The 7 Stage Model

"Anybody else want to weigh in? The ability to talk about these things together is the strength of an online community like this."
This stuff is so far beyond me. But it is really amazing to think that we are here watching this unfold! Honored to be here.

" the majority of them are currently working at beginning or intermediate levels. No one will be left behind!!! "
Nice! Thank you!

"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 "

Sorry Kenneth, bad habit, I do it all the time. I was editing while you posted, then soemthing else occured and I got carried away. I'll put a stop to it.



Nick

nvm

"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.

What about the people who need help the most?"

I wholeheartedly support Kenneth and anyone else who's intentions are to demystify and expose what is happening in the course of meditation practices and experiences and to assist people with these practices and the processes that unfold. Elsewhere people often say or post back, find a good teacher, well, here you are, someone with the skills and experience to help you through this.

This is a huge step forward from where things were at in the west 30 years ago and a step in the right direction from where things were at even 3 years ago. It pushes the envelope and adds to the impetus for other teachers in the west and elsewhere out there to get their acts more together, to open up and become more accessible as well.

The further on one is with these investigations, realizations, the development of knowledge and understanding the more difficult it is to explicitly define what is happening. The inclination to view the phenomenon of being as related to 'someone' drops away and this is followed by many of the processes that are interrelated with that view. Insight starts out as a practice and becomes normative, opening up into a very expansive awareness of phenomena flowing in and out of the body, senses and mind without any reference to a substantial ongoing person in any sense. So how do you define whatever unfolds from there onwards? Not very easily or definitively and certainly not with any clear sense of finality, awareness just continues to open inwardly and outwardly without any of the normal boundaries imposed by conventional misapprehensions and misappropriations of the phenomena, it is largely a process of continuing discovery. Traceless, beyond range, etc..

"nvm"

From thefreedictionary.com:

Acronym Definition
NVM Non-Volatile Memory
NVM Never Mind
NVM Night Vision Monocular
NVM Not Very Much (chat)
NVM National Volcanic Monument
NVM NewVoiceMedia (Hampshire, England)
NVM Nonvolatile Matter
NVM Network Virtual Memory
NVM Network Virtual Machine
NVM Not Very Mature
NVM New Vision Mortgage, LLC
NVM New Vessels Ministries (Muncie, IN)

(Which one did you have in mind, Beoman?)

o heh i meant nevermind, as i posted something which might have caused controversy, then decided that was not the best way to get my point across

I happen to think the strength of 4 path/3 gear model as Kenneth was teaching here was that I felt that Kenneth really knew that whole terrain. It was robust--a lot of examples, a lot of details, of lot of consideration of traditional maps, a lot of different angles to diagnosis the same general thing. My concern with the 7 stage model at this point is that Kenneth has only recently passed into it, a few months. And while other folks have been there--a large number of traditional teachers IMO, Adya, etc.--none that I know of who have that specific pragmatic-dharma eye or background.

So while I think the reduction of emotional content, the lose of self-contraction, etc. are big pieces of puzzle, it seems skeletal to me. The model would be thin in comparison to the 4P and would be guiding people based on too small a sample size, at least if one wants to stay up to previous KFD standards.

A middle ground in my mind would be to just be honest about this. Just say that the stages 6 and 7 are less fleshed out, very newly realized, extrapolated from a limited number of sources. And there may be 8 or 9. But here is what 6 and 7 look like so far. It would be like having a beta version. This would just be honest and open and allow for revision without stating things like facts and then having to take it back.

P.S. I've been reading about this quite a bit, and my sense is that the loss of self-contraction isn't the final stage. Roberts calls the "no self" experience the Great Passageway onto a different, higher order realization which she describes in a few different ways. She even describes a possible higher stage/experience than that where there is total obliteration/possession of the person by God. Dan Brown, in the interview posted here recently, says that no-self is just the start of a kind of multi-dimensional awareness that the Mahayanists aim for. My read of Hindu Tantra is the same, that something else occurs.

Yeah, I think Night Vision Monocular, too, Beoman

"The further on one is with these investigations, realizations, the development of knowledge and understanding the more difficult it is to explicitly define what is happening. The inclination to view the phenomenon of being as related to 'someone' drops away and this is followed by many of the processes that are interrelated with that view. Insight starts out as a practice and becomes normative, opening up into a very expansive awareness of phenomena flowing in and out of the body, senses and mind without any reference to a substantial ongoing person in any sense. So how do you define whatever unfolds from there onwards? Not very easily or definitively and certainly not with any clear sense of finality, awareness just continues to open inwardly and outwardly without any of the normal boundaries imposed by conventional misapprehensions and misappropriations of the phenomena, it is largely a process of continuing discovery. Traceless, beyond range, etc." -triplethink

This is very well expressed, Nathan.

I like mdaf30's idea of thinking of the 7 stage model as a beta version. I think all good models are perpetually "in beta" because our objective in building models is not to create another static idea that we can inhabit but rather to provide a scaffold that will help people grow.

With regard to corroboration of the 6th & 7th stages, there are two aspects of it: 1) textual support and 2) consensus from people who have been there.

In talking about textual support, keep in mind that the only "new" thing in the model is synthesis; I have put together two different interpretations of the traditional 4 Path model. So, when we talk about the 6th and 7th stages of my model, we are also talking about the 3rd and 4th paths of the ten fetters model, for which there is no lack of textual support.

As for consensus, that is trickier because we are attempting to map aspects of human development that by their very nature are rarely attained. I would like to change that if possible, but for the time being (and so far throughout history) it seems that only a tiny minority reach these levels. If we wait for consensus, we may wait forever. I would argue that there is value in modeling this territory as best we can, even with the limited data available to us.

There are a lot of good points that have come up in this discussion. Thanks guys.
One thing that's brought to mind by the discussion is that (and I hope we can discuss this without another big round of dharma drama) the AF people seem to be reporting phenomena that don't fit into the technical 4 path model, and with a few very rare exceptions orthodox buddhists don't seem to be reporting an enlightenment that fits in with the 10 fetters model. Ramana and the Nis are also reporting things that don't fit in with most modern Buddhist descriptions.

Another part of the problem might be that given the fact that most of the challenges are deeply emotional after 4th path, people around here stop reporting about what's going on. I know I'm guilty of this. Getting to the 6th stage in the hybrid model seems to require a ton of work on the heart.

In the end though, isn't the point of the maps more about being a guide to practice, rather than a final description of what "Ultimate Enlightenment" is? And for that, the 7 stage model helps. While this Owen isn't suffering, suffering is still happening. And it sucks sometimes. This hybrid model appears to be a good framework for refining my practice and it also simplifies the earlier stages with the A&P added on as a discrete stage. That was part of the weakness of the 4 path and 10 fetters model - they don't really speak to the profound impact of "getting on the ride".

JMHO, and to more or less agree with Owen, but the more comprehensive you want to make your models and maps the more detailed, ad nauseum discussion you will get into. It seems to me you can't have it both ways. If your goal is to help people with simple, easily understood maps then you have to drop the concern for comprehensiveness and detail (and yes, the concern for "AF people"). If on the other hand you do want to try to make a comprehensive, detailed, probably impossible to complete and never ending map, well, then go that route but get ready for endless discussion and much less utility.

Maps are just concepts overlaid on some shared experience. They *seem* to match some of what we actually experience and that's potentially helpful. In the end, though, our mileage may vary... and that's okay.

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

Remember that First Gear has an entire map for pre-path, the traditional insight knowledges. So there is a finer scale topographic map to A&P and to Stream Entry. This other mapping is just up a scale.

For what it's worth, I'm still not convinced that, if you got folks in stages 6 and 7 in a room and had them map their experiences out for each other, there would be clear phenominological markers they would agree were stage-like. From what I've read... some people just talk about on going and endless refinement, others talk about milestones in their ripening -- so that's a big split right there. Those that do talk about milestones seem to have different definitions, so it makes cross comparisons hard to sort out. Things like "the loss of self" seem to have about ten different definitions, same thing with "the loss of emotions", same thing with "the loss of preference/will"...

I don't know if it helps to have someone well below these stages comment at all... but that's my view on the outside looking in.

"One thing that's brought to mind by the discussion is that (and I hope we can discuss this without another big round of dharma drama) the AF people seem to be reporting phenomena that don't fit into the technical 4 path model
...
Another part of the problem might be that given the fact that most of the challenges are deeply emotional after 4th path, people around here stop reporting about what's going on. I know I'm guilty of this
...
In the end though, isn't the point of the maps more about being a guide to practice, rather than a final description of what "Ultimate Enlightenment" is?"

just wanted to add my 2 cents: that the AF method seems to lead to stage 7 - well, not only eliminating self-contraction but eliminating the self entirely - that it seems to have been successfully applied so is not just theoretical, and it works for both Arahats and non-stream enterers alike. i think it's worth it looking at it from a technical, practice- and goal-oriented point of view, as opposed to an ideological point of view.

it also is indeed deeply emotional, which is why the AF threads on DhO look so different than the Vipassana threads.

"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. "

i agree that when trying to help someone get stream entry, and in a model where one must go through the stages one by one, it's not helpful to talk about stage 6 and 7 to them. although i can't see why one couldn't talk about it in addition to answering questions about lower-level practice. maybe there should just be a post-4th path section of the board so those threads dont get mixed in w/ the rest?

"i agree that when trying to help someone get stream entry, and in a model where one must go through the stages one by one, it's not helpful to talk about stage 6 and 7 to them. although i can't see why one couldn't talk about it in addition to answering questions about lower-level practice. maybe there should just be a post-4th path section of the board so those threads dont get mixed in w/ the rest?"

the final state of AF is not the 7th stage as Kenneth Folk explains it. Both Kenneth and Tarin Greco would most probably say the same thing and I think they already have. An AFer has no access to any jhanas, nor NS. A 7th stager, according to Kenneth does. Why is there this difference? I think you should ask Tarin. He seems to have an idea why. As far as I know, they are not the same result. Similar but not the same.

Nick

"i agree that when trying to help someone get stream entry, and in a model where one must go through the stages one by one, it's not helpful to talk about stage 6 and 7 to them. although i can't see why one couldn't talk about it in addition to answering questions about lower-level practice. maybe there should just be a post-4th path section of the board so those threads dont get mixed in w/ the rest?"

That's the purpose of a comprehensive map. The problem as I see it is that we have a really good understanding of what happens in stages 1-4 on the 7 stage map and how to get people though it. The early stage people are lucky in that regard. We don't have the same ability to tell people how to progress from 5-7. The AF people have made some progress, though the language they use could be much more clear.

We are talking about finally ending the conceit of self, which as far as I know no other modern traditional Buddhist teachers are willing to openly talk about, possibly because they haven't done it. Bernadette might be right about that, and it also might be why Richard keeps talking about AF being 180 degrees away from Buddhism.

What is the definition of the "conceit of self" in this regard versus the "self-contraction" versus "not-self" or "no self?"

The terms being used here appear to be interchangeable, variable and inconsistent. It would really help everyone if we were to use the same terminology for the same things and to create a written reference guide or dictionary. In my daily life I'm helping an industry automate inter-company data transmissions and until we were able to agree on using the same words for the same things, i.e.; standardize the lexicon, it was a hopeless effort.

(Yes, I'm a cranky old bastard)

Um, sorry to sound quite so cranky there.

"the final state of AF is not the 7th stage as Kenneth Folk explains it. Both Kenneth and Tarin Greco would most probably say the same thing and I think they already have. An AFer has no access to any jhanas, nor NS. A 7th stager, according to Kenneth does. Why is there this difference? I think you should ask Tarin. He seems to have an idea why. As far as I know, they are not the same result. Similar but not the same.

Nick"

ah interesting. i'll have to look into this more. can you link a thread where this has been discussed? until then i'll watch those vids to see what is really meant by 7th stage, but until then is there any more comprehensive description of what 7th stage is in text form?

@Owen in post #41:
This seems like a re-current theme, that no one else is really teaching this. But, while I've admittedly been attracted to and practiced in a very different tradition (Vajrayana) than that most normative here (theravada), and thus have exposed myself to different sources and most importantly applied myself to somewhat different methods, I don't feel like this kind of teaching is under-represented.

It just might be given in a different context, a less goal oriented context. But certainly of the Vajrayana teachers I've been exposed to, both eastern and western, the experiential insight into no-subjectivity, into the inferred character of the "subject", is pretty much fundamental to the way they teach buddhism. So I get confused when statements are made implying that there is a great lack of this sort of teaching out there. That doesn't match my experience, either in terms of what I've read, or how my practice functions experientially.

Is the way you guys approach this insight-- the ending of self-conceit, defined as making the inference of subject behind experiences-- really that different now than the way you approached it as beginners and while traversing the paths and stages through 4th path of the technical model? I'm really curious as to how the investigation is different for you, concretely.

Jake's got a really good point. The scope of Buddhist teaching, of all spiritual teaching and experience, is no doubt much. much larger than any of us conceive. Self-limiting it to the Theravada, or worse, just to what is discussed here, would be a mistake.

To more clearly define terms, this is what I'm referring to as the end of the self contraction or self conceit.

---

Khemo Sutta

---

[The other monks hear that the Ven. Khemaka has said:] "In these five groups of clinging I perceive no self, nor any thing pertaining to a self." [They therefore wrongly conclude that he is an Arahant. Finally, though sick, he comes in person to explain. They ask:] "As for this 'I am' you mention, friend Khemaka, what is it? Do you say this 'I am' is the body or not the body,... feelings,... perceptions,... mental formations,... consciousness or not consciousness?"

"No, friends, I do not say this 'I am' is the body,... consciousness, nor that it is other than the body,... consciousness. Yet with regard to the five groups of clinging,[1] 'I am' comes to me,[2] but I do not consider it (by way of wrong views) as 'This I am.' It is just like the scent of a blue, red or white lotus.[3] If someone were to say, 'The scent belongs to the petals, or the color, or the fibers,'[4] would he be describing it correctly?"

"Surely not, friend."

"Then how would he describe it correctly?"

"As the scent of the flower, would be the correct explanation."

(cont)

"In the same way, friends, I do not say this 'I am' is the body,... consciousness, nor that it is other than the body,... consciousness. Yet with regard to the five groups of clinging, 'I am' comes to me, but I do not consider it as 'This I am.' Though, friends, an Ariyan disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters,[5] there still remains in him a subtle remnant[6] from among the five groups of clinging, a subtle remnant of the 'I'-conceit, of the 'I'-desire, an unextirpated lurking tendency[7] to think: 'I am.' Later on he dwells contemplating the rise and fall of the five groups of clinging,[8] and he sees: 'This is the body, this is its arising, this is its passing away. These are feelings,... perceptions,... mental formations,... this is consciousness, this is its arising, this is its passing away.'

"So, as he dwells thus in contemplation of the rise and fall of the five groups of clinging, this subtle remnant from among the five groups of clinging, this subtle remnant of the 'I'-conceit, of the 'I'-desire, this unextirpated lurking tendency to think: 'I am' is brought to an end.[9]

"Friends, it is like a cloth, soiled and stained, whose owners give it to the washerman. He rubs it smooth with salt-earth, lye or cow-dung then rinses it in clean water. Now though the cloth has been cleaned and thoroughly purified, there still hangs about it, unremoved, the subtle smell of salt-earth, lye or cow-dung. The washerman returns it to the owners, who put it away carefully in a sweet-smelling box. Then the smell of salt-earth, lye or cow-dung that still clung to it disappears completely.

"In just the same way, friends, though an Ariyan disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters... [as above]... this unextirpated lurking tendency to think: 'I am' is brought to an end."

---

The above is what I would call the completion of the 7th stage. You guys do make a good point about the Vajrayana, I don't have enough background on that tradition to make a blanket statement. To be fair though, I haven't heard anybody from that tradition make a statement quite as explicit as the above referenced sutta.

Not to say they haven't, but I find Vajrayana to be so wrapped up in Tibetan cultural mythology that I usually can't make heads or tails of what they are talking about when it comes to end stage practice.