Is 4th path really "enlightenment"?

"...people seemed to be getting too caught up lately in semantics.
IN MY OPINION, 4th path is Full enlightenment. Everything in the manifest world is seen for what it really is, and this can be done in real time. Nothing further to examine. Everything is seen for what it is.
Is 4th path Full Liberation? certainly not necessarily. There is a purification of 'seeing everything for what it is' that is needed, and it needs to be permanent in order to attain Full Liberation (from the 10 fetters).

Now, is my opinion right? is it wrong?
who the heck cares??
It's not about the names one uses to describe these things, but the way the here and the now are experienced!"

Well, apart from resorting to posting images, semantics is what we have to work with.

From Wikipedia,
Semantics (from Greek sēmantiká, neuter plural of sēmantikós)[1][2] is the study of meaning.

Of words, of course.
So working towards more clarity about what the meaning is of what has been variously written by various writers, particularly when different teachers and practitioners have different interpretations of words and meanings is variously quite useful.

There have been some comments to the effect that some have missed hearing from some of the old farts in the peanut gallery here and at DhO. So in case you have yet to realize it, dithering around about various minutia is about all there is left to do once the enlightenment and the laundry are looked after. So, we can burn out or fade away, make up your friggin minds already!

"I've restated the Theravada party line in brief for the sake of any lingering historical interest. As a final note from me on this subject. These kinds of discussions have taken place before and been pursued to a limited degree. They ended variously with a great deal of acrimony, much parting of the ways, the excising of the related threads from various boards and the setting up of other boards by various parties. So if you missed out on all that fun, well, count your blessings and move on.

"

Hi triplethink.

I'm not sure if these posts are directed to me, but I'll take a shot and reply that it's all okay by me and my post was not intended in any way other than to ask a direct question. I am a very curious person and have a rabbinical side, so I can't stay away from a good discussion. That's part of why I am here--the quality of the discussion is strong. Moreover, I have never found a quality intellectual discussion an impediment to my spiritual development. Quite the contrary (or maybe I just don't have anything better to do).

So it's okay if Kenneth contradicts himself or changes things or is somewhat new fangled. As long as he advertises this as an open community, and as long as I am allowed to ask questions and he'll answer a fair question--which he has--then I'm good. Even if his answer is "there is no answer"--which he has as well--that's a good enough answer in my book. And even if he wanted to become the unchallenged guru--not saying he does--I think that's useful too.

I think the reason why people get so upset by spiritual debates if that they don't debate enough. Airing things out makes them easier to let go of.

Yours,
Mark

"Now, is my opinion right? is it wrong?
who the heck cares??
It's not about the names one uses to describe these things, but the way the here and the now are experienced!" -Jorge Freddy

Nice! All of this talking is, ideally, pointing to this moment.

"There have been some comments to the effect that some have missed hearing from some of the old farts in the peanut gallery here and at DhO. So in case you have yet to realize it dithering around about various minutia is about all there is left to do once the enlightenment and the laundry are looked after. So, we can burn out or fade away, make up your friggin minds already!" -triplethink

Nathan, I just want to let you know how much I have been enjoying your wisdom, wit, and humor of late.

"I think the reason why people get so upset by spiritual debates if that they don't debate enough. Airing things out makes them easier to let go of." -mdaf30

I find that a refreshing attitude, Mark. Most things seem to benefit from a good airing out. I like it when you challenge and ask questions. It keeps us all honest.

"I think the reason why people get so upset by spiritual debates if that they don't debate enough. Airing things out makes them easier to let go of.

Yours,
Mark "

I see your points and I can understand the value of this for you in these ways. This is something that varies a lot however. For people who share your makeup debating can be a valuable tool, for others it can be quite counterproductive. As I see it too little questioning and the group think starts to set in, too much questioning and people have no sense of security and become very uncomfortable about discussing various concerns that they can feel very sensitive about. Overall, subject areas like this, as treated in forums on the net can't help but end up appearing far more cerebral than they are for many practitioners in real life terms. So there is actually a lot more intellectual banter and debate than what you tend to encounter in retreat centers or monasteries and so on where these days women probably outnumber men, how people are feeling is probably more important to people than what they think about things and very little or no talking and no discussion is more typical than not.

"Nathan, I just want to let you know how much I have been enjoying your wisdom, wit, and humor of late. -Kenneth"

I agree, Nathan. Please stay

"Nathan, I just want to let you know how much I have been enjoying your wisdom, wit, and humor of late."

My little stocking stuffers, for all of you. Btw, check your socks for coleslaw.

Hi Kenneth.

I don't know why, but your answer makes me smile in a good way. The whole DM introduction, particularly right before my experience of 4th path, was a serious intellectual challenge; it was maybe the biggest questioning and reevaluation I've done of my practice goals since the early 2000s. And I REALLY didn't like it at first, particularly the part about the emotions. In some ways I stuck it out during that time almost out of a sense of competition, not for very lofty reasons. I just didn't want to get "left behind" in a lesser attainment.

And now, having been through that, I have come full circle and am arguing your side and for DM as the bee-knees and the new bar! And then you kind of tell me, well, I am already enlightened (sort of, anyway).

I find this all strangely and pleasantly comical. The perfect prescription is not imminent

Yours,
Mark

"I see your points and I can understand the value of this for you in these ways. This is something that varies a lot however. For people who share your makeup debating can be a valuable tool, for others it can be quite counterproductive. As I see it too little questioning and the group think starts to set in, too much questioning and people have no sense of security and become very uncomfortable about discussing various concerns that they can feel very sensitive about. Overall, subject areas like this, as treated in forums on the net can't help but end up appearing far more cerebral than they are for many practitioners in real life terms. So there is actually a lot more intellectual banter and debate than what you tend to encounter in retreat centers or monasteries and so on where these days women probably outnumber men, how people are feeling is probably more important to people than what they think about things and very little or no talking and no discussion is more typical than not. "

Yes, indeed, you are correct. This is not everybody's cup of tea and is probably part of my karma. Indeed, it isn't even my cup of tea in all situations and at all times. I've spent a great deal of time in those types of practice communities--predominantly female even--where discussions like this would never happen and they probably shouldn't. Indeed, I never--not once--asked my root guru a question or challenged her perspective in ten years of sitting personally at her feet where I could have. It never occurred to me to actually ask a question; the answers were kind of all right there.

But this is a different community and it's a different dharma. I checked in with Kenneth early and often to make sure I wasn't just being a wet blanket with the questions. As long as he's okay, I'm good. If he asks me to stop, I would.

Yours,
Mark

"I see your points and I can understand the value of this for you in these ways. This is something that varies a lot however. For people who share your makeup debating can be a valuable tool, for others it can be quite counterproductive. As I see it too little questioning and the group think starts to set in, too much questioning and people have no sense of security and become very uncomfortable about discussing various concerns that they can feel very sensitive about. Overall, subject areas like this, as treated in forums on the net can't help but end up appearing far more cerebral than they are for many practitioners in real life terms. So there is actually a lot more intellectual banter and debate than what you tend to encounter in retreat centers or monasteries and so on where these days women probably outnumber men, how people are feeling is probably more important to people than what they think about things and very little or no talking and no discussion is more typical than not. "

"So working towards more clarity about what the meaning is of what has been variously written by various writers, particularly when different teachers and practitioners have different interpretations of words and meanings is variously quite useful"

...Don't quite see it happening without having a different teachers and practitioners debate their different interpretations or "semantics" (of words, of course) as I like to put it.

I apologize. I'm in a "Tarin Greco" kind of mood today!

"And now, having been through that, I have come full circle and am arguing your side and for DM as the bee-knees and the new bar! And then you kind of tell me, well, I am already enlightened (sort of, anyway)." -mdaf30

I'm thinking of direct mode as a practice modality rather than an end in itself. The end is freedom from suffering. DM is a valuable tweak on a time-honored theme, which is to keep the attention in the mind and body. It is especially valuable (and compelling) while working toward the transformation of the emotional life that comes post-4th Path. After that, it is, as far as I can tell, about as good as any other conditioned state. Gluten-free pizza is also good, and if I had to choose between them, I would choose the pizza as often as not.

"I'm thinking of direct mode as a practice modality rather than an end in itself. The end is freedom from suffering. DM is a valuable tweak on a time-honored theme, which is to keep the attention in the mind and body. It is especially valuable (and compelling) while working toward the transformation of the emotional life that comes post-4th Path. After that, it is, as far as I can tell, about as good as any other conditioned state. Gluten-free pizza is also good, and if I had to choose between them, I would choose the pizza as often as not."

Ah, I see, I was wondering what DM was and couldn't find it in my copy of the DSM-4 (Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), this explains why. Right, I have a simple preliminary step in approaching this area that classifies emotional issues into two types, my emotional issues and anyone else' mistaken impression that their emotional issues are my emotional issues. If it is in 'their pile' I ignore it, if it is in 'my pile' I let it bubble up and fizz or sizzle away whenever it gets the notion and I sit back and enjoy the show. Definitely a vote in favor of with pizza if possible, with or without gluten, anchovies, banana peppers or whatever. Main thing is not to buy into any of it in the least bit. Not exactly AF but then I am an old fart living alone in the woods who enjoys the entertainment of any notable shift in the distribution of the scanty emotional baggage and anyways any visible indication of something like the PCE would surely be mistaken for chronic drug abuse in my neighborhood.

"So, if you subscribe to the thinking that the teachings of the Buddha scrupulously outlined in exhaustive detail in the Pali Tipitaka is a mythological load of crap, then there is no problem with becoming an Arahat while simultaneously remaining a complete douchebag. If on the other hand, you take the years of time to carefully read, comprehend and carry through on the fine print in those texts, you will find that detailed instructions on how to attain absolutely every quality that seems to be missing from the experience of some is covered in those texts in exhaustive detail.

"

This was my hunch for a long time, that perhaps people are neglecting certain traditional pre-path practices like sila, specific practices that generate dispassion for the aggregates and thus when it gets done, there appears to be some cleaning up to still do. But if the cleaning up is done pre-path or pre-4th at least then 4th path is going to be perhaps a different experience to one who bypassed all the pre-preparation.

Am i talking out my arse?

A monk who dedicates his whole life to generating dispassion for the aggregates, developing deep jhanic absorption and generating dispassion for it all, and observing a strict code of sila, will have conditioned the mind and body in such a way that once it gets done, it is very much what the Buddha was talking about when one gets to arhatship.

And maybe when modern day 21st century "I want it now" yogis with families, pet hedgehogs, fiancees and jobs go for it, they may bypass some of the generating dispassion for mind and body and the mastering of deep jhana and thus when it gets done, it looks slightly different to the monk's version.

Am I still talking out my arse? Nathan, I love your approach to Dhamma as currently I am finding how much in the pali suttas I HAVE bypassed or not really taken on board and am returning to it with a lot of enthusiasm. Please keep being a stick-in-the-mud!

Is 4th path (completing the circuit, getting off the ride, seeing through the centre point etc) available to yogis who cannot live the life of a monk or have the good fortune to live like one (as I assume Nathan has ? Are we doing things in reverse order? Or is 4th path not connected to what "becoming an ahrat" means? Is it a streamlined version of a stream enterer? Does it depend on how much dispassion has been generated previously? Does it depend on having 100% right view? Is it one of the things that is supportive of becoming an arahat? Is it a lesser arahat? All questions that have been rattling around my brain since I got involved in all this "pragmatic dharma". I am loving this discussion by the way. I think it is needed. Semantics? yes....but it would help clear up a lot of confusion that can float about and turn people off and away.


Nick

Nathan, thanks for your posts and food for thought / insight.
You wrote before that although you are done in the '4th path-pragmatic-dharma` approach, you are not done in the Sutta sense. Can you please elaborate on what kinds of fetters are left in your experience?

I haven't posted here for a long-ish time but want to chime in here with a thought.

It appears to this fool that all the markers we put down and talk about are just markers that we humans like to create, and once created well, we gotta use 'em. Maybe they make us feel better about "where we are" in a process, or maybe they satisfy some primal need to classify or conceptualize, to make models, or maybe they help us compare ourselves to others. The more I experience *this* and the more it starts to gain purchase in my everyday life the more I think that whatever "enlightenment" might be it's an enormously wide spectrum that runs from pure white to pure black with an infinite number of shades in between. I can be "here" in this moment and be "there" in the next. My placement therein (if I can call it that) can hop around like a frog on a hot plate. We can just as easily call the same places on the path by different names as we can peg different places using the same name.

So, anyway, the extent to which we get stuck on definitions might be the extent to which we're lost. I don't think we should be seeking merit badges

Ron Crouch, this was a great topic to start.

"
So, anyway, the extent to which we get stuck on definitions might be the extent to which we're lost. I don't think we should be seeking merit badges

Ron Crouch, this was a great topic to start.

"

Hi Chris,

Welcome back. Hope you stick around.

I don't think people are seeking merit badges . At least I know I am not. The end of suffering is what I seek. Is that a bad thing in your opinion? If a model's end goal is the end of suffering why is it a bad thing to adhere to if people are saying the model's end result is kind of legit?

I guess it also depends on what definition you are stuck on concerning "end of suffering" too.

"We can just as easily call the same places on the path by different names as we can peg different places using the same name. [...] So, anyway, the extent to which we get stuck on definitions might be the extent to which we're lost. I don't think we should be seeking merit badges " ~Chris

I second Chris' acknowledgement of the greatness of this topic selection. Way to go, Ron

I think that Chris and I are like-minded in our opinion that meditation practice does seem to unfold in stages, and that some people experience a similar unfolding as others do. I think it is important for a teacher to be able to recognize these unfoldings so that they can help their students work through some of the familiar challenges that arise there.

It starts to get confusing, however, when a term like "4th Path" is used synonymously with the title "Arahant", when "Arahant" means so many different things to different traditions of Buddhism. Particularly within the framework of traditional Theravada Buddhism, I've never met anyone -- online or in person -- that I felt met the criteria for the Arahant spelled out in the Pali canon. Besides, arahantship is the end of the road in this tradition. To talk about development that comes after the end is... confusing.

I think it's fine to divide the path into recognizable landmarks, and even to call them "stages". But it's confusing to use traditional terminology mixed in with revised meanings. For example, for someone to say, "I go by a seven stage model. Right now I think I'm at stage three." That is less confusing than saying, "I'm an arahant, but I still have more waking up to do."

(continued below)

(continued from above)

Ultimately, as Nikolai points out, the common goal is the end of suffering. We all have different opinions on the best way to articulate the path to this end. I just think that some of the conceptual frameworks being drawn up may potentially get in the way of further progress, particularly by way of creating yet another self-concept to cling to, e.g. anagami, arahant, post-arahant, etc. It's the baggage that comes along with these terms that makes them problematic (and I don't necessarily mean "baggage" in a pejorative sense... probably not the best word choice). Besides, I think the markers are arbitrary unless they are used as guidelines for further work. Eliminating titles all together, in my view, wouldn't be a bad idea.

~Jackson

BTW, I was posting a general comment aimed at no one in particular. It's just this old fool's opinion, to be taken or left as you see fit. I didn't make any comments about the end of suffering. That doesn't even sound like a model. It sounds more like a goal.

Yeah! I'm so happy to hear from Chris and Jackson!

If anything, this whole thing has made me want to go back and actually read the original texts, ala triplethink. For a long time that has kind of been impractical given my yuppie-yogi go go go life, but I'm starting to get an itch for it. Most of what I know comes from the few suttas I've read, lots of quotes, and teachers who have interpreted it for me. Maybe it's time to take a deeper look for myself.

From what I can tell, the idea that 4th path is THE end of the path is just not true. But it is an end, and a very very important end. I think what everyone is discovering is that it is also a beginning of something that we don't have a good language or model for. Perhaps that is what all the cognitive dissonance and disagreement has been about - figuring out what this post 4th landscape is and what it means...

I think that as long as we are clear on our goal (complete end of suffering), whatever is means to that end, is great, and whatever is found to be a hindrance, drop it like the hot coal it is

I too have found the Suttas of great value. The further this thing goes, the more sense they make to me. Modern culture does not do faith well - it is treated with suspicion. I don't know if following the full training would have changed my experience post 4th, but I do think it would allow far more people to gain access to this awakening process and probably proceed more quickly and skilfully.

After 4th, as I was relating my experience, the teacher I had consulted with told me something like "well, this is where the path really begins". This is where you know and see what needs to done. As I see it, 4th is the end of 'I am' as anything more than a fleeting notion. It has no teeth any more. On the other hand, using Nicks sewer analogy, there are lots of sharp often unknown objects passing through the pipes and they can really hurt. Sort of like passing kidney stones.

"After 4th, as I was relating my experience, the teacher I had consulted with told me something like 'well, this is where the path really begins'. This is where you know and see what needs to done. As I see it, 4th is the end of 'I am' as anything more than a fleeting notion. It has no teeth any more. On the other hand, using Nicks sewer analogy, there are lots of sharp often unknown objects passing through the pipes and they can really hurt. Sort of like passing kidney stones." ~Chuck

This reminds me of a thought I had this morning. What if experiencing cessation for the first time (or catching a first glimpse) is what puts one on the "path" of stream entry? And, what if we're calling "4th Path" is really just the "fruit" of stream entry? This would make sense in terms of 4th path being considered "where the path really begins." This also relates to something that Nikolai was tossing around in his practice thread. He said something about having only really removed the first three fetters of the 10 Fetters Model, and that he was working on removing the other seven. Traditionally, the first three fetters are removed at stream entry. One such fetter is "personality view", which would line up with Chuck's statement about how, "4th is the end of 'I am' as anything more than a fleeting notion. It has no teeth any more." Interesting, huh?

I'm not actually suggesting that we use this model. Far from it! It was just a fleeting thought. Still, for me it points out the fact that the labels we use are arbitrary. But that's not to say that the labels we use can't affect one's practice and realization. Someone who sees this 4th path thing as a starting line rather than a finish line will probably view themselves in a very different light, for better or for worse.

Food for thought, I suppose.

Jackson

"What if experiencing cessation for the first time ...is what puts one on the "path" of stream entry? And, what if we're calling "4th Path" is really just the "fruit" of stream entry?"

Hi Jackson,
I understand the reasoning - in the Suttas, 4th is defined in several places as the end of 'I am' with reference to any phenomena (form and formless). So if that notion comes up then the fetter is not cut. I don't think this is what he meant though. Rather, is there any sense of I am that is held to as being me or mine. After 4th (at least for me) this is not the case - the fleeting notion is just that - as it simultaneously collapses into 'that's just another thought' not as something reflected on but immediately seen.

All seems simple enough prior to the experience - kind of like trying to key out a wild mushroom shall we say - looks easy in the book until you have this thing in your hand and all of a sudden you have all these subtle aspects that don't fit clearly into the key. So when it actually happens and we still experience annoying thoughts, irritating vibrations, tension, frustration (now the AF lurkers are thinking 'I knew it - he does experience those things!') when we were expecting bliss, infinite joy, etc. it doesn't fit. On the other hand, in the suttas it is clear that Arahats still may experience unpleasant sensations and his advice to Arahats was to practice jhana in order to have a pleasant experience in the here and now (while you happen to be lugging around this slowly decaying body and all that old karma).

Something I came upon recently in the Suttas is that one must ultimately let go of mindfulness as well. Though I am aware of the sense of awareness getting subtler and subtler (I think Kenneth has also spoken of this) I can't say I have let go of mindfulness - this gets into Nathans discussion of the emancipations.