The 7 Stage Model

Hey Everybody,
I'd like to suggest that we switch to using the 7 stage model in our discussions of enlightenment. I had a good long conversation with both Kenneth and the other hamilton project folks yesterday and I'm convinced that it is ready to be let out of beta.

The problems of both the technical model and the 10 fetters model are well known, and I see them causing endless confusion both here and on other discussion forums. I've also grown to dislike the term Arhat, simply because it is damn confusing and conjurers up too many projections from the traditionalists. Don't get me started on the whole dropping dead if you don't ordain in a week thing.

I think that the 7 stage model meets the requirements for pragmatic dharma. It's conceptually clean, it shows the major challenges of each stage, and it makes clear diagnosis possible. It also keeps me (at 5th stage) honest about what's done and what remains.

Anyhow, I figured I should at least start the discussion. Let's embrace the joy of baggage free maps!

Kenneth is the only one we know of who claims to have gotten to 6th and 7th stage of this model. Would it not be a better idea, to see if it's validated by other yogis first before making it the norm? I believe Kenneth when he says it is so. But wouldn't it appear more sound and acceptable if others could also validate it first? At least the 6th stage by others? And does this model mean that progress has to be in this order? Does this model have any holes? Does this model mean that it must occur like so? I would be interested to hear the opinions of some old timers like Chelek or triplethink or any 4th pather or actually by everyone. What is your opinion of this model?

Oh, and Kenneth, is the 7th stage the end of suffering as the Buddha promised? Would you say 7th stage is an "end goal"? Or would you be open to an 8th, 9th etc stage? Is making the 7th stage the end of the model creating a possible glass ceiling, like 4th path (supposed end goal) seemed to have been done previously?

Very curious!!

"Let's embrace the joy of baggage free maps!" -OwenBecker

I agree with Owen. This is an idea whose time has come. I have also been shying away from the "arahat" word lately, and for the same reasons you mention; there is ambiguity built into the word because of the various interpretations of the 4-Path model and there is also the accretion of mythology that has built up over the ages, which makes arahatship seem a superhuman feat.

By switching to the 7 stage map, we side-step the mythology and are left with a map that is based on traditional maps but is also firmly backed up by the experience of people here in our community.

It's also important to reiterate here that if we discover more stages beyond the 7th, we will add them to the map. I believe that any good model must include the possibility for further refinement as new data comes in.

For more on the 7 stage model, see this hourlong interview with jgroove in which I explain the map in detail:

" Kenneth is the only one we know of who claims to have gotten to 6th and 7th stage of this model. Would it not be a better idea, to see if it's validated by other yogis first before making it the norm? I believe Kenneth when he says it is so. But wouldn't it appear more sound and acceptable if others could also validate it first? At least the 6th stage by others? And does this model mean that progress has to be in this order? Does this model have any holes? Does this model mean that it must occur like so? I would be interested to hear the opinions of some old timers like Chelek or triplethink or any 4th pather or actually by everyone. What is your opinion of this model?

Oh, and Kenneth, is the 7th stage the end of suffering as the Buddha promised? Would you say 7th stage is an "end goal"? Or would you be open to an 8th, 9th etc stage? Is making the 7th stage the end of the model creating a possible glass ceiling, like 4th path (supposed end goal) seemed to have been done previously?

Very curious!!

"

Hi Nick,

I missed your post as I was composing mine, so I want to answer here soon. I need to talk to a yogi for an hour now and hopefully I can respond later tonight. Short version: I agree with everything you just wrote. (So don't edit it!)

All right, I'm back sooner than expected. Yes, the idea of creating the new model is not to plant flags or to create a glass ceiling, but rather to have a map that is verified in the experience of real, live, present day human beings. The first five stages are well-documented in practice threads on this website, on the DhO, etc., so I think we are on firm ground there. As you say, we have much less data to support the 6th and 7th stages. Still, I feel confident in including them in the model because they are so clear in my own experience and because they seem to line up so cleanly with the ten fetters map as well as accounts given by Bernadette Roberts, Adyashanti, and Eckhart Tolle, among others.

In other words, a major shift in one's experience of emotions (6th stage) is a common thread in many accounts of awakening. Likewise, the loss of anything that appears to be "I" (7th stage) is commonly reported among advanced contemplatives from various traditions and across different historical periods.

Having said that, I remain open to any new data. I would like to hear from anyone who believes they have had these shifts of perspective (especially the 6th and 7th), as well as people who believe they have gone beyond the 7th. We can change the map if it proves to be inaccurate or incomplete.

As for the sequence of events, there are rare accounts from people who may have attained to the 7th stage all at once, in some cases without any contemplative practice whatsoever. If I recall correctly, Suzanne Segal was waiting for a bus when her sense of "I" disappeared forever. According to my model, any later stage automatically carries with it the insights from earlier stages, so having the stages out of sequence doesn't really apply; you can get more than one stage at a time (this seems to be extremely rare), but you cannot skip around, if you see what I mean. Here again, this is my hypothesis; I may be wrong.

Thanks Kenneth,

I have some more questions which i am asking for myself but also for possible visitors to this site who want to know how to see this new model in the light of the fetter model. We can dislike the old models all we want, there is still confusion if we don't explain the newer model in light of the older ones.

Do you have any opinion on the idea of the destruction of the asavas (outflows)?


Is the 7th stage equal to the stage of the fetter free arhat ?(taking out all extra "myth" sounding criteria)

I know people dislike the term arhat for all the baggage it can carry with it, but setting such baggage aside, and because i personally think it's important to clarify, does the 7th stage mean that these fetters are no longer arising for the yogi?


sensual desire
ill will
lust for material existence, lust for material rebirth (rupa jhanas)
lust for immaterial existence, lust for rebirth in a formless realm (arupa jhanas)
conceit
restlessness
ignorance

If I had to deal with friends who have been immersed in a theravada tradition all their yogi careers and if they asked me about the fetter model (and they do) and where pragmatic dharma yogis are falling within such a model (common question), would it be correct to compare the fetter model with the 7 stages model like this:

1st Stage= AP nana
2nd Stage= Stream Entry (Personality View, Attachment to Rites and Rituals, Doubt in Buddha)
3rd Stage=
4th Stage=
5th Stage= Sakadagami (Attenuating of sensual desire and ill will) Note: I say this because it matches my current experience of 4th path)
6th Stage= Anagami (Sensual desire and ill will done away with)
7th Stage= Arhat (the rest of fetters dealt with)

Sorry for asking all this. But it helps I think. It helps me anyway.

Nick

"Is the 7th stage equal to the stage of the fetter free arhat (taking out all extra 'myth sounding criteria)?" Nick

Yes, I think so.

"I know people dislike the term arhat for all the baggage it can carry with it, but setting such baggage aside, and because i personally think it's important to clarify, does the 7th stage mean that these fetters are no longer arising for the yogi?" -Nick

Yes, by my interpretation of the ten fetters, they are gone at the 7th stage. Interpretation is everything here. It is possible, of course, to interpret the fetters in such an extreme way that I'm not sure anyone past or present could qualify as being free of them. But when you put it in the context of the original teachings, extreme interpretations do not make sense. According to the stories, people in the time of the Buddha were routinely getting rid of the ten fetters; unless human nature has changed radically for the worse, (and there is no evidence for that to my knowledge), we can believe that what was possible for ordinary humans then is also possible now.

One can awaken and still be a human being, ordinary in many ways. That means that one can still enjoy food, for example. Is the enjoyment of food "sensual desire"? I don't think so. I think that particular fetter refers to clinging rather than the ability to discriminate between filet mignon and rotten tomatoes. Similarly, does freedom from "sensual desire" mean one no longer enjoys sex? I don't think so. It means one is always present in this moment, free of clinging and aversion to pleasant, unpleasant, and neutral sensations. Part of pragmatic dharma is reclaiming what may well have been the original meaning of these Pali words in a way that does not deny life or humanity. My belief is that the words have been misinterpreted; they were never intended to put awakening out of reach for us mere mortals.

"If I had to deal with friends who have been immersed in a theravada tradition all their yogi careers asked me about the fetter model (and they do) and where pragmatic dharma yogis are falling within such a model (common question), would it be correct to compare the fetter model with the 7 stages model like this:

1st Stage= AP nana
2nd Stage= Stream Entry (Personality View, Attachment to Rites and Rituals, Doubt in Buddha)
3rd Stage=
4th Stage=
5th Stage= Sakadagami (Attenuating of sensual desire and ill will) Note: I say this because it matches my current experience of 4th path)
6th Stage= Anagami (Sensual desire and ill will done away with)
7th Stage= Arhat (the rest of fetters dealt with)

Sorry for asking all this. But it helps I think. It helps me anyway.

Nick"

Yes, I believe this is a reasonable way to align the ten fetters model and the 7 stages model.

"[...] rather than the ability to discriminate between filet mignon and rotten tomatoes. -Kenneth"

Hahahah Good one, Kenneth.

" I would be interested to hear the opinions of some old timers like Chelek or triplethink or any 4th pather or actually by everyone. What is your opinion of this model?
"

Hi Nick,
I covered this as best I could over on the Mahasi and Chah thread. With these two very different experiences, it's hard for me to add something here. Kenneth came through the Mahasi style and his model reflects his experience and may or may not reflect that of others using that style of practice. I am not in a position to comment on that at all.

Regarding my own experience, the 4 path model works fine though I find Bernadette Roberts language more contemporary and descriptive. Specifically:
(keep in mind when I use the term path it is in the Chah context)
1)Egoic (in my view this covers both 1st and 2nd paths while communicating that the day to day experience remains egoic)
2) Unitive (3rd path) - Communicates the collapse of ego and the unitive quality of on going experience 'I am Emptiness, God, Actual Freedom, etc')
3) Not Self (4th path)- Communicates the end of an ongoing self consciousness or self reflection.

Beyond this there is much that takes place but I'm not sure how useful a model is as the process no longer contains a sense of self and the process seems automatic. Still, practice tips are helpful. Traditionally (as far as I can glean): live simply in a quiet place, practice jhana and metta.

Vajrayana discusses qualities that are present and these are useful for someone going through this.
(cont)

Vajrayana: Post 4th, there is a dropping away of 'self habits' as the following qualities are emerging and deepening:

- Vividness of Phenomena: 'conceptual limitations have been dissolved and each phenomena, each perception, can appear exactly as it is'.
- Complete Ordinariness: 'the raw truth and reality of our lives...the most basic, unadorned experience of what life is'.
- Ultimate Nakedness: 'The energies around you- textures, colors, mind states, relationships ..all so naked and right in front of you without any padding...that nakedness is overwhelming'.
- Inescapable: 'so raw, its vividness so penetrating, that one wants to run away from it'.
- Youthfulness: 'there is no sense of repetition, no wearing out of interest because of familiarity'.
- Great Bliss: 'not so much great pleasure, but it is the experience of tremendous spaciousness, freedom from imprisonment, which comes through seeing the duality of existence'.
- Communicative Power of Being: 'we begin to realize that there is enegy, intelligence, and direction in our most ordinary experience as humans'.
- Magic of What Is: 'reveals the natural order and rightness of reality at just this moment'.

-from Secret of the Vajra World - pg. 286

It's not really appropriate for me to comment on maps or models. However perhaps I should fill in some blanks for people who haven't been following all of the many discussions from the early days of the DhO. I've always been interested in and supportive of openly sharing meditative practices and experiences. There is nothing within the Tipitaka or within Theravada teachings preventing lay followers of the Buddhadhamma from doing so. There are Vinaya rules and forms of censure against any Theravada bhikkhus speaking to lay followers or others about attaining superior states. There are similar rules and consequences for any bhikkhus who make false claims to other bhikkhus.

I've had various mediative experiences which have had a lasting impact and for many years I've been interested in discussing these kinds of mental events, mental qualities and similar longer term changes in outlook and understanding. At the same time my thinking is that it is beside the point to attempt to fashion a map or model or to establish some kind of a guide that routinizes everyones meditative experiences. Similarly, I have no interest in claiming any sorts of attainments or superior states of being. As I perceive everything there is no attainer and nothing to be attained rather it is a question of disillusionment and dispassion which lead to ever more abandonment and renunciation and so I find maps and models as often as not misleading. Also I think the effort to create deterministic and progressive levels confining and limit the potential discussion to unnecessarily narrow ranges of experience. I prefer much broader and open ended discussions of the nature of peoples meditative experiences and experiential changes. As for the Buddha's approaches to defining progress on the 8F path, I like it just fine.

cont->

I'm a student of traditional Theravada teachings and teachers, drawn to it particularly because much of it matched up with my meditative and day to day experience. I'm of reasonable intelligence but even so it has taken many years of serious study to become fairly familiar with the range of teachings in the Tipitaka and relatively conversant with the technical details and specifics of the content as it is a large body of rich and challenging texts. From this kind of vantage point there is obviously considerable fault that one can find with many of the popular notions about Theravada teachings. For one thing, while the regions which have sustained Theravada have naturally introduced many cultural elements, temples, rituals, fortune telling, amulets and while all of the usual worldly human faults have entered in along with the growth of buddhism in south east asia, the Tipitaka itself is almost entirely free of the kind of mythical layering, contamination, distortion and cultural accretions of which it has from time to time been accused. It might be said to have some slight historical layering but the very few levels of this and any later additions were made very early, within a century or two of the Buddha's parinibbana. Since the first and 2nd councils the Tipitaka itself has been maintained largely intact, the only exceptions being the possibility of a handful of sutta texts having possibly been lost.

cont->

With these things clarified I must also add this. I'm not posting here simply to antagonize Kenneth although I suspect he must often feel this way. By far the greater portion of the historically dominant buddhist schools and traditions have defined themselves variously in opposition to the teachings found within the Tipitaka and within what is now known as Theravada or southern buddhism. The views found in other buddhist schools past and present have been more or less informed and astute in their criticisms of and differences with the Tipitaka teachings and they have variously and significantly redefined the objectives of and the paths of practice. In any case, when they have defined their own dharmas they have typically done so in relation to what are commonly held to be the Buddha's original teachings and typically in a reasonably knowledgable way.

The western adoption of buddhism has come through a variety of lenses and filters and with mixed results however in keeping with the more skillful practices of the past it seems reasonable that before attempting to extract what is valuable from the oldest of the teachings and discarding the rest that people familiarize themselves with the contents of it as a whole. I have no real idea how informed or not Kenneth or any other teachers are and it is not my role to inform them. The resources do exist for everyone to inform themselves and I simply point this out and encourage everyone to make use of them.

cont->

So long as all of this is made clear then it should be easier for everyone to understand that new teachers and movements within and outside of buddhism almost always adopt the same basic tendency to define themselves in various ways in opposition to the traditions of the past and naturally engage in a variety of criticisms of the teachings and teachers within those traditions. It is also for this reason that it makes sense for some to speak in defense of the older traditions. It also should be clarified in this particular case that I don't speak on behalf of Theravada or as an advocate of Theravada but more as something like an informed fan of Theravada.

So, good luck modeling, I hope you get the gig with Gucci on the runway this spring.
Seriously, I hope this approach serves everyone well.

"The resources do exist for everyone to inform themselves and I simply point this out and encourage everyone to make use of them.
"

Thanks for these posts Nathan,
Really food for thought for me. I really find myself pulled to researching and reading more of the suttas, and am currently doing that. Thanks for the encouragement!



Nick

P.S. Thanks to you and Chuck for the advice on dropping conditioning factors (tension) in the jhanas. It has become my principal practice.

"So, good luck modeling, I hope you get the gig with Gucci on the runway this spring."

This cracked me up. Nice!

I don't know guys, I have some reservations about this. Just because the model is so top-heavy.

The mandate of KFDh as far as I understood it was to help chronic yogis get to first path, and it seems more like you are focusing almost exclusively on the upper echalon in this model.

It's almost like the rank system they have in the Army. There's and elabroate structure for NCO's and and an elaborate structure for commisioned officers. Thank Heavens someone suggested adding the a&p as a part of the model or this proposal would have ignored the NCO chronic yogi ranks all together.

Let me put it this way: I'm one of the guys in the trenches, you've all been there. I am in the place where I'm suffering and have bullets whizzing over my head, but reading this stuff you're writing I feel like the people who can help get me out of here are spending a lot of time trying to highlight the finer points of what distinguishes a Lieutenant General from a Field Marshal.

What about the people who need help the most?

"What about the people who need help the most?"

That's a very good question.

"I don't know guys, I have some reservations about this. Just because the model is so top-heavy.

The mandate of KFDh as far as I understood it was to help chronic yogis get to first path, and it seems more like you are focusing almost exclusively on the upper echalon in this model.

It's almost like the rank system they have in the Army. There's and elabroate structure for NCO's and and an elaborate structure for commisioned officers. Thank Heavens someone suggested adding the a&p as a part of the model or this proposal would have ignored the NCO chronic yogi ranks all together.

Let me put it this way: I'm one of the guys in the trenches, you've all been there. I am in the place where I'm suffering and have bullets whizzing over my head, but reading this stuff you're writing I feel like the people who can help get me out of here are spending a lot of time trying to highlight the finer points of what distinguishes a Lieutenant General from a Field Marshal.

What about the people who need help the most?"

Yeh, i kind of agree. I think the 7 stage model should be put on a back burner before it is universally accepted by those who profess to have validated it (at least till other yogis get to stage 6 or 7 if they ever do) And focus on getting the rest of the yogis to stream entry and at least 4th path.

Here, here!!!! Stream entry or bust!

All 4th pathers are probably realizing that there is still more to do. We don't know how it's going to turn out exactly. We may well be jumping the gun (again). Maybe this model needs years to be validated and accepted as the norm or not. I think we need to give this thing time. Otherwise it looks strange to others coming in contact with the Pragmatic dharma scene. We can't just invent up new models when our experience shows us there was more to do. Perhaps we don't make it concrete just yet. Maybe it would be wiser to say there is the 4 path model separated from the traditional fetter model (at least in the experience of the pragmatic scene with it's 4 distinct perceptual shifts) but there seems to be somethings you can do after it and so far, these few people seem to show what may happen post-4th.

When we have more numbers ( this is what we need, more post-pathers) who have experienced something similar, then we could go ahead and adapt all these terminolgies and new models. Sure, we have Bernadettte Roberts and others, but they arent part of the Pragmatic scene. It just seems liek the best way to go about it, but I'm not gonna get mad if it doesn't. Perhaps a loose tentative model is the wisest move. A concrete model proven by one person within this community does seem slightly dubious. I believe Kenneth, but there is the history of both Daniel and Kenneth professing that 4th path was arahatship (the end goal to many). It apparently is not. unfortunatley this may just make people who could benefit turn away. Making it the norm? is this wise?

Thanks for the feedback, guys. I find it very helpful. Anybody else want to weigh in? The ability to talk about these things together is the strength of an online community like this.

Just to reassure everyone (and especially MarkVanWhy), my mission hasn't changed; I'm still here to help people awaken to the happiness that is independent of conditions and that includes yogis at all levels of development. I talk to yogis on Skype or telephone six days a week (I finally promised myself I would take Sundays off), and the majority of them are currently working at beginning or intermediate levels. No one will be left behind!!!

Nick, please stop editing and re-editing your posts! When you do that, it cause problems because:

1. People respond to what you have posted, but then your post changes and the context for the response disappears, leaving everyone confused.

2. We miss much of what you say because we know we have already read a certain post of yours and don't realize that you have changed it so we don't go back to read it again.

I request that you solve both of these problems by only editing for typographical errors or to make minor changes to improve the clarity of your original comments. Anything beyond that is better put into a new post to supplement rather than replace your original comments.

Thanks,

Kenneth

edit: typo