One subject that I've alluded to in the past, but never thoroughly discussed, is what is required to stay free of the mind. Many people become free of the mind, but later fall back into delusion. I suspect that this happens because they do not fully appreciate the capacity and power of mind to subtly re-assert its dominance.
I'll mention two examples that come to mind:
1. Jane Doe. As a young woman, Jane was only interested in finding the truth. She became so intensely focused in her search that many people thought she was slightly mad. Eventually, she had a mind-blowing enlightenment experience that freed her completely from her previous ideas about the world. Afterwards, she lived life like a little child and was happy, carefree, and one-with Tao. She got married, had children, and lived an enlightened life for many years. Then, she went back to graduate school, became consumed in her studies, and began to feel that she had wasted the wonderful gift that she had been given as a young woman. She started searching again in an effort to regain what she thought that she had lost. By the time I encountered her Jane had discovered Zen, realized that she had had a kensho experience. She had begun to regularly meditate and assumed that a daily meditation practice was the missing ingredient in her previous understanding. In short, mind had once again become dominant, and during the rest of her life she never realized that her conclusion about meditation, while containing a grain of truth, was incorrect.
2. John Doe. This relatively well-known figure in non-duality circles, woke up in the midst of a nightmare situation. He discovered that he was free, and that he was not who had always thought he was. He subsequently wrote a highly-praised book and became a guru. People flocked to go on retreat with him and listen to his satsangs. He remained free of the mind for several years, but then mind subtly returned to the scene. He began to think of himself as a modern-day Buddha. He began to see people in terms of their "level" of attainment, and he referred to people as "a 550" or a "675." He began to believe that he could accurately rank anyone's attainment on a scale from 1 to 1000, living or dead, present or on the other side of the world.
In non-duality circles, this story has been repeated again and again. I'm not talking here about people who have a fifteen-minute enlightenment experience and think they're enlightened. I'm talking about people who become substantially free of the mind, and live for many years in an enlightened state before gradually falling back into delusion.
I suspect this happens because those folks don't recognize or appreciate the subtle power of mind to reassert itself given the right circumstances. What can prevent this sort of thing from happening? First, recognizing the importance of remaining psychologically present (not in the sense of "I must remain present" but in the sense of being present without reflection). Second, regularly shifting attention away from thoughts to "what is," to what's happening NOW, to what can be seen, heard, etc.
A Zen person who attains satori and becomes free of mind has already established a habit of daily meditation and samadhi. It has become a way of life. S/he has also become a person of action rather than reflection, so mind never has anywhere to gain a foothold. Such a person lives in a community where egocentrism in even the most subtle forms is powerfully eschewed, so even the slightest hint of self-aggrandizement would be immediately recognized and rejected as a kind of spiritual pitfall.
In Advaita circles, there is no similar allegiance to a meditative practice or habit of remaining psychologically present, so the potential of mind reasserting its dominance is much greater.
Let me emphasize that thinking, alone, is not a problem, and thinking need not be eschewed. I am simply saying that unless there is a habit of frequently and non-conceptually interacting with "what is" mind can reassert its past dominance and lead to a loss of clarity.
In the example of Jane Doe, she apparently never realized that she had never gained anything with enlightenment nor had she ever lost anything several years later. She seems to have missed the fundamental realization that no such person as "Jane Doe" had ever existed. The last time I talked with her she was still hoping that she could once again become unified with "what is" and free in the same way she had experienced for a period of several years. She did not seem to realize that a reflective mode of mind, coupled with a sense of "me," was "causing" her sense of separation.
The last time I talked with John Doe he offerred to help me "raise my level of awareness" to his own high level, a level that only Buddhas exhibit. I declined his offer.
I'll mention two examples that come to mind:
1. Jane Doe. As a young woman, Jane was only interested in finding the truth. She became so intensely focused in her search that many people thought she was slightly mad. Eventually, she had a mind-blowing enlightenment experience that freed her completely from her previous ideas about the world. Afterwards, she lived life like a little child and was happy, carefree, and one-with Tao. She got married, had children, and lived an enlightened life for many years. Then, she went back to graduate school, became consumed in her studies, and began to feel that she had wasted the wonderful gift that she had been given as a young woman. She started searching again in an effort to regain what she thought that she had lost. By the time I encountered her Jane had discovered Zen, realized that she had had a kensho experience. She had begun to regularly meditate and assumed that a daily meditation practice was the missing ingredient in her previous understanding. In short, mind had once again become dominant, and during the rest of her life she never realized that her conclusion about meditation, while containing a grain of truth, was incorrect.
2. John Doe. This relatively well-known figure in non-duality circles, woke up in the midst of a nightmare situation. He discovered that he was free, and that he was not who had always thought he was. He subsequently wrote a highly-praised book and became a guru. People flocked to go on retreat with him and listen to his satsangs. He remained free of the mind for several years, but then mind subtly returned to the scene. He began to think of himself as a modern-day Buddha. He began to see people in terms of their "level" of attainment, and he referred to people as "a 550" or a "675." He began to believe that he could accurately rank anyone's attainment on a scale from 1 to 1000, living or dead, present or on the other side of the world.
In non-duality circles, this story has been repeated again and again. I'm not talking here about people who have a fifteen-minute enlightenment experience and think they're enlightened. I'm talking about people who become substantially free of the mind, and live for many years in an enlightened state before gradually falling back into delusion.
I suspect this happens because those folks don't recognize or appreciate the subtle power of mind to reassert itself given the right circumstances. What can prevent this sort of thing from happening? First, recognizing the importance of remaining psychologically present (not in the sense of "I must remain present" but in the sense of being present without reflection). Second, regularly shifting attention away from thoughts to "what is," to what's happening NOW, to what can be seen, heard, etc.
A Zen person who attains satori and becomes free of mind has already established a habit of daily meditation and samadhi. It has become a way of life. S/he has also become a person of action rather than reflection, so mind never has anywhere to gain a foothold. Such a person lives in a community where egocentrism in even the most subtle forms is powerfully eschewed, so even the slightest hint of self-aggrandizement would be immediately recognized and rejected as a kind of spiritual pitfall.
In Advaita circles, there is no similar allegiance to a meditative practice or habit of remaining psychologically present, so the potential of mind reasserting its dominance is much greater.
Let me emphasize that thinking, alone, is not a problem, and thinking need not be eschewed. I am simply saying that unless there is a habit of frequently and non-conceptually interacting with "what is" mind can reassert its past dominance and lead to a loss of clarity.
In the example of Jane Doe, she apparently never realized that she had never gained anything with enlightenment nor had she ever lost anything several years later. She seems to have missed the fundamental realization that no such person as "Jane Doe" had ever existed. The last time I talked with her she was still hoping that she could once again become unified with "what is" and free in the same way she had experienced for a period of several years. She did not seem to realize that a reflective mode of mind, coupled with a sense of "me," was "causing" her sense of separation.
The last time I talked with John Doe he offerred to help me "raise my level of awareness" to his own high level, a level that only Buddhas exhibit. I declined his offer.
