enemies in a video game. That's a very intense vipassana practice and while it apparently makes for quick progress towards full awakening, one could argue that it's not for everyone.
- wirrbel 4y ago
  I guess I am also a noob and I am not an expert on the Mahasi method, but in general buddhist meditation has like 3 pillars, metta (loving-kindness meditation, also features self-love), samatha: (tranquility or calm abiding), vipassana (insight). Samatha and vipassana would be preconditions to awakening (bodhi). samatha contains sati [mindfulness], samadhi [stable attention], piti [joy], passaddhi [tranquility], upekkha [equanimy]). vipassana is insight (among others) into anicca [impermanence], sunnata [emptyness], dukkha [stress], paticcasamuppada [interdependence of phenomena], anatta [no-observable self],.... The meditative states of jhana (dhyana in sanskrit, chan in chinese, Zen in japanese although the meaning has changed while the term traveled further east) originate from samatha practice. Overall most Theravāda traditions or traditions that take the pali canon as a source kind of use this metta, samatha/sati, vipassana classification and acknowledge jhanas as meditative states. However, the meditation practice in the theravāda tradition was revived in the 19th/20th century only, so there is in the theravāda tradition no continuous meditation teaching lineage, so people had to make sense of the Pali canon source texts, which aren't exactly a meditation manual as we expect it today and there are concurrent approaches. I am just a casual meditator (like 2-3 times per week) but overall an avid reader so I have seen quite a few different takes on how metta, mindfulness and insight meditation relate, most aren't dismissing one of these practices entirely, but the order and emphasis on when to practice what differ greatly. "dry-insight" is a I think to be understood as a counterpoint to voices that stated that a buddhist needs to practice concentration first and potentially even reach the jhanas before practicing Vipassana. So concentration / sati is not entirely dismissed. The idea of "dry-insight" is, that fewer meditation hours practicing concentration may be enough to develop insights and it is thus also advertised as a "quicker way" to awakening. Overall, when reading or listening to meditation teachers, I am cautious about claims to "speed", which makes me a bit reserved about the Mahasi noting method crowd. What made sense to me was: Laypeople should practice Metta meditation in any case. Practicing Sati (mindfulness) and Samādhi (concentration) is like taking your brain to the gym & spa, it should also help you a lot in dealing with stressful emotions, if your meditation object are your senses (breath, feet in walking meditation, hands while washing dishes) this seems to be a rather well-grounded activity and not inherently dangerous (unless maybe you have a serious psychological condition). Proficient enough in Sati (mindfulness) and Samādhi (concentration), the route could go to practicing samatha and vipassana. Now my assumption would be that if you directly overemphasize vipassana and your skills for concentration, tranquility and equanimity aren't sufficient to contain reactions when 'insight' hits you. That being said, Vipassana covers a wide range of stuff. Like "Body Scans" as done in Mindfulness based Stress reduction (MBSR) are thought of IIRC as vipassana practices, and IMHO they could just as well be thought of as sati practice.

wirrbel 4y ago

btw. Daniel Ingram refers to himself as an Aharat/aharant and it is kind of a no-no in buddhism to talk about your own "awakening-status". That's a serious red-flag.

nprateem 4y ago
Either that or it's a cultural difference and he doesn't see the point of hiding it.
- wirrbel 4y ago
  Any other instance that comes to my mind is cult leaders. As in I am not aware of a western theravāda teacher referring to himself as an arhant
  - andai 4y ago
    He covers the motivation for this in the book (as well as other departures from traditions of not talking about things he considers important to talk about). Basically there's a tradition of people keeping people in the dark about things that he thinks does more harm than good. I'm not qualified to comment on the wisdom of either approach, just pointing out that it's covered in the first part of the book, and other parts, e.g. "Mushroom Factor".