r/streamentry • u/jabinslc • 1d ago
Practice commons mistakes examples?
I was inspired to ask this question based on a post from yesterday about sexuality. there seemed to be a debate about whether desire falls off completely vs seeing through the empty nature of desire.
what are other common thinking errors people make on the path? like reifying awareness, the addiction to enlightenment, alienation from regular life perceived as good, the inability to reduce suffering anywhere but on the cushion, the pitfall of viewing things as non-existent vs lacking self nature, etc.
in my own practice, whenever I perceive something as having true ultimate nature, I calmly look at it as empty of self. whether its anger or bliss. good or bad. gently return to the emptiness of even nirvana itself.
8
u/adivader Arahant 1d ago
what are other common thinking errors people make on the path?
The most common error people make is not a thinking error, its an approach error. People approach awakening practice and its consequent result of awakening from the perspective that is most familiar to them, which is to try and understand it through language and concept.
Language and concept are needed to communicate practice instructions, but it is only practice that leads to an experiential understanding and an experiential freedom from dukkha.
And it is very difficult to actually practice, while it is very easy to engage in language and concept.
Basically the ability to sit down and stabilize attention for two hours (for example) on the temperature element at the top most corner of the left nostril - is the very ability that experientially leads to clarity regarding all the language and concepts that we use. But people don't want to do that. Because it scares the fuck out of them!
4
u/adivader Arahant 1d ago
I am surprised that the HH folks haven't shown up yet in my mentions. It would most certainly be ... extremely hilarious
But at the same time I think the HH folks have learnt to stay within their own subreddit :) :) HAHAHAHAHA
1
u/jabinslc 1d ago
what is HH?
1
u/adivader Arahant 1d ago
2
•
u/ComprehensiveCamp486 23h ago
Have you checked out The Dhamma Hub on YouTube? Might be worth a look. They align with Hillside Hermitage in regards to views on meditation and sense restraint.
•
u/adivader Arahant 21h ago
I will certainly check this out next time I want a good chuckle :). Thanks for the recco.
•
u/Fortinbrah Dzogchen | Counting/Satipatthana 22h ago
Do you guys have beef between the systems? I thought they also encourage lots of practice
•
u/adivader Arahant 21h ago
Its a personal opinion of mine.
I thought they also encourage lots of practice
No dude. They consider meditation to be a self hypnosis technique :)
I mean their whole doctrine is so weird, its difficult to believe that they are actually serious about it. I mean prima facie it feels like an elaborate joke
3
8
u/JohnShade1970 1d ago
ignoring the somatic and physiological aspects of the path. Especially trauma
not utilizing the tools of western psychology as an adjunct to meditation
chasing after states that your not prepared for like jhana while not developing the basic skills
blending too many styles and technique hopping in general
not bothering with or half assing sila or the ethical aspects of the path.
obsessing over maps and attainments
only concerning yourself with on cushion mindfulness and not working the path in the real world
not exploring subtle states like boredom or anticipation with vipassana but trying to get away from them or eradicate them.
caring more about feeling better than understanding and accepting your actual experience
too much gathering of information, reading etc and not enough time spent going deep on simple practices
thinking teachers are special.
....too many to list them all
5
u/Common_Ad_3134 1d ago
I'm probably making lots of mistakes.
But a mistake (in my view) that I see here from time to time looks something like this:
- there is only one, true set of practices (which I, an unenlightened person, happen to know)
- there is one, true set of progress markers for those practices (which I, an unenlightened person, happen to be able to judge)
- not meeting (my interpretation/threshold of) the progress markers means you are not progressing
For what it's worth, I think the above can be fine if all parties agree on set of teachings. But in this forum, where people are pulling from various teachers, it seems to lead to comparison and doubt.
3
u/neidanman 1d ago
not working on the body/energetics side of things, e.g. through daoist/yogic practices. Having a good foundation this way makes other practices easier. Also connecting to qi/shen directly in practice opens a whole other side to progress on the path.
1
u/jabinslc 1d ago
what are energetics or qi?
1
u/neidanman 1d ago
qi/prana - 'spiritual energy'. There's a podcast here that goes into the connection between the 2 aspects of the path - the energy side and the more classic meditation side https://soundcloud.com/user-127194047-666040032/meditation-vs-qigong
1
u/jabinslc 1d ago
I know "energy" talk is common in meditation circles. but I remain skeptical that ideas about energy/qi/prana are valid. it's been my experience that people use those words when they fail to grok certain processes that happen in the mind.
few people can provide an account of what they even mean by "energy"
but I am open to such ideas, just never heard it explained in a way that makes sense.
2
u/neidanman 1d ago
well i guess basically the idea ties in with us being atman/soul, and of soul currently being in this world. At the same time as soul being in this world, there is also the divine energy that flows in brahman/the unified soul, in this world too. This being something like light shining through water/some other medium - the divine energy can flow in/through soul/other mediums.
so when we experience this energy, we can get sensations of divine love/consciousness, deep contentment, spiritual connection etc. Also it has different grades/intensities, so we can get more basic feelings of vitality/feeling alive and radiant etc. Or when we are very low on it, we can feel drained/dark/like life has gone out of us etc.
We can also become more used to tuning into these energies and build/grow them in our systems. This can come with a more general warmth/feeling of life and vitality, and also with much more uniquely 'energetic' experiences.
For example, there can occasionally be sensations of extreme electric shocks/sparks internally, or of electric like currents moving in the system. Or there can be awareness of internal channels where a liquid type energy flows into and through. Or there can be sensations of 'energetic pellets' moving through and out of the system. There can also be gravitational/magnetic like sensations that can pull parts of the body, or the whole body around. There can also be sensations of incoming channel(s) of this energy opening and connecting into our systems. Or also there can be a sense of oscillating waves of energy, or waves of energy moving up the spine like a jacobs ladder, etc etc
2
u/Common_Ad_3134 1d ago
few people can provide an account of what they even mean by "energy"
I'll take a shot at that if you'd like.
At least in my understanding/experience, it refers to sensations felt in/on/around the body. The arising/passing of the "energy" is a hallucination in definitional sense: there's no apparent external stimuli causing the sensations.
Various meditative traditions mention the sensations. And they're pretty clearly within the reach of a lot of people, at least if we trust their own, subjective accounts. You have no reason to trust me, but I can say unequivocally, that I feel the sensations – though I don't attach any particular importance to them.
To me, that people would feel these sensations isn't very surprising. The moment-to-moment experience one has of having a concrete, solid body oriented in space is not the actual experience of having a body. Instead, you might say that the mind is making a moment-to-moment best guess, based on available data. E.g.:
- "I see my hand in front of me, to my left, on the keyboard."
- And then sensations arise in consciousness to support that best guess, to an extent.
But the mind is pretty easily fooled into guessing wrong and hallucinating. See this sort of experiment, for example, where people are fooled into identifying a rubber hand as their own:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3125296/
In still, seated meditation with eyes closed, you're depriving yourself of many day-to-day external stimuli, making it difficult for the mind to produce a coherent experience of the body. In those circumstances, the mind is pretty open to suggestion to fill in the gaps. The suggestions might take the form of something like "energy work" practices.
Whether or not "energy" is a valid object for meditation is up to you. I don't personally use it.
1
u/jabinslc 1d ago
read the other definition given. this is not what people mean when they use the word energy in religious or spiritual contexts. people mean souls or some other real substance that connects us. and it comes with a lot of assumptions about what this energy does. and it's lumped together with Hindi or Chinese words that might or might not mean the same thing.
•
u/Common_Ad_3134 23h ago
No problem. Sorry if my answer above wasn't what you were looking for.
people mean souls or some other real substance that connects us
There are lots of different people with different beliefs, and there's lots of delusion out there.
But fwiw, I haven't come across anything like "energy = soul" in 5+ years on this subreddit or in Buddhist teachings – at least not where "soul" is defined as something like a spiritual entity or self.
it's lumped together with Hindi or Chinese words that might or might not mean the same thing.
I'm not a fan of the book, but here's what "The Mind Illuminated" says about that, for example:
Working with inner energy currents and channels is a recurrent theme in many traditions. This energy is variously called chi or qi, prāna, kriyā, kundalinī, or inner wind. There are detailed systems describing the channels, meridians, nādis, and chakras through which it flows, and there are powerful practices for working with this energy. Of all these traditions, the Theravada Buddhists have the least to say about energy movements. Their advice is simply to treat them the same way you treat any other experience that arises in meditation: note it, let it be, and ignore it until it goes away. With a milder manifestation of energy, just letting it be is certainly the best advice, since it’s so easy to get caught up in trying to control and manipulate it.
Yet, as with everything else in this journey, there are tremendous variations in the intensity of the experience. For some, energy movements are subtle and quickly lead to pleasurable sensations pervading the whole body. Others undergo a prolonged process involving violent energy surges and painful blockages. If you experience these more intense manifestations, you may need to work intentionally with the energy in some way. Tai chi, qigong, and yoga can all be helpful additions to formal meditation because they work directly with the energy movements in the body.
There's nothing about a soul-as-entity in that book.
It's fine if you see "energy = soul" as inherent in these practices and it turns you off. But it might be useful just to try out a practice and see if it's for you or not.
Rob Burbea is linked in the sidebar. He's got a lot of "energy body" practices. Here's one talk with some practices if you're interested:
He does talk about a "soul" but it's not what I think most Westerners would understand by the word:
Probably most people when they hear the word 'soul' tend to immediately conceive -- in most instances, depending on how it's used -- but tend to immediately conceive of some kind of entity, 'the soul,' 'a soul,' some thing which may not be material, but some kind of entity.
[...]
But actually, I would like to more often use a word such as 'soulfulness' rather than 'soul,' to take it away from that problematic notion of an entity -- although, as I just said, I don't have a problem with it. But rather to use more a word like 'soulfulness,' and also 'soulmaking,' which is a word that came from the poet John Keats, I think, originally. 'Soulmaking,' you'll notice, is a verb. We make soul. One can make soul, or soul is made, so to speak. Soulmaking. What does that mean? Or soulfulness is made. What we're really talking about, what I want to emphasize here by shifting the inclination a little bit (and at times, the vocabulary), what we're really talking about is ways of looking -- that means ways of relating, ways of conceiving -- and also ways of acting in the world. Let's call all of that ways of looking: relating, conceiving, acting. Ways of looking that nourish, sustain, increase a sense of soulfulness.
https://hermesamara.org/resources/talk/2015-08-10-soulmaking-part-1
None of these are my practices. I'm not trying to convince you to do a certain practice, just hoping to answer your question from above. If I'm failing, then apologies again in advance. Have a good one!
•
u/jabinslc 23h ago
thank you for taking the time to reply. I think your answers are great and very well thought out. I have no issue engaging with the ideas as you present them. but check out what someone else said in this thread:
"well i guess basically the idea ties in with us being atman/soul, and of soul currently being in this world. At the same time as soul being in this world, there is also the divine energy that flows in brahman/the unified soul, in this world too. This being something like light shining through water/some other medium - the divine energy can flow in/through soul/other mediums."
people treat the word energy as a substance, like some electricity that runs and powers the whole human. an electricity we can use, mold, manipulate. something that has existence separate from biology or sitting alongside it. something that can be used in a supernatural way. for example: people might say "I focused the divine energy on his knee, so it telepathicly healed it" or "I had an energetic feeling that susan got a C on her test"
now when used to describe the workings of the mind. I can see the use of the word, although imprecise.
•
u/Common_Ad_3134 22h ago
Ah, gotcha. I hadn't seen that comment earlier.
well i guess basically the idea ties in with us being atman/soul, and of soul currently being in this world.
Without wanting to challenge anyone's religious beliefs, I think the idea of an atman/soul at least in the usual Western sense is pretty marginal on this sub. In Buddhism and lots of western dharma circles anyway, "anatman" ("no soul/self") is a central doctrine:
https://encyclopediaofbuddhism.org/wiki/An%C4%81tman
That said, I do sort of get into the "unified soul" business in a sense – more "unified" than "soul". But I think it's a result of practice and not a driving belief required for practice. There's a thought anyway that the big, common mystical experiences like "everything is one" are the result of parts of the brain shutting down, as in meditation or when using pyschedelics – notably parts of the default mode network (DMN).
people treat the word energy as a substance, like some electricity that runs and powers the whole human. an electricity we can use, mold, manipulate
The energy sensations like in the Burbea talks above can feel quite electric – the felt sense is often "buzzy". And they are malleable with intentions. Like you can work them up and then, say, shoot them out the top of your head as if out a blowhole.
But as for the rest ...
people might say "I focused the divine energy on his knee, so it telepathicly healed it" or "I had an energetic feeling that susan got a C on her test"
To me, this is pure delusion. Even if you take the Buddhist suttas literally, the Buddha didn't fix his bad back, with "energy" or otherwise.
•
2
u/carpebaculum 1d ago
A common mistake I notice is people taking basic instructions, especially those related to renunciation such as the five precepts, like a set of commandments. To me this is an unfortunate and probably unconscious application of Judaeo-Christian worldview to a dharmic tradition.
I observe this view brings about a lot of guilt when people are unable to follow it to the letter, or when mistakes happen. It is better to view these restrictions as a set of voluntary guidelines for the benefit of one's own practice. If mistakes happen, notice that, be aware it will disrupt your practice momentarily (depends on how severe a breach), express regrets, say oops, make amends or ask for forgiveness if necessary, and get back on the horse. No guilt necessary, karmic laws take care of everything (and I don't mean anything supernatural or spooky, it is as simple as, if you drink alcohol, it clouds the mind and it won't be as sharp or calm as it would be otherwise). This is a practical aspect of training, not a lifelong rule, though that said obviously morality and the law continue to apply in shared spaces.
1
u/jabinslc 1d ago
I call them the buddha thumpers! some buddhist subreddits make me feel like I am interacting with christians just with a Buddhist language mask.
2
u/Former-Opening-764 1d ago
Often happens:
- The diligent attempt to build conceptual understanding replaces the development of practical skills. Words begin to be used in isolation from the practice to which they refer.
- Weak methodological understanding of the chosen system of practice. Which leads to ignorance of when, how and what technique to use.
- The above is usually combined with low-intensity practice, or less commonly, persistence in incorrect practice.
1
u/M0sD3f13 1d ago
I'm in the waking up app sub even though I don't use the app. Reifying awareness/consciousness is a massive impediment for them from what I've noticed. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
1
u/jabinslc 1d ago
I think identifying with awareness is the most common impediment I see. a lot of people even claim that is synonymous with enlightenment.
why do you think this happens?
1
u/M0sD3f13 1d ago
I agree it's very common. I think it's like u/adivader said it's much easier to conceptualise and get stuck in that world than to practice and abide in the experiential world. I think it's best to view everything through a kammic lens, as process, dependant co-arising, cause and effect. This counters the tendency to get lost in that particular thicket of views.
1
u/jabinslc 1d ago
a common conceptualizing that I have found in my practice is cause and effect. dependent co-arising is different than linear cause then effect. but I am still untangling that one. so I can't fully speak to it. what do you think?
1
u/M0sD3f13 1d ago
Ajahn Chah says it better than I ever could
In Buddhism, the primary reason we study the Dhamma (the Truth) is to find the way to transcend suffering and attain peace. Whether you study physical or mental phenomena, the citta (mind or consciousness) or cetasika (mental factors), it is only when you make liberation from suffering your ultimate goal, rather than anything else, that you will be practising in the correct way. This is because suffering and its causes already exist right here and now.
As you contemplate the cause of suffering, you should understand that when that which we call the mind is still, it’s in a state of normality. As soon as it moves, it becomes sankhara (that which is fashioned or concocted). When attraction arises in the mind, it is sankhara; when aversion arises, it is sankhara. If there is desire to go here and there, it is sankhara. As long as you are not mindful of these sankharas, you will tend to chase after them and be conditioned by them. Whenever the mind moves, it becomes sammuti-sankhara – enmeshed in the conditioned world – at that moment. And it is these sankharas – these movements of the mind – which the Buddha taught us to contemplate.
Whenever the mind moves, it is aniccam (impermanent), dukkham (suffering) and anatta (not-self). The Buddha taught us to observe and contemplate this. He taught us to contemplate sankharas which condition the mind. Contemplate them in light of the teaching of paticcasamuppada (Dependent Origination): avijja (ignorance) conditions sankhara (karmic formations); sankhara conditions viññana (consciousness); viññana conditions nama (mentality) and rupa (materiality); and so on.
You have already studied and read about this in the books, and what’s set out there is correct as far as it goes, but in reality you’re not able to keep up with the process as it actually occurs. It’s like falling out of a tree: in a flash, you’ve fallen all the way from the top of the tree and hit the ground, and you have no idea how many branches you passed on the way down. When the mind experiences an arammana (mind-object) and is attracted to it, all of a sudden you find yourself experiencing a good mood without being aware of the causes and conditions which led up to it. Of course, on one level the process happens according to the theory described in the scriptures, but at the same time it goes beyond the limitations of the theory. In reality, there are no signs telling you that now it’s avijja, now it’s sankhara, then it’s viññana, now it’s nama-rupa and so on. These scholars who see it like that, don’t get the chance to read out the list as the process is taking place. Although the Buddha analysed one moment of consciousness and described all the different component parts, to me it’s more like falling out of a tree – everything happens so fast you don’t have time to reckon how far you’ve fallen and where you are at any given moment. What you know is that you’ve hit the ground with a thud, and it hurts!
What takes place in the mind is similar. Normally, when you experience suffering, all you really see is the end result, that there is suffering, pain, grief and despair present in the mind. You don’t really know where it came from – that’s not something you can find in the books. There’s nowhere in the books where the intricate details of your suffering and it’s causes are described. The reality follows along the same course as the theory outlined in the scriptures, but those who simply study the books and never get beyond them, are unable to keep track of these things as they actually happen in reality.
Thus the Buddha taught to abide as ‘that which knows’ and simply bear witness to that which arises. Once you have trained your awareness to abide as 'that which knows’, and have investigated the mind and developed insight into the truth about the mind and mental factors, you’ll see the mind as anatta (not-self).
You’ll see that ultimately all mental and physical formations are things to be let go of and it’ll be clear to you that it’s foolish to attach or give undue importance to them.
The Buddha didn’t teach us to study the mind and mental factors in order to become attached to them, he taught simply to know them as aniccam, dukkham, anatta. The essence of Buddhist practice then, is to let them go and lay them aside. You must establish and sustain awareness of the mind and mental factors as they arise. In fact, the mind has been brought up and conditioned to turn and spin away from this natural state of awareness, giving rise to sankhara which further concoct and fashion it. It has therefore become accustomed to the experience of constant mental proliferation and of all kinds of conditioning, both wholesome and unwholesome. The Buddha taught us to let go of it all, but before you can begin to let go, you must first study and practise. This is in accordance with nature – the way things are. The mind is just that way, mental factors are just that way – this is just how it is.
from: The Key to Liberation by Ajahn Chah
1
u/M0sD3f13 1d ago edited 1d ago
My extrapolation, The still and concentrated mind can perceive DO. As soon as it goes out and becomes enmeshed in the sensual world again you are back in delusion and conceptualisation territory. It is important to understand the concept but one must then drop it and experience it directly to gain true transcendent insight. When not in deep concentration and just experiencing the "thud" just ovserve as that which knows and simply bare witness to whatever arises and passes away.
1
u/jabinslc 1d ago
I don't think it's all just about "simply bare witness to whatever arises" that's another western pitfall.
one must practice understanding that what arises is empty.
1
u/M0sD3f13 1d ago
Ajahn Chah was certainly not western. I get you though. It's difficult to discuss these things. Practice and direct experience is where the rubber meets the road.
1
u/jabinslc 1d ago edited 1d ago
agreed and I have found that when I talk to strangers online. it takes a minute for our vocabulary to sync and then we actually tend to agree.
2
1
u/jabinslc 1d ago
I don't disagree with any of that. but fail to see how it relates to seeing the emptiness of cause and effect?
1
u/M0sD3f13 1d ago
common conceptualizing that I have found in my practice is cause and effect. dependent co-arising is different than linear cause then effect. but I am still untangling that one
It seemed pertinent
•
u/Fortinbrah Dzogchen | Counting/Satipatthana 22h ago
in my own practice, whenever I perceive something as having true ultimate nature, I calmly look at it as empty of self. whether its anger or bliss. good or bad. gently return to the emptiness of even nirvana itself.
You can do that all the time btw
•
u/jabinslc 21h ago
yup. but if nirvana is seen as empty. and emptiness itself is empty. what is it that I can do all the time then? it's like a loop that cancels itself out. if the whole impetus of studying emptiness was enlightenment, when the goal is seen as empty of inherent nature. the search is replaced fun and enjoyment. so I worry less about doing "that" all the time. the search for enlightenment is suffering.
and I was trying to ruffle the feathers of those who reify certain things, like nirvana.
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
Thank you for contributing to the r/streamentry community! Unlike many other subs, we try to aggregate general questions and short practice reports in the weekly Practice Updates, Questions, and General Discussion thread. All community resources, such as articles, videos, and classes go in the weekly Community Resources thread. Both of these threads are pinned to the top of the subreddit.
The special focus of this community is detailed discussion of personal meditation practice. On that basis, please ensure your post complies with the following rules, if necessary by editing in the appropriate information, or else it may be removed by the moderators. Your post might also be blocked by a Reddit setting called "Crowd Control," so if you think it complies with our subreddit rules but it appears to be blocked, please message the mods.
If your post is removed/locked, please feel free to repost it with the appropriate information, or post it in the weekly Practice Updates, Questions, and General Discussion or Community Resources threads.
Thanks! - The Mod Team
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.