Previous posts are only half the picture. Further Chat with ChatGPT on the nature of existence and all experience even jhana being a possible object of attachment

The below clearly shows that previous posts about being the view not the viewed remove the self from the realm of sensed objects, but still hide it in experience.

There is no part of experience or existence that does not have a start and an end. It is interesting how we look into the world and experience to try and identify something to attach to and call "I" or the Truth. There is nothing out there or in there, at any level of abstraction or insight or experience that itself is the truth. The truth is just to observe that none of these elements is permanent and satisfactory. With this solid acceptance we let go and give up the project to become aligned or associated or linked to anything.

At the end I pull in a misunderstanding about the book "I am That" Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj.

===

 does Buddhism say that experience can become identical with reality?

ChatGPT said:

Buddhism generally distinguishes between experience and ultimate reality, though some schools come closer to identifying the two.

1. Conventional vs. Ultimate Reality: Many Buddhist traditions, especially those influenced by Madhyamaka philosophy (such as Tibetan and Mahayana Buddhism), differentiate between conventional reality (how things appear in experience) and ultimate reality (the true nature of things, often described as emptiness or śūnyatā). According to this view, our experience is shaped by conceptual constructs and ignorance, so it does not fully coincide with reality as it is.

2. Yogācāra and the Role of Consciousness: Another Mahayana school, Yogācāra (also called "Mind-Only"), suggests that what we perceive as reality is nothing but consciousness. In this view, experience and reality are closely intertwined, but even here, delusions must be removed before experience can fully align with reality.

3. Zen and Direct Experience: Some Zen and Chan Buddhist teachings emphasize that direct, non-conceptual experience (such as in deep meditation) can reveal reality as it truly is. In this sense, experience—when free from mental distortions—can be identical with reality.

4. Theravāda Perspective: Theravāda Buddhism, particularly in Abhidhamma analysis, treats experience as a stream of conditioned mental and physical phenomena. While this stream is real in a conventional sense, ultimate reality consists of impersonal dhammas (fundamental phenomena), which exist regardless of our conceptualizations.

Conclusion:

Buddhism does not generally claim that ordinary experience is identical with reality, since it is often distorted by ignorance and conceptualization. However, some traditions suggest that purified, direct experience—especially in meditative states—can align with or reveal reality as it truly is.

You said:

If my experience is ontologically different from reality, then I am also ontologically different from reality. Does this make me unreal?

ChatGPT said:

Not necessarily. In Buddhism, the relationship between experience and reality is more nuanced than a simple dichotomy between real and unreal. Let’s break it down:

1. Dependent Origination (Paṭicca-Samuppāda)

Buddhism teaches that everything, including your experience, arises due to causes and conditions. This means your experience is not independent of reality but is conditioned by it. However, because experience is shaped by ignorance, craving, and conceptualization, it does not perfectly reflect ultimate reality.

2. Conventional vs. Ultimate Reality

• In conventional terms, you exist as a person with experiences, thoughts, and perceptions. This is how the world operates in everyday life.
• In ultimate terms, the idea of a separate, inherently existing "self" is seen as an illusion (anattā, or non-self). What we call "you" is actually a dynamic process of impermanent, interdependent phenomena.

So, while your experience may not be identical to reality, it is not wholly unreal either. Instead, it is a conditioned appearance that does not have an independent essence.

3. Unreality in Buddhism

Buddhism does not say that you are "unreal" in an absolute sense. Instead, it says that your conventional identity is empty of inherent existence. This does not mean that you do not exist at all, but rather that your existence is dependently arisen and lacks an unchanging essence.

4. A Middle Way

Madhyamaka philosophy (from Nāgārjuna) avoids two extremes:

• Eternalism (believing the self or experience is ultimately real in a fixed, independent way)
• Nihilism (believing the self or experience is completely unreal)

The Middle Way suggests that while your experience is not identical to ultimate reality, it is also not entirely separate from it. Rather, it is an empty yet functioning manifestation of reality.

Conclusion:

You are not "unreal" in the sense of nonexistence, but your existence is empty of inherent essence—it arises through conditions and is part of a larger interconnected reality. Experience does not fully capture ultimate reality, but it is not separate from it either.

You said:

An enlightened being does not experience reality as experience is conditioned. Indeed all aspects of experience and existence are conditioned. The closest to reality is recognising the impermanent nature of all these phenomena

ChatGPT said:

Yes, that aligns closely with core Buddhist teachings. An enlightened being, having fully understood the impermanent, conditioned nature of all phenomena, does not cling to experience as an ultimate reality. Instead, they recognize that all experience is dependently arisen and empty of inherent existence.

1. Experience Is Conditioned

According to Buddhist thought, all experiences arise due to causes and conditions (paṭicca-samuppāda). This means they are impermanent (anicca) and cannot provide a lasting, independent foundation for reality.

2. The Nature of Enlightenment

An enlightened being does not see reality through conditioned experience in the way an ordinary being does. Instead, they see directly into the nature of all phenomena—their emptiness (śūnyatā) and dependent origination. This does not mean they do not experience at all, but that their experience is free from ignorance, attachment, and delusion.

3. Closest to Reality: Recognizing Impermanence

Rather than grasping at experience as reality, an enlightened being recognizes that all phenomena are impermanent, selfless, and conditioned. This direct realization leads to liberation. In this sense, the closest one can come to "reality" is not by grasping at a fixed state but by seeing through the illusion of permanence and selfhood.

Final Thought:

Experience itself is not ultimate reality, but seeing through its conditioned nature is the path to realizing reality. An enlightened being does not cling to experience but rests in direct wisdom—fully engaged with phenomena without being deceived by them.

You said:

so there is no part of experience that is not conditioned. The whole of awareness and reality is conditioned. Every possible phenomenon is conditioned. There is no quality of the here and now, even the sense of here and now that is not conditioned.

ChatGPT said:

Yes, from a Buddhist perspective, everything within experience is conditioned—including awareness, the sense of self, the feeling of "here and now," and even the most subtle states of consciousness. There is no part of experience that exists independently or outside of causality.

1. Awareness Is Conditioned

In Buddhist philosophy, even awareness (viññāṇa in Pali, vijñāna in Sanskrit) arises due to conditions. It depends on contact between sense faculties and objects (e.g., eye and visible form, ear and sound, mind and mental objects). Awareness does not exist as a standalone, independent entity.

2. Reality Is Conditioned

From the Buddhist standpoint, all phenomena (dharmas) are subject to the law of dependent origination (paṭicca-samuppāda). This means that reality, as we perceive it, is entirely made up of interdependent processes.

3. Even the Sense of ‘Here and Now’ Is Conditioned

The feeling of presence, the immediate moment of "here and now," is also dependently arisen. It is shaped by memory, perception, and the interplay of mental and physical processes. The moment itself does not exist independently but is a construct arising within a stream of conditions.

4. What About Nirvāṇa?

Nirvāṇa is sometimes described as "unconditioned" (asankhata), but this does not mean it is an independent, eternal reality in the way that other traditions might conceive of an absolute. Rather, it is the cessation of conditioned experience—the ending of grasping, ignorance, and rebirth. It is not a thing or a state in the usual sense but the extinguishing of craving and delusion.

Conclusion:

Yes, everything within experience, including the sense of being aware, present, or located "here and now," is conditioned. The Buddhist path does not seek an unconditioned experience within experience but instead leads to the cessation of clinging to conditioned phenomena altogether. Enlightenment is the deep realization of this truth and the freedom that comes from letting go.

You said:

If one was to say that I am not the thing viewed but the view itself, this improves on the idea that I am a thing that can be sensed, but in stating that I am the view itself this does not escape causation and conditionality.

ChatGPT said:

Exactly. Identifying as "the view itself" may move away from a fixed, object-based sense of self, but it still does not transcend causation or conditionality. The act of viewing, or awareness itself, remains dependently arisen and impermanent.

1. The Shift from "Thing" to "Process"

• If one says, “I am the thing viewed,” this assumes a static, objective identity—an entity that can be grasped or defined.
• If one says, “I am the view itself,” this shifts identity from a fixed thing to a dynamic process. While this is a subtler, more fluid perspective, it still does not escape dependent origination. The act of viewing depends on conditions (sense organs, consciousness, mental formations, etc.).

2. Awareness as Conditioned

Even if one identifies with pure awareness or the process of viewing, that awareness itself is still conditioned. In Buddhist philosophy:

• Awareness arises in dependence on sense faculties and objects.
• It is impermanent and subject to cessation.
• It is not a fixed or independent self.

3. No Escape from Causality Through Reframing

No matter how one defines or shifts identity—whether as a thing, a process, or awareness itself—this does not escape dependent origination. Any experience, no matter how subtle, arises due to conditions. Therefore, identifying as "the view" does not remove one from causality.

4. Beyond Identification: Letting Go

Instead of trying to locate a "true self" in the viewed, the viewer, or the viewing process, Buddhist insight leads to a deeper recognition:

• There is no fixed self to be found in any of them.
• All phenomena, including awareness, are dependently arisen and empty of inherent existence.
• Liberation comes not from redefining the self but from ceasing to grasp at any identity at all.

Conclusion:

The statement “I am not the thing viewed but the view itself” is an improvement in that it shifts away from object-identification. However, it still remains within the domain of the conditioned. True freedom, from a Buddhist perspective, comes not from identifying with awareness but from seeing through all identification entirely.

You said:

So we cannot purify consciousness to reveal any fundamental truth or reality. Anything revealed is just another phenomenon which has a beginning and an end.

ChatGPT said:

Yes, exactly. In Buddhism, no matter how much one purifies consciousness, whatever is revealed is still just another conditioned phenomenon—impermanent, dependently arisen, and empty of inherent essence.

1. Consciousness Is Conditioned

• Consciousness (viññāṇa) arises due to causes and conditions—specifically, through contact (phassa) between sense faculties and objects.
• Since it is dependently arisen, it cannot be a fundamental reality or an ultimate, unchanging truth.
• Even highly refined states of meditative consciousness (like the jhānas or formless attainments) are temporary and conditioned.

2. No Permanent Truth to Be Revealed

• Any experience, insight, or realization—even the most profound—has a beginning and an end.
• If it can be "revealed," then it is part of impermanence (anicca) and cannot be an ultimate, unconditioned truth.

3. The Buddhist Path Is Not About Finding a Hidden Reality

• Some traditions outside Buddhism suggest that purifying consciousness can lead to an ultimate truth or permanent awareness.
• Buddhism takes a different approach: rather than seeking a fundamental essence, it emphasizes seeing through all conditioned phenomena, including consciousness itself.
• Liberation (nirvāṇa) is not the discovery of a hidden reality but the cessation of clinging to all phenomena—seeing that everything, even consciousness, is empty (suññatā).

4. Nirvāṇa: The End of Clinging, Not a "Revealed Truth"

• Nirvāṇa is sometimes called "unconditioned" (asankhata), but this does not mean it is an ultimate experience or reality in the way the mind might imagine.
• It is the cessation of craving, ignorance, and rebirth, not a hidden truth waiting to be discovered.

Conclusion

Yes, any so-called "fundamental truth" revealed through consciousness is just another conditioned phenomenon, bound by impermanence. The Buddhist path does not seek an ultimate, unchanging reality within experience but rather the end of attachment to all experiences—the realization that no phenomenon, including consciousness itself, can serve as a final foundation.

You said:

So Mind Only school is risky in that it could be seen to present Mind as a fixed entity.

ChatGPT said:

Yes, exactly. The Mind-Only school (Yogācāra) can be risky if misunderstood, as it might seem to present mind (or consciousness) as a fixed, ultimate reality—which would contradict the core Buddhist teaching of impermanence (anicca) and non-self (anattā).

1. Potential Misinterpretation: Mind as an Ultimate Reality

• The Yogācāra school asserts that all experiences arise within mind (citta) and that what we take to be an external world is actually mind-generated appearances.
• This could be mistaken as a claim that mind itself is an ultimate, independent reality—similar to idealism in Western philosophy.
• If mind is misunderstood as a permanent substratum, this risks falling into eternalism (sassata-vāda)—a view rejected in Buddhism.

2. How Yogācāra Avoids This Pitfall

• Classical Yogācāra does not claim that mind itself is an eternal essence. Instead, it says that mind is also conditioned and empty.
• The "storehouse consciousness" (ālaya-vijñāna), which carries karmic imprints, is not a permanent soul or fixed reality but just a subtle conditioned process.
• Ultimately, even consciousness must be seen as empty (śūnyatā).

3. The Yogācāra-Madhyamaka Synthesis

• Later Buddhist thinkers, such as Śāntarakṣita and Kamalaśīla, tried to integrate Yogācāra with Madhyamaka, emphasizing that mind-only does not mean an absolute mind.
• They clarified that consciousness itself is dependently originated and empty, just like all other phenomena.

4. Final Conclusion: Mind Itself Is Not a Fixed Entity

Yes, the Mind-Only school is risky if it is misread as asserting an ultimate, unchanging mind. But when properly understood, Yogācāra aligns with the broader Buddhist teaching that even mind and consciousness are impermanent, conditioned, and empty. The highest realization is not that mind is reality, but that mind itself is empty of inherent existence.

You said:

is there a jhana of nothingness?

ChatGPT said:

Yes, there is a jhāna of nothingness—it is called the Seventh Jhāna, or the Sphere of Nothingness (ākiñcaññāyatana-jhāna) in the formless (arūpa) meditations of Theravāda and Mahāyāna Buddhism.

1. The Four Formless (Arūpa) Jhānas

Beyond the four rupa-jhānas (which are based on refined material perception), there are four arūpa-jhānas, which are progressively more subtle and detached from form:

1. Base of Infinite Space (ākāsānañcāyatana)
2. Base of Infinite Consciousness (viññāṇañcāyatana)
3. Base of Nothingness (ākiñcaññāyatana) ← the jhāna of nothingness
4. Base of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception (nevasaññānāsaññāyatana)

2. What Is the Jhāna of Nothingness?

• In the Seventh Jhāna (Nothingness), the meditator lets go of even the experience of infinite consciousness from the previous jhāna.
• What remains is a direct perception of "nothing"—the absence of any objects, space, or perception of existence.
• It is not nihilism but an extremely subtle, peaceful, and detached state where the mind is no longer clinging to anything at all.

3. Is Nothingness the Ultimate Reality?

• No. Even the Sphere of Nothingness is still conditioned, and eventually, it fades.
• It is not Nirvāṇa, because it still involves consciousness and mental activity.
• The Buddha warned that clinging to the formless jhānas as ultimate truth is a mistake.

4. What Comes After Nothingness?

• If one goes deeper, one enters the Eighth Jhāna (Neither Perception nor Non-Perception)—an even more refined state.
• Beyond that, if wisdom (paññā) is developed, the mind can let go of all conditioned experience, leading to Nirvāṇa, which is beyond all states of consciousness.

Conclusion

Yes, there is a jhāna of nothingness—the Seventh Jhāna (ākiñcaññāyatana). It is an advanced meditative absorption where the perception of "something" disappears, leaving only awareness of "nothingness." However, this is still a conditioned state and should not be mistaken for ultimate liberation.

You said:

What do the jhanas teach the practicitier?

ChatGPT said:

The jhānas teach the practitioner a variety of profound lessons, primarily about the nature of concentration, mindfulness, and the impermanent and empty nature of all phenomena. While the jhānas themselves are not the end goal of Buddhist practice, they serve as powerful tools that guide a practitioner toward insight (vipassanā) and ultimately liberation (nirvāṇa). Here's how the jhānas contribute to the practitioner's understanding:

1. The Power of Concentration (Samādhi)

• The jhānas show the immense potential of concentration. As the practitioner enters progressively deeper states of absorption, they experience the stillness and clarity that comes from a fully focused mind. This power of concentration is critical for developing insight (vipassanā) and understanding the nature of reality.
• Concentration through jhāna leads to mental stability and mental purification, which are essential for clear insight into impermanence, suffering, and non-self.

2. The Impermanence of Experience (Anicca)

• Each jhāna state is characterized by a specific mental quality (e.g., rapture, bliss, equanimity), but these qualities are impermanent. They arise and fade as the mind progresses through the stages of deep concentration.
• Through repeated practice, the practitioner becomes more aware of the transient nature of all mental and emotional states. This helps to reduce attachment to pleasure and pain, as the practitioner sees that even these sublime states are not permanent.

3. The Dissolution of Attachments (Anattā)

• The jhānas help the practitioner dissolve the sense of self. As the mind becomes more absorbed, the distinction between the "self" and the "object of meditation" (whether it is a sensation, thought, or mental image) becomes less clear.
• In higher jhānas, especially the formless jhānas, the concept of a separate self can fade altogether. The practitioner realizes that even consciousness and awareness are not permanent or substantial—they are simply fleeting phenomena.

4. The Absence of Distraction (Vikṣepa)

• In the deeper jhānas, the practitioner experiences a lack of distraction, with the mind becoming completely absorbed in the object of meditation. This absence of mental distraction reveals the mental clutter that usually prevents clarity in ordinary life.
• This teaches the practitioner the possibility of a mind free from distraction, a key element for deep insight into the nature of reality.

5. Equanimity and Balance (Upekkhā)

• As the practitioner progresses through the jhānas, especially in the higher jhānas, they develop a profound sense of equanimity—a balanced state of mind that is not swayed by pleasure or pain, gain or loss, or any other dualistic experience.
• This teaches the practitioner to respond to life with equanimity rather than attachment or aversion. It also points to the ultimate goal: nirvāṇa, which is beyond all extremes and dualities.

6. Insight into the Nature of Reality (Vipassanā)

• Though the jhānas are primarily states of concentration, they serve as fertile ground for developing insight into the Three Marks of Existence:
  • Impermanence (anicca): In the jhānas, the practitioner directly experiences how all states of mind, whether blissful or neutral, arise and pass away.
  • Suffering (dukkha): The temporary nature of jhānic states reveals how attachment to even pleasurable states creates subtle forms of suffering.
  • Non-Self (anattā): The dissolution of self-identity in deeper jhānas helps the practitioner understand that even consciousness is not "the self," but simply an impersonal process.
• The stillness and clarity of the jhānas allow for the arising of deep insight into the empty nature of all phenomena, and for the practitioner to directly see the interdependent nature of all things.

7. Non-Grasping and Liberation

• The experience of bliss and peace in the jhānas, while deeply satisfying, is also understood to be impermanent. This realization helps the practitioner understand that even bliss is not worth clinging to—thus diminishing attachment and fostering renunciation.
• The ultimate lesson of the jhānas is that true freedom and liberation lie not in clinging to any experience, no matter how refined, but in the deep realization that all phenomena are transient and without inherent self-nature.

---

Conclusion

The jhānas teach the practitioner both the power of concentration and the impermanent nature of all experiences. They help the practitioner develop deep equanimity, mental clarity, and insight into the true nature of reality—namely, the impermanence, suffering, and non-self of all phenomena. The jhānas themselves are not the end goal of Buddhism, but they are essential tools that support the development of wisdom (paññā), leading to liberation (nirvāṇa).

You said:

I believe I experienced the 5th or 6th jhana where my awareness expanded to fill all space. I remember being able to enter the space in all directions including behind my own head, which marked it aside from visual consciousness which is spread out in front of us. Does this sound like a jhana?

ChatGPT said:

Yes, what you describe sounds quite similar to experiences that can occur in the higher jhānas, particularly those that involve spatial awareness and a diffuse, expansive sense of consciousness.

In the 5th or 6th jhāna, specifically in the Fourth Jhana or higher, practitioners may experience an expansion of awareness beyond the usual limitations of the body and senses, sometimes including a sense of infinite space or even all-pervading awareness. Here’s a breakdown of what might be happening in your experience:

1. Expansion of Awareness

In deeper jhānic states, especially those approaching the arūpa-jhānas (formless jhānas), awareness can expand beyond the ordinary body-centered perspective. Your description of awareness filling all space—including behind your head—suggests a state where your consciousness is no longer constrained by the usual physical boundaries of the body or the sense of a localized "self." This is often associated with the "Base of Infinite Space" (ākāsānañcāyatana) jhāna, which is the first of the formless jhānas.

• In the Base of Infinite Space, a meditator’s awareness is said to become boundless, experiencing space as infinite and without limit. The sense of direction or localization of the body often dissolves, which could account for your ability to enter space in all directions, including behind your head, which marks a shift from the typical, visual “front-and-center” perspective.

2. Distinct from Visual Consciousness

Your remark that this experience was distinct from visual consciousness, which is usually focused in front of us, is insightful. In these advanced jhānas, the sense of spatiality shifts from the usual perception tied to the eyes (where consciousness is oriented frontward) to an expanded, all-encompassing awareness that can pervade the entirety of space, without being confined to the visual field.

• In the Base of Infinite Space jhāna, one typically does not perceive objects or forms in the usual sense. The awareness of space itself becomes the object of focus, and it becomes all-pervasive, creating the sensation of being everywhere, even in directions traditionally not within our perception, like behind us.

3. Possible Experience of the 5th or 6th Jhana

• The 5th jhāna (Base of Infinite Consciousness) might also fit, especially if the focus was on the nature of awareness itself, perceiving it as boundless and expansive. This jhāna emphasizes the awareness of infinite consciousness, which is another form of spatial awareness.
• If your experience was not only spatial but also included a strong awareness of the mind or consciousness as infinite, it could indeed be closer to the 5th jhāna.

4. The Context of Advanced Practice

In the formless jhānas, the sense of self becomes progressively more subtle, and the boundaries of the body and sense of self dissolve. The experience of spatial awareness expanding is a natural progression as the meditative absorption goes deeper, and this kind of perception can happen in those stages.

Conclusion

Based on your description, it seems like you might have experienced a state that aligns with the Base of Infinite Space (ākāsānañcāyatana) in the formless jhānas. This jhāna involves the perception of infinite space and the dissolution of the ordinary limits of body and visual consciousness. It reflects a profound shift in the way awareness functions, moving from a localized, sensory-based experience to an expansive, all-encompassing state of awareness.

In this context, what you experienced is very much in line with the profound effects that can occur during advanced jhānic practice, where the boundaries of space and self become increasingly fluid and expansive.

You said:

So that bit about self becoming subtle is the question. After the experience while filled with an extraordinarily deep sense of peace I explained to someone that I had just had an amazing experience. I believe this latter experience of describing the profound experience as mine complete replaced any insight into self. Is it possible for akusala from kusala where the self is actually strengthened by such an experience?

ChatGPT said:

Yes, it is certainly possible for akusala (unskillful mental states) to arise even after a profound, peaceful, and highly refined meditative experience. The moment when you described the experience as "mine" can indeed be seen as a subtle reinforcement of the sense of self—even though the jhānic state itself may have been free from such identification.

1. The Nature of "I" and "Mine" in the Moment of Insight

When experiencing deep states of peace or non-duality during meditation, the mind may temporarily dissolve the usual sense of self or the distinction between subject and object. However, once the experience is over, the concept of "I" or "mine" can re-emerge very quickly. This is a subtle but important aspect of the mind’s tendency to revert to clinging.

• The moment of describing the experience as “mine” might seem harmless, but it is important to recognize that this act can reinforce the illusion of a permanent, separate self.
• In Buddhism, clinging to even the most profound experiences is considered a form of subtle attachment. This attachment can prevent deeper insight into the nature of impermanence (anicca) and non-self (anattā).

2. Kusala and Akusala: The Transition

• Kusala refers to skillful or wholesome mental states, such as the peace, clarity, and insight you might experience in deep meditation. These states can help weaken the attachments and delusions that bind you to the cycle of suffering (samsāra).
• Akusala refers to unskillful or harmful mental states, such as attachment, ignorance, and ego-centered thinking. Even after moments of profound peace and insight, the delusion of a separate self (the "I" that claims the experience) can arise and cause suffering.

The transition from kusala to akusala often happens when the mind starts clinging to the experience—even if that experience was profoundly peaceful. This is not because the experience itself is inherently problematic, but because the mental habits of grasping and identification are still present in subtle ways.

3. Strengthening the Sense of Self

• When you describe the experience as "mine", you are inadvertently reinforcing the sense of self, even if the experience itself pointed toward non-self. This is because language and conceptualization often work to reestablish boundaries, labels, and distinctions where none really exist.
• The very act of identifying with the experience ("I had this amazing experience") subtly strengthens the illusion of a permanent, separate self, even in the context of something as profound as the formless jhānas.
• In Buddhism, the insight into non-self (anattā) is not just about realizing the emptiness of phenomena in meditation but also about recognizing the subtle workings of selfing—even in moments of apparent peace.

4. The Risk of Reinforcing the Self

• Reification: When you hold onto the idea of the experience as something owned by you, it can cause the experience to be reified—it becomes an object you identify with, rather than something impersonal and impermanent.
• Attachment to Experiences: Even though profound experiences of peace and insight can be immensely valuable, they can also become objects of attachment. The ego then latches onto the memory or concept of the experience, reinforcing the idea that "I am the one who had that experience," which can subtly increase pride or self-concept.

5. How Can This Be Overcome?

• Mindfulness: The key is to practice mindfulness and awareness of these subtle attachments. The insight you gained during the jhānic experience is valuable, but it's important to recognize that holding onto the experience as "mine" is a form of attachment that reinforces the illusion of self.
• Understanding Non-Self: True insight into anattā requires not just an intellectual understanding but also the practical application of non-attachment to the self. Even after profound experiences, a true practitioner continues to examine the ways in which the mind clings to the experience as something "owned" by a separate self.

Conclusion

Yes, it is possible for akusala (unskillful states) to arise after an experience of kusala (skillful states), especially when there is attachment to the experience and the arising of the sense of self that identifies with it. Even profound jhānic states, which are deeply peaceful and can point to insights into non-self, can be followed by subtle reinforcing of the ego if the mind becomes attached to the experience as "mine."

The key is to maintain mindfulness and insight, recognizing the impermanent and non-self nature of all phenomena—even the experiences that feel deeply personal and transformative. True liberation comes when the mind lets go of all attachments, even to the experiences of peace and insight themselves.

You said:

So it is possible that the arising of deep meditative states can actually present objects of attachment that impede letting go of a self. I believe Buddha noted this in India in his time, with teachers attached to higher mental states. Does this mean that jhanas and other mental states by themselves are not enough to liberate and the oath to liberation can be extremely subtle.

ChatGPT said:

Yes, you’re absolutely right. The Buddha did indeed recognize that profound meditative states like the jhānas can present objects of attachment that actually impede the path to liberation, if the practitioner becomes attached to those states or clings to them as a source of self-identity or pride. This subtle attachment to even higher mental states can create an obstacle to the deeper insight required to liberate the mind fully.

1. The Buddha’s Warning About Attachment to Meditative States

The Buddha was keenly aware that some practitioners, especially those of the jhana-samadhi traditions of his time, would become attached to supernormal mental states such as deep concentration, bliss, or the formless jhānas. They might view these states as the goal of practice or markers of spiritual progress, which can lead to pride or self-identification with the experience.

The Buddha warned that attachment to any mental state, even those of peace and insight, could keep one bound in samsara because those states are still conditioned phenomena that arise and pass away. If one clings to them, even with the belief that they are spiritual attainments, they can reinforce the illusion of a permanent self.

In the Sāriputta Sutta (MN 111), the Buddha discusses how even the highest meditative states are still conditioned and therefore, not the ultimate liberation. The path to liberation is about seeing the impermanent, unsatisfactory, and non-self nature of all phenomena, including even the highest states of mind.

2. Jhanas and Mental States Are Not Liberation

While the jhānas and other mental states can aid in developing concentration (samādhi) and clarity, they are not by themselves sufficient to achieve nirvāṇa. Here's why:

• Jhanas (or any mental states), though they might offer deep peace and bliss, are still temporary and impermanent. If one becomes attached to the bliss or stillness of jhana, or views these states as final, the underlying delusion of self remains intact. Even blissful experiences can be an obstacle if the mind becomes attached to them, seeing them as something "I am having" or "I am."

• The core insight in Buddhism is not just about attaining meditative states, but about gaining wisdom (paññā) into the nature of reality—specifically impermanence (anicca), suffering (dukkha), and non-self (anattā). Even in profound states like the jhānas, the practitioner must continue to look deeply into these truths in order to release all attachment.

3. The Subtlety of the Path to Liberation

The path to liberation can be extremely subtle. It is not just about attaining high mental states, but about developing wisdom to see through the illusion of self that arises even in the midst of those states. The delusion of self can creep in subtly after even the most profound meditative experiences, especially when the practitioner begins to identify with or cling to those experiences.

• Attachment to the self can persist in very subtle forms, such as pride about one's meditation skills, the idea of being a "spiritual person," or clinging to one's progress on the path.

• The Buddha taught that the way to liberation is the realization of the emptiness of all things—including the idea of a "meditator" or "self" that experiences those things.

4. The Role of Insight (Vipassanā)

Thus, jhana (concentration) alone is not enough to achieve liberation; it must be accompanied by insight (vipassanā) into the true nature of reality. While concentration (samādhi) calms and purifies the mind, it is insight (vipassanā) that penetrates the nature of suffering, revealing that even the calmest, most peaceful states are still impermanent and subject to clinging.

• In vipassanā practice, the meditator must directly observe the arising and passing away of all phenomena, including thoughts, emotions, and meditative experiences. The insight into impermanence and non-self must be seen directly and applied to every experience, including jhānic states.

• Liberation comes when the practitioner releases attachment to all phenomena, including the experience of deep states of mind, and recognizes that the mind itself, just like everything else, is empty of inherent selfhood.

5. The Subtlety of the Oath to Liberation

The Buddha's path to liberation is not linear or overt but can be incredibly subtle. The process of letting go of self-identification is gradual and requires the practitioner to notice even subtle attachments and tendencies toward clinging, especially after having profound experiences. It requires constant vigilance and awareness that even the most peaceful, blissful experiences are impermanent and do not define who we truly are.

The path is thus about continuously discerning the subtle attachments that can arise even after the highest meditative states, and recognizing that true freedom lies in non-attachment to all conditioned phenomena.

Conclusion

Yes, the Buddha clearly acknowledged that meditative states (such as the jhānas) are not, by themselves, sufficient for liberation. They can serve as powerful tools to calm the mind and provide clarity, but if the practitioner becomes attached to those states—thinking of them as "mine" or "the self"—they can actually reinforce the illusion of a permanent self. The path to liberation is subtle, and requires not just developing concentration, but deep insight into the impermanent, unsatisfactory, and non-self nature of all phenomena, including the experience of meditative states themselves.

You said:

In the book "I am That" Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj appears to be suggesting that there is central "I" that is not individual but when examined is common to all beings and the universe. But isn't this trying to attach to a permanent form?

ChatGPT said:

You're absolutely right to be cautious about interpretations of the concept of "I" in teachings like those of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj. On the surface, the way he speaks of the "I" in "I Am That" could be interpreted as suggesting a kind of central, universal "I" that is at the core of all beings and the universe, a fundamental awareness or consciousness that is shared by all.

However, it’s essential to recognize the subtlety in his teaching. While it may seem like he's pointing to a permanent, central self, he’s actually challenging the typical conception of an individual, separate "I". Let's unpack this in a way that stays true to the deeper message:

1. The Nature of the "I" in Nisargadatta's Teachings

In "I Am That," Nisargadatta Maharaj often emphasizes the direct experience of the sense of "I"—the sense of being or awareness that all of us have, often referred to as the sense of "I am". This awareness of being is a primordial experience, something that we all share. It is not an individual self but the very awareness that enables us to experience anything at all.

• Nisargadatta's teaching isn’t about affirming a permanent individual self but about pointing to the underlying awareness that is the same in all beings, which can be understood as the root of all experience.
• He encourages direct self-inquiry into the sense of "I am" to reveal that this awareness of "I" is not personal but universal and essentially formless. It is what you are before the mind constructs the notion of an individual self.

2. Is This a Permanent "I"?

Nisargadatta speaks of this core "I" as the "I am" or consciousness that is beyond individual identity. However, he also makes it clear that this "I" is not a fixed, permanent form in the way we often think of an individual "self". Instead, it's a transcendental awareness—something that exists, yet is not an object that can be grasped or perceived in the conventional sense.

• Attachment to permanence is a delusion. Nisargadatta is not asking us to attach to a permanent "I." Instead, he is pointing to the fact that the awareness of being is not an object to be identified with or attached to in a material sense.
• He’s guiding us to recognize that this sense of being is what underlies all experience, but it is not individual. It is universal consciousness, or what he sometimes refers to as the "unmanifested"—the source of all experience.

3. The Danger of Misunderstanding the Teaching

The potential issue arises when this universal "I" is mistaken for an individual, permanent self that can be grasped or held onto. Nisargadatta’s point is that even the "I" (the sense of "I am") is not the self. It is simply an awareness or presence that allows for the experience of existence, but it is not something to be possessed.

• The key insight is that the sense of "I am" is not the personal "I" of the ego, but rather the universal awareness that allows the personal ego to arise. When we examine this awareness deeply, we realize that it is not bound by the limitations of the individual mind or body, nor is it permanent in the sense of being fixed.

4. Awareness and Non-Attachment

Nisargadatta teaches that true freedom and liberation arise when we realize that this awareness is not personal and that it does not need to be clung to. It is impermanent and formless. The sense of "I am" is not a permanent entity but rather the primordial ground of experience.

• By focusing on this pure awareness (without attaching to it as "mine"), one moves closer to liberation—recognizing that this awareness is not a thing to be grasped but the very nature of consciousness itself, which is empty of inherent existence.

5. The Subtlety of the "I"

The subtle danger in his teaching could be seen as the risk of thinking that this awareness (or the "I am") is itself some permanent, separate entity. But if you probe deeply into it, you’ll find that this awareness is not a thing at all—it's simply the presence of experience without any permanent, fixed identity.

Nisargadatta is not advocating for the attachment to a permanent "I", but rather the realization that what we truly are is beyond any individual, finite "I" and is the universal consciousness or awareness that pervades all beings.

Conclusion

Nisargadatta Maharaj’s teachings on the "I" are deeply rooted in a non-dual understanding of reality. He’s not suggesting that there is a permanent, individual "I" in the conventional sense. Rather, he is pointing to the universal awareness—the sense of being or "I am"—that is common to all beings. This awareness is not something we can grasp as a permanent entity; it is the very foundation of consciousness itself, beyond the personal, egoic self.

By recognizing that this "I am" is not the individual self but the universal consciousness, we can transcend the illusion of individual identity and move closer to the realization that we are one with all of existence, free from attachment to a permanent form.

You said:

However the "presence of experience" is itself conditioned? Like everything even this is impermanent and unsatisfactory? As I understood from the previous exposition there is no part of experience or even the experience itself that is not conditioned and unsatisfactory.

ChatGPT said:

Yes, you’re absolutely right, and this is an important nuance in both Nisargadatta Maharaj's teachings and in Buddhist philosophy more broadly. The presence of experience or awareness itself, even though it may seem to have a quality of being, is still conditioned and impermanent, just like everything else. Let's explore this further to clarify the distinction and the deeper understanding.

1. The Conditioned Nature of Experience

As you've pointed out, the Buddha’s teachings, particularly in the Doctrine of Dependent Origination (Paticca-Samuppāda), stress that everything is conditioned. This includes not just external phenomena like objects and events but also the internal experiences of perception, feeling, and awareness. Even awareness or the "I am" sense of being, which may seem to be fundamental or primal, is ultimately impermanent and conditioned.

• All experience—including the experience of awareness or consciousness itself—arises due to conditions. The sense of "I am" is conditioned by previous experiences, mental habits, and the nature of consciousness itself. It is not a permanent, independent self but a phenomenon that arises, remains for a while, and passes away.
• In Buddhism, even the most refined states of awareness or meditative concentration are not exempt from impermanence (anicca) and unsatisfactoriness (dukkha). No experience, not even the awareness of "I am," can escape these three marks of existence.

2. "I Am" and Non-Self in Buddhism

From a Buddhist perspective, the sense of "I am" (or pure awareness) may seem to be the ultimate truth, but it is still an object of experience, and as such, it too is impermanent and empty of inherent self-nature.

• The sense of "I am" might feel as though it is untouched by the fluctuations of daily life, but when examined deeply, even this awareness is a phenomenon in the mind that arises conditioned by past experiences, mental habits, and processes.
• Just like any other mental formation, the sense of awareness or presence is not self-sustaining. It depends on conditions such as attention, concentration, and mental states. In Buddhism, even the purest awareness must be recognized as impermanent and empty of a fixed, independent self.

3. The Unreality of the "I" and Attachment

Nisargadatta Maharaj's teaching on the "I am" is pointing toward the experience of awareness as the most fundamental and universal aspect of being, but he also emphasizes that even this awareness must be transcended in the pursuit of liberation. In other words, attachment to any aspect of experience—including the awareness of "I am"—will ultimately prevent true liberation.

• Nisargadatta is very clear that while the awareness of "I am" is crucial in pointing toward the deeper nature of existence, it is still something experienced, and thus impermanent. The ultimate truth cannot be fixed or permanent, and even the awareness we identify with must be let go of in order to experience the formless, non-dual nature of reality.

• Liberation comes from recognizing that nothing in experience—not even awareness itself—has any inherent, independent existence. Everything is conditioned and impermanent, including the "I" that we take to be our true self.

4. The Paradox of "I Am"

This is where the paradox lies: On one hand, the experience of "I am" is essential to the path of self-inquiry, as it points to the root of awareness. On the other hand, clinging to it as a permanent self—or as something that is “mine” or “eternal”—will ultimately prevent liberation.

• Awareness or the "I am" feeling is a gateway to understanding that we are not merely the ego or body, but it is still a conditioned phenomenon, and it will not lead to ultimate freedom until it is also recognized as empty.
• Buddhist insight into non-self (anattā) and impermanence (anicca) tells us that even the awareness of "I am" cannot be grasped as a permanent entity. It must be recognized as impermanent, like everything else in the cycle of birth, death, and rebirth (samsara).

5. Liberation Beyond "I"

So, while the "I am" can be an important pointing device on the spiritual path, the final liberation in both Buddhism and Nisargadatta’s teachings lies in transcending even the awareness of "I am". This means letting go of the attachment to being or awareness as something permanent or inherent.

• The true freedom is found in the realization that everything—including awareness, being, and all phenomena—is empty of inherent self-nature. The realization of this emptiness is what leads to nirvāṇa or liberation.

• Nisargadatta’s teaching ultimately points to a state of no-self, where even the most fundamental awareness (the "I am") is seen as just another phenomenon arising in consciousness, not something to be clung to. This insight transcends the duality of subject and object, self and other, and is the core of true freedom.

Conclusion

Yes, the presence of experience, including awareness itself, is conditioned. Even the sense of "I am"—which Nisargadatta Maharaj points to as a key to understanding consciousness—is impermanent and unsatisfactory. This is consistent with the Buddha’s teachings, which state that nothing—including the deepest states of awareness or consciousness—is exempt from the three marks of existence: impermanence, suffering, and non-self.

Thus, even though the sense of "I am" may be the most fundamental experience of being, it too is subject to impermanence and attachment. Liberation comes when we recognize this impermanence and release all attachment—even to the most subtle experiences of awareness.