Right View continued: Dependent Origination

Amber Larson, Dhr. Seven, CC Liu, Wisdom Quarterly: Noble Eightfold Path, Part III

Golden Buddha, sunrise, Wat Muang, Ang Thong, Thailand (Sasin Tipchai/Bugphai/flickr)

Contemplating the dependent origination of a flame meditation (roshchodeshnewmoon.com)

  
Dependent Origination
Right view also means understanding something mentioned at the beginning: Dependent Origination (paticcasamupada). That is, all things arise dependent on supporting causes and conditions and not independent of them. (The one exception, leading to IT not being called a conditioned THING like everything else, is nirvana, "the unconditioned element").

All things have a cause and are themselves causes. Everything that arises does so depending on supports not in their absence.

This is very easy to understand AND very deep, profound, and difficult to understand. The Buddha stated that, "It is because of not seeing this truth that not only you but I, too, have wandered on for so long in this samsara [cycling wheel of death and rebirth]" meeting with suffering again and again, now here now there. It is key to enlightenment. (There are 37 "things pertaining to enlightenment" in all the Buddha's teaching, a list labelled the bodhi-pakkaya-dharma or "Requisites of Enlightenment." Such lists are for understanding, not for clinging to or memorizing or worrying about).

Easy DO

Five factors give rise to illusory flame.

Well, what's the easy version? As a general principle of reality, of life, of physics, of psychology, we can see countless examples of things that seem like things, like solid objects, like fundamental elements, like unities. But we come to find that they are actually composites. Fire (defined here as a simple flame) is a thing, but what is fire? It is not a "thing" at all, but a process, and this process has components, elements, factors. 

What are the elements of fire? Fuel, heat, air (or any oxidizer), a medium, and combustion. There may be more, but let's just look at these five and add anything else later when the principle of dependent origination is grasped. Is any one of them "fire"? Are any two, three, four? Is there "fire" without any of them? Is there "fire" hiding in them waiting to come out? Is there "fire" apart from them? These things, the components of fire, are NOT fire. And yet there is no fire without them.

Fire element (NLbroekieNL)

Put them together in a functionally operable way and, BAM, suddenly there's fire, there's a flame. Pull any one of the components (the supporting causes and conditions) out and, BAM, suddenly there's not fire. Add the component back and, BAM, fire. Pull another one and, BAM... Try it. Is the "fire" hiding in the thing pulled out and added back in? No, because "fire" is not a thing. It's an epiphenomenal process, an empty heap of elements, an illusion arising based on components.

That is not to say it's conventionally unreal. Of course, it's conventionally real. And if anyone doubts that, we'll burn you with a flame...or at least point you to a fire, and you can have at it. It is ultimately "unreal" -- that is, not at all what it seems, but rather without permanence, identity, or ability to satisfy. It is impersonal; no fire ever reaches out intending to burn someone. But burning will occur as a result of contact with it. Yet, our language forces us to say what is not actually true, which is that "It burns [inflicts injury on] us."

FACILE ARGUMENTS EXPLAINED

Candles go out (imag.yaymicro.com)

It does nothing of the sort. It just becomes (not is, not being, but becoming, an ever-dynamic process, and if the process stops for even an instant, it goes out. 

• Where does it "go"?

It doesn't actually go anywhere; that is just an artifact of the language we employ to talk when we talk about a process as if it were a "thing."

• Where's nirvana?

Nirvana's not a place; that's just an artifact of the language we use to talk about it.

• What are the components of nirvana, is it those 37 mentioned before?

Nirvana's not a "thing." It doesn't have components and is the only thing that does not, so it is the only thing that is not a thing.

• Aha, but you just called it a thing!

That's an artifact of the language we use, not a property of nirvana, and anyway the path to a thing is not the thing.

• Aha, you just called it a 'thing' again!

Shut up.

• No, you shut up!

Okay, I'll shut up, and then this argument's over.

• But...

Uh uh uh!

Difficult DO

Temple in Hamaya (Fabian Belleville/flickr)

Is it clear that what is a composite, composed of elements, is not an independent thing? It is a dependent thing, leaning for support on those elements. Even if we add others or subtract some, the principle remains. No-thing really comes into being or goes out; that's just illusory, that is, what seems to be happening. In reality, what there is is emptiness. Ah, emptiness (shunyata as anatta).

We chose the example of fire/a flame on purpose Other dharmas (e.g., Jainism) have had to say, due to the logic of their arguments about a self/soul, that fire is alive. It certainly is to animists, to some shamans, and to faithful Jains. A wise person, therefore, neither lights nor extinguishes fires for fear of "killing." Look into it.

The Five Aggregates of fire (or what Ven. Thanissaro explains in terms of ancient Indian ideas prevalent at the time of the Buddha of fire clinging or binding to an object, leading him to the eccentric definition of nirvana as "unbinding") are a lot like a famous Mahayana Buddhist Sutra, the most famous in fact.

The Heart Sutra (the epitome of the Heart of Wisdom Sutra in the Prajnaparamita literature) runs: "(1)Form is emptiness, and the very emptiness is form. Whatever is form, that is emptiness. Whatever is emptiness, that is form. And the same is true of (2) feelings, (3) perceptions, (4) formations, and (5) consciousness."

These five are called "heaps" or the Five Aggregates (Groups) of Clinging because they are clung to as self (ego, soul, identity, personality, I, and me). But the very thing that looks at the world is not a unity either. It is a composite. A thing. And these are its components.

• I'm not a 'thing'!

Of course not, not you. You're different. We meant every other living being, every other animate and inanimate thing. But here thing does not mean thing in conventional language. Conventionally, of course, we are all persons. Lowly living beings move up. High born beings fall. Everyone whirls in samsara rarely hearing anything about liberation, nirvana, enlightenment, or the Buddha's Dharma, so rarely appearing in the world.

So we beg your indulgence to pay a little attention because a little "right view" goes a long way in this continued wandering on of suffering, rebirth, and death, death, death. Actions performed with right view are very profitable, very meritorious, even for one not striving for enlightenment. So pay attention. You will rarely ever hear something so important. CONTINUED

Step 1: Right View

Amber Larson, Dhr. Seven, CC Liu, Wisdom Quarterly Noble Eightfold Path, Part II

Tibetan Vajrayana Buddhist monks in India, August 2012 (Laura Murphy)

Nepal (Peter Barritt/allposters.com)

How does one begin along the Buddhist "path"? The path has eight steps. They are really connected factors or interdependent limbs (angas). And they are all cultivated together, supporting one another, jettisoning one toward full enlightenment (bodhi) and complete liberation (nirvana).

But if they are taken as literal steps, as systematic instructions on what to concentrate on first, then right view is paramount.

Right view, according to Bhikkhu Bodhi, is like setting out for the opposite end of the country. We wouldn't just start driving, but if we did we could hardly be surprised that we got nowhere fast. Instead, we set out a goal, signposts along the way, and make systematic progress to get there. For instance, get on the Interstate-10 Freeway and that will take a driver from coast to coast with plenty of side routes along the way. How does one get to Rome? Any road will do. How does one get to nirvana?
 

Afghan Buddha (Michel Porro/Getty)

The Buddha said interesting thing about that when asked. Imagine a well walled city, he answered, with bricks laid so tightly that even an acrobatic cat could not squeeze through, and a vigilant guard at the gate aware of all who entered and exited with no entrance other than that guarded gate.

The guard makes no note of who is inside or who is outside but is perfectly aware of everyone passing through the gate. In just the same way, the Buddha pays no attention to who has entered nirvana or remained outside, and yet he knows one thing with certainty: If the person is in, it is because they came in through this gate, this way, this path.

Generally speaking, that is the ennobling (enlightenment-making) Noble Eight Fold and more specifically the penetration of the Dependent Origination of things (how they come into being and pass away, arise and fall, originate and disintegrate).

Right View

"'Right view, right view' it is said. What is right view? (Dhammawheel.com)

 
Correct understanding, a proper outlook, the optimal overview are key to setting off in the right spiritual direction with hopes of getting there anytime soon.

When we practice the path that leads to purity of heart/mind, we must first undertake to gain the right (samma) view (ditthi, vision, outlook, perspective, or paradigm). It is Step 1. It is first gaining confidence in the law of karma. "Law" here does not mean a rule laid down by someone or something, a "Karma God." It is impersonal and regular, a "rule" in the sense of a pattern or reliable feature of the universe we inhabit. Who makes the Math Rules. I want to talk to that person. No one does. Well, can we at least talk to the Grammar Gods? No. And why not? There ain't any. (Oh sorry, Lord, aren't any!)

People who discern or describe regular rules, natural laws, axioms and truths, are not the arbiters, not the deciders, not the creators, not even the controllers. The "gods" (godlings and Gods, devas and brahmas) are in the same boat as us mere earthlings, subject to karma. We are more fortunate than they in ONE way: It is easier to attain enlightenment from here, where suffering is visible and pleasure is possible.

 

Only the arhats have gone beyond karma, transcended it, beaten Mara. But so long as they persist in the world, dependently originated, cycling through samsara, karma affects even them, and Mara tries to make inroads (as if adepts, the "elect," could ever be tricked again); the difference being that the effects of karma will end for arhats at the end of this lifespan. For they have escaped from the illusion to reality and thereby evaded all further suffering of any and all kinds. That is what nirvana is, the "complete end of ALL suffering," not just most of it. What is suffering (this first Noble Truth)? Understanding what constitutes suffering is part of right view.

In terms of karma (actions undertaken, deeds with the capacity to create results anytime in the future, karma consequences, welcome, neutral, and unwelcome), we are creating our own malleable fates, our destinies, our futures in the present moment. For it is not only what was done in the past but, more importantly, what we are doing right now -- our actions and responses right now -- that determines the way karmic results (called vipaka and phala, mental resultants and tangible fruits). Be here now; it's good advice.

What must Sakka's celestial Hall of Truth look like in the world of the Thirty-Three? Might it resemble the best place to make deals on Earth? (BBC)

 
Very generally, when we do good deeds -- that is, intentions free of greed (craving), aversion (hatred and fear), and/or delusion (wrong view and ignorance) -- with a pure mind/heart (that is, one free of craving, aversion, and delusion), we will doubtlessly have good results.

And when we do bad deeds -- that is, actions beset by greed, hatred, wrong views -- with an impure heart/mind, we will experience unwelcome, unpleasant, unwished for results because of our polluted minds/hearts.

Crime pays...or does it?

But DOUBTS do arise! "I don't believe stealing is 'bad,' just look at the thieves enjoying all that money!" we argue. But our argument is rooted in wrong view, shrouded in ignorance, and based on our misunderstandings and assumptions.

In this case, indeed, thieves are happy, and thieves have money, and some thieves can even enjoy that money. But they are not happy because they have money nor -- and this is the shocking part -- do they have money because they stole it. Yes, they do! No, they don't. They have it because of good karma in the past, and were that karma not there to support having money, they would quickly lose it. Thieves are ruining themselves.
 
With such good karma of the distant past they could produce and hold onto riches without crime, and they could enjoy it. How does the thief suffer now and in the future? The thief exhausts good karma of the past (that makes it possible to hold onto ill gotten gains), accrues bad karma (from stealing, harming others, and a feeding greed), leaves good karma of the present left undone, and generates compounding bad karma by guilt, worrying, misgivings, being ever alert to getting caught, found out, or punished by others...

• Karma Class: 10 Courses of Unwholesome Action

Of these, feeding greed is the worst, the most self-destructive. They hurt others and hurt themselves, and when they finally meet with the fruits of this thievery karma, they grieve terribly. Those consequences may not come for a very long time, and so we all doubt that they will ever come. But the Buddha says with certainty in the Numerical Discourses (AN X.206),

"I declare, meditators, that actions willed [intended], performed [carried out], and accumulated [stored up] will not become extinct as long as their results have not been experienced -- be it in this life, in the next life, or in subsequent future lives."

Even for an arhat, a non-teaching buddha, or a supremely enlightened teaching buddha, karma keeps producing results and fruits. But one is not distressed by conditions, whereas ordinary-uninstructed worldlings are. And at the end of the lifespan, ordinary beings go on to meet with the results of their actions, whereas the others do not. They are freed, and we are not freed. So not every action will get a result, but what is certain, what the Buddha is declaring, is that that karma (deeds with the potential to result in consequences anytime in the future) will not become defunct until its results are experienced in one way or another, in one world or another.

This playing out of karma is imponderable and one would become unhinged if one persisted in contemplating the staggering implications of actions and their results. The general rule still applies and is enough to comprehend and have confidence in, overcoming all doubts with time. CONTINUED

How can I overcome maddening sexual lust?

Dhr. Seven, Amber Larson (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly via Sayalay Susila (sayalaysusila.net)

Tiger Girl with full Japanese back tattoo or irezumi (Arisu Nomura/imageof.net)

  

Question: How can I overcome sexual lust, which is recurring again and again despite experiencing progressive calmness in my meditation?

Answer: Contemplate this fathom-long body.  And develop the jhanas, the absorptions, to overcome maddening sensual cravings.

• Singing Birds and Stinging Bees: SEX Slavery

Shorter Sutra on the Aggregate of Distress

Wisdom Quarterly version, Cula-dukkha-kkhandha Sutta (MN 14)

Ssshh, don't talk or think about "cookies."

Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was staying among the Sakyans at Kapilavatthu in the Banyan Park [Afghanistan]. Then Mahānāma (3) the Sakyan [the Buddha's cousin, which the Commentary claims was already a once-returner when this discourse was delivered] went to the Blessed One.

Arriving he bowed, sat respectfully to one side, and said: "Venerable sir, for a long time now I have understood the Dharma taught by the Blessed One in this way: 'Greed is a defilement of the mind/heart; aversion is a defilement; delusion is a defilement.'

Sexual craving is like a jungle thicket, hard to escape. A banyan park is better (Kiran Gopi)

  

The Buddha (ArunHaridharshan/flickr)

"Yet, even though I understand the Dharma taught by the Blessed One in this way, there are still times when the mental/heart states of greed, aversion, and delusion invade my mind/heart and remain.

"The thought occurs to me: What within me is as yet unabandoned so that there are times when these invade my heart/mind and remain?"
 

"Mahanama, that very [greed, hatred, and delusion] is what is as yet unabandoned by you so that there are times when they invade your heart/mind and remain.

• NOTE: Previously mistranslated, the point of this sentence is that the mental states that invade Mahanama's mind/heart are precisely the ones he has yet to abandon. In practical terms, this means he does not have to look for another quality lurking behind them but, instead, can focus attention on abandoning these states directly whenever they arise. The remainder of the discourse gives a lesson on how craving, aversion, and delusion can be abandoned by understanding the object on which they most frequently focus: sensuality (Ven. Thanissaro).

If fat is sexy, is fatter sexier?

"For if that were abandoned by you, you would not live the household life and would not partake of sensuality. It is because it yet remains unabandoned by you that you live the household life and partake of sensuality.
 

"Even though a disciple of the noble ones has clearly seen as it actually is with right view that sensuality is very disappointing, associated with much despair and great drawbacks, nevertheless -- if one has not attained a rapture (piti) and supersensual pleasure [sukha, both associated with the first and second absorptions] apart from the ordinary five sense strands, apart from unskillful mental states, or something more peaceful than that [any attainments beyond the second absorption] -- one can be tempted by sensuality.

Paris (Bryan1974/flickr.com)

"But when one has clearly seen as it actually is with right view that sensuality is very disappointing, associated with much despair and great drawbacks, and one has attained a rapture and supersensual pleasure apart from the ordinary five sense strands, apart from unskillful mental states or something even more peaceful than that, one can no longer be tempted by sensuality.

"I, too -- before enlightenment, when still an unawakened bodhisattva -- saw as it actually was with right view that sensuality is very disappointing, associated with much despair and great drawbacks. But as long as I had not attained a rapture and supersensual pleasure apart from the ordinary five sense strands, apart from unskillful mental states, or something even more peaceful than that, I did not claim that I could avoid being tempted by sensuality. 

"But when I saw as it actually was with right view...I claimed that I could avoid being tempted by sensuality."

Why? The Five Hindrances

The Five Hindrances (nīvarana) or "obstacles to enlightenment" make one blind, whereas the Seven Factors of Enlightenment (bojjhangas) give rise to internal light and wisdom (S.v.97f.). The "Discourse on the Hindrances" points out how the methodical development of the Four Foundations of Mindfulness (satipatthānas), when practiced and brought to culmination, rid one of the Five Hindrances (A.iv.457f.).

Explaining "Right View" (sutra)

Amber Larson, Dhr. Seven, Wisdom Quarterly; John Bullitt (Access to Insight), "Right View"

The Buddha overlooking Thailand (theskamantues'dayglory/flickr.com). NOTE: There is preliminary right view as distinguished from final knowledge or liberating right view.

 

Right view is the first of the eight factors in the Noble Eightfold Path, and belongs to the wisdom division of the path.

Definition

"And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to disappointment, knowledge with regard to the origin of disappointment, knowledge with regard to the cessation of disappointment, knowledge with regard to the path of practice leading to the cessation of disappointment -- this is called right view" (DN 22).

Right view's relation to the path

"And how is right view the forerunner? One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view. What is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no [special significance to things done to] mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no Brahmins or wandering ascetics who, faring and practicing rightly, proclaim this world and the next after having directly known and realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view...
 
"One abandons wrong view to enter into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view to enter and remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Therefore, these three qualities -- right view, right effort, right mindfulness -- run and circle around right view" (MN 117).

Buddhist novices practicing in Lamayuru monastery, Ladakh, India (Dietmar Temps/flickr)

 
Consequences of wrong view

"In a person of wrong view, wrong intention comes into being. In a person of wrong intention, wrong speech. In a person of wrong speech, wrong action. In a person of wrong action, wrong livelihood. In a person of wrong livelihood, wrong effort. In a person of wrong effort, wrong mindfulness. In a person of wrong mindfulness, wrong concentration. In a person of wrong concentration, wrong wisdom. In a person of wrong wisdom, wrong liberation. This is how from wrongness comes failure, not success" (AN 10.103).

Results of right view

Borobudur, Java, Indonesia (TrevThompson/flickr)

"When a person has right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration, right wisdom, and right liberation, whatever bodily deeds one undertakes in line with that view, whatever verbal deeds... whatever mental deeds one undertakes in line with that view, whatever intentions, whatever vows, whatever determinations, whatever formations all lead to what is welcome, agreeable, charming, profitable, and pleasing. Why is that? It is because the view is auspicious.

"Just as when a sugar cane seed, a rice grain, or a grape seed is placed in moist soil, whatever nutriment it takes from the soil and water, all conduces to its sweetness, tastiness, and unalloyed delectability.
 
Why is that? It is because the seed is auspicious. In the same way, when a person has right view... right liberation, whatever bodily deeds one undertakes in line with that view, whatever verbal deeds... whatever mental deeds one undertakes in line with that view, whatever intentions, whatever vows, whatever determinations, whatever formations -- all of them lead to what is welcome, agreeable, charming, profitable, and pleasing. Why is that? It is because the view is auspicious" (AN 10.104).
 
A thicket of wrong views

Bamboo thicket (Maxwell Holden/flickr)

"There is the case where an uninstructed, ignorant worldling... does not discern what ideas are fit for attention and what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, one does not attend to ideas fit for attention, and instead one attends to ideas unfit for attention... This is how one gives attention unprofitably:

• 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past?
• What was I in the past? How was I in the past?
• Having been what, what was I in the past?
• Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future?
• What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future?
• Having been what, what shall I be in the future?'

Or one is perplexed about the present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?'

 

"As one attends unprofitably in this way, one of six kinds of view arises: 

• the view I have a self arises in one as true and established, or the view I have no self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive self... or
• the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self... or the view It is precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises as true and established, or
• the view: This very self of mine -- the knower who is sensitive here and there to the ripening of good and bad actions -- is the self of mine who is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will endure as long as eternity.'

Meditation (health.indianetzone.com)

"This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed, ignorant worldling is not freed from birth, aging, and death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair. One is not freed, I tell you, from suffering and disappointment.

 

"The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones... discerns what ideas are fit for attention, and what ideas are unfit for attention. This being the case, one does not attend to ideas unfit for attention, and instead gives attention to ideas fit for attention... One attends profitably, This is disappointment... This is the origin of disappointment... This is the cessation of disappointment... This is the way leading to the cessation of disappointment. As one attends appropriately in this way, three fetters [obstacles to enlightenment and liberation from suffering] are abandoned: identity-view, doubt, and clinging to rites and rituals [as if they had the power to lead to enlightenment]" (MN 2).

 

Knowing and seeing for oneself

Novice meditating (alibaba.com)

[Kaccayana:] "'Right view, right view,' it is said, venerable sir. To what extent is there right view?"
 
[The Buddha:] "By and large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (a false dichotomy) a polarity -- that of existence and non-existence (being and nonbeing, the twin wrong views of eternalism and annihalationism).

"But when one sees the origin of the world as it actually is with right view, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right view, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.
 

Meditation (SeekingHeartwood/flickr)

"By and large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings, and biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of mind, biases, or obsessions, nor is one resolved on 'my self.' One has no doubt or uncertainty that, when there is arising (origination, becoming, being), only unsatisfactoriness is arising. And when there is passing away, only unsatisfactoriness is passing away. In this, one's knowledge is independent of others. It is to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view" (SN 12.15).

Abandoning the unskillful

                                  ...Cultivating the skillful

Meditation superhero (msnbc.msn.com)

"Do not go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scriptures, by logical speculations, by inferences, by analogies, by agreement through pondering, by probability, or by the thought, 'This monastic is our teacher.'

"[Instead,] when you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted and carried out, they lead to harm and to suffering' -- then abandon them...
 
"When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted and carried out, lead to welfare and to happiness' -- then enter and remain in them" (AN 3.65).

• Sutra on Views (AN 10.93)
• The Four Noble Truths
• The Fourth Noble Truth
• "Views" in General Index

The Enlightened American (Daniel Ingram)

Wisdom Quarterly (edit); Buddhist Geek Daniel Ingram (DharmaOverground.org)

Self-proclaimed arhat, author (Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha), and Site Administrator Daniel Ingram founded the Dharma Underground, which lead to the Dharma Overground, which culminated in The DhO.

 
Frustrated with the world of online Dharma blogs that are all about dogma, hierarchy, disempowering views about how it can't be done, mindless blind faith in absurd ideals, and texts that are wildly out of touch with reality, and a whole host of other absurdities, Ingram founded The DhO to form a safe haven.

It is for people who are into hardcore practice, real attainments, helping people out in the spirit of mutual noble friendship, open conversations about topics related to actual practice, and the like.
 
Ingram's website, InteractiveBuddha.com, is home to a distinct voice in the wilderness. He is boldly making the following claims to attainments:

• I am an arhat, having attained [full enlightenment] in April, 2003.
• I have mastery of the [traditional eight] samatha jhanas [meditative absorptions], including Pure Land One and Pure Land Two, The Watcher, and Nirodha Samapatti [the "extinction of feeling and perception," a meditative state said to only be possible for arhats].
• I have some experience with some other traditional attainments.
• I can access the state [The DhO] calls No Dog. 

:: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ::

The face of enlightenment (DhO)

Ingram wrote the book Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha: An Unusually Hardcore Dharma Book, often abbreviated MCTB, which has influenced the practice of many members of The DhO.
 
He is an emergency medicine physician who practices in emergency departments in Mississippi and Northeast Alabama, where he lives with his wife, Carol, and his cats Boris, Mavis, and Elvira (Mistress of the Dark), along with a number of relatively tame raccoons, two of which his family calls Scruffy and Ramona.
 
Ingram gives a whole lot more biographical information in MCTB.
 
He states, "I have many outside interests, including green building, cooking, dancing, playing, and listening to music, the writings of Jack Vance, and a good deal more. Updates on my current practice, whatever it may be, can be found at Current Practice Blog."
 
It is his sincere hope that The DhO will serve to add to the available literature and support of hardcore, empowered practice. He further hopes that through the collective work of a group of dedicated, skilled practitioners that meditation technology and culture will be advanced, enhanced, and adapted to this post-post-modern world.

Financial Disclosure
A brief disclosure of finances: Renting the server space and bandwidth for The DhO costs me about $179/month from Omegabit. There are also other expenses in running The DhO, such as developing the PM feature (which Liferay 5.2.2 didn't have), which cost me about $1,500 out of pocket for the programming, and recent attempts to upgrade to Liferay 6.1, of which the total bill so far has been over $3,000. I also get a small royalty on my book, MCTB, which generally runs roughly $400-$800 every 6 months. Thus, after paying for The DhO server time and miscellaneous expenses, I lose money on all of this, which is just fine by me and consider it my small dana [act of generosity] to the world of meditation. I hope this community benefits every interested person in some way. 

COMMENTARY
Wisdom Quarterly (EDITORIAL)

Daddy, is this an enlightened being? (Eighteen for Life/flickr.com)

 
Do we believe Ingram's claims about attainments? Yes.
 
The problem, of course, is that traditionally the belief has been that one who attains non returner or arhat stages would immediately want to ordain and live according to monastic guidelines, which are regarded as the perfection of the "high life" or brahmacariya. To live otherwise entails blameworthy harm being done to others. This would not suitable for a person of perfected view. (Enlightenment does not perfect personality; it perfects view).
 
A person with right view does not do harm while engaging in a livelihood. Outside of the Sangha it may be that one "goes along to get along" in the world. The arhat, unwilling or unable to stray from what is right/virtuous, would fall by the wayside. There is no example that we could find of a layperson becoming an arhat at the time of the historical Buddha who did not immediately ask for admission into the Sangha. It is not generally believed that a layperson can even attain that distinction to begin with except in exceptional cases. Monks scoff at the notion since they themselves, under ideal conditions, have so much trouble remaining motivated and reaching the goal, particularly in the city.

Falsely accusing the Buddha

Traditional Theravada teachers would probably not keep advancing a stream enterer or once returner who did not intend to ordain. But the question is, Is it possible? We do not see a necessary reason why it would be impossible. Tradition says that this or that is what happens, and it may be the strong inclination of an arhat to live in peace as a harmless contemplative. But we do not see where it says that has to happen. (Of course, there is the issue of sex and sexual motivation, procreative or strictly based on lust; it would not, as we understand it, be something an arhat would be drawn to. Then again we would not have thought a stream enterer would still break precepts, but they do. How do we know? We've seen it, and the texts say so. Look at the Ratana Sutra. Apparently, what they are incapable of doing is keeping it a secret, but they can live heedlessly. This would seem to be impossible for an arhat).
 
The systematic commentarial work by Buddhaghosa, The Path of Purification, may seem like a set of hard and fast rules about the Dharma, meditation, attainments, and norms (niyamas), but there are so many examples of exceptions in the texts that one would be hard pressed to defend any definitive view. Buddhaghosa was not giving his opinion, which is how we define "comment" and "commentary." Expanding on and systematizing sacred texts is a sacred Indian tradition; one may need the commentary as much as the original text to make sense of most things great sages have taught.

It is easiest to believe that Daniel Ingram is mistaken or has misestimated his attainment. But how can we say with certainty? How can anyone say? One way to say is to become an arhat and then go meet Ingram. "It takes one to know one" is literally true in this case. If it is his experience, and he is being honest in reporting his experience, who will accurately judge the accuracy of his claims? To doubt it, if it is correct, is unskillful karma. Skeptical doubt is a major hindrance, so it would be better to believe or to leave it undecided until one can check.

An awakened heart of wisdom

We would only advise any person about to make such claim of enlightenment to check with a known arhat (such as Ajahn Jumnien, Pa Auk Sayadaw, the Western monk Ven. Dhammadipa, or other masters who would know) to confirm the attainment. It is easy to be mistaken even when one is personally "sure." What would be worse than living mistakenly thinking oneself liberated -- and convincing others of that -- if, in fact, one were wrong?
 
But Ingram has a mission to bring attainments out of the shadows where teachers imply they have attained things they may have not, and they never have to directly state one way or the other, or conceal what they are thought to have attained. The "defeat" offense (parajika) for monastics everyone seeks to avoid or ever be accused of in any way is to knowingly falsely claim attainments and/or distinctions in meditation for the sake of some worldly gain; if it is merely the result of misestimation, that does not fulfill the factors of defeat. There are, indeed, laypeople who have attained the stages of enlightenment alive today in America. We have met them. Until one learns what enlightenment actually is and meets examples of it, one may never "believe." This is a path of knowing-and-seeing, not of faith, for the wise and sincere. People may not be wise, but they will go a long way so long as they are sincere.
 
Before anyone judges this potential arhat or any other, we highly recommend reading Ingram's written work FREE: Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha, an Unusually Hardcore Dharma Book. Thank you for teaching, venerable sir.