Sacred geometry

The Sixth Jhāna (The Realm of Infinite Consciousness)

0:00:00
1:19:46
Date4th January 2020
Retreat/SeriesPractising the Jhānas

Transcription

Before I get on to the teachings proper, I mentioned at the beginning of the retreat that in many ways, the retreat happening at all is, has been, somewhat of a miracle, for lots of different reasons, and that Robert had -- we had initially gambled that his employers would give him the time off work to come. And then it turned out that they would only give him a partial time to come, and then Kirsten heroically sacrificed her full retreat, to sit this retreat fully, and joined with the teaching. And so it's been a bit of a patchwork in that sense, but it's happening. And now, in fact, tomorrow, the time has already come for Robert to say goodbye, as his employers demand his services on Monday morning, I assume -- yes, Monday morning. So he will be leaving us about lunchtime tomorrow, after his interviews. And just, again, I really want to say how grateful, how absolutely hugely grateful I am, and I think we all are, to you for being here, and using your holiday time to do that. And also to Kirsten for stepping in. The retreat couldn't have happened, so this kind of patchwork of tag team teachers was the only way this could have happened. And so we're really, really grateful to Robert, and everything that you've brought here, and your spirit, and your knowledge, and also to Kirsten, very much, that willingness to step in and offer and share and be there for everyone. So Robert will slip out quietly with belly full after lunch yesterday -- tomorrow! [laughter] Too much emptiness of time. You get a little confused. (Do you want to say anything? You don't have to. You do? Good, yeah.)

Robert Brodrick: So I guess I wanted to just say that meeting with you all these last two weeks, and seeing your practice and your patience and your perseverance has really touched me, and brought much sukha. And now that I'm leaving, I guess my wish for you all would be, during these last few days, this victory lap of the retreat, where the conditions are so rare and so precious, that your intentions remain strong, and that the fire, what brought you here, burns ever stronger and ever brighter.

Rob Burbea: Thank you. Yeah, actually, just to echo that last point: you all probably know how it is on retreats. We have, I think, four days left, something like that, and if this was a week retreat, this would be like, you know, towards the end, the mind starts sensing it's towards the end. Papañca ... ready to pounce! [laughter] Hindrances don't give a damn. They'll be coming and going. You're up and down. You're wherever you are in your little or big wiggles. As Robert said, keeping steady, keeping going -- this is so much a part of the art, the fundamentals of the art of this practice, the fundamentals of the art of any practice, the fundamentals of the art of staying in relationships, staying with a project that you love. It's so crucial. So how is your intention? How's that doing? What am I believing? Again, this thing we've come back to several times: am I buying into what the seeds of the hindrances have spawned? And then it's a story, and it's very, very convincing, and then my intention is wobbling. They're seductive, and they seduce us. The hindrances, papañca seduce us into believing this or that -- make it sound so, so convincing. So these are precious days, these (whatever it is) four days are precious days, a precious opportunity to practise, to go further, to learn more about this territory, but also everything around this territory that we've talked about: my personal relationship with desire, and intention, and steadiness, and form, and all that. Again, once more, the invitation to work, play, enjoy, and find out.

Okey-doke, so today, we will talk about the sixth jhāna, which the Buddha didn't call the sixth jhāna, but called 'the realm of infinite consciousness' -- 'sphere' or 'the base of infinite consciousness.' And hoping for him to shed great light on what's involved here, as he goes through the stages describing a practitioner practising:

The thought occurs to him [after he's gone through the first four jhānas, fifth jhāna]: "What if I, with the complete transcending of the sphere [the realm] of the infinitude of space, realizing that 'consciousness is infinite,' were to enter and remain in the realm of the infinitude of consciousness? Without jumping at the realm [or the sphere] of the infinitude of consciousness, he enters and remains in the sphere of this infinitude of consciousness. He sticks with that theme, develops it, pursues it, and establishes himself firmly in it."[1]

So it's not a lot of ... [laughs] Not a lot to go on there, other than "stick with it, develop it, pursue it, establish it." And it's something to do with consciousness, and again, it's very, very big. [laughter] Okay, what is this? What's he pointing to here? What's involved in this perception attainment, this opening? I would say the principal, the central feature, if you like, is awareness knowing itself. Sometimes I've heard it described as "It's awareness knowing the infinitude of space." In other words, it's the consciousness of the fifth jhāna. And there's certainly a way that it can seem like that. But I think, I've come more to think that the primary feature is just awareness knowing itself, and then there's an infinite expanse of that. But either way -- (1) awareness knowing infinite space or the awareness that knows infinite space, or (2) the awareness knowing itself -- I tend to think the second there, the awareness knowing itself, is primary.

I should say right now that I use the words 'awareness' and 'consciousness' completely interchangeably. Over the last thirty, forty, forty-five years or so, there have been different kind of -- not really trends, but some people have at times drawn those two words apart, and referred to 'consciousness' as something that's much smaller -- it's one of the aggregates, it's impermanent, it's unsatisfactory, it's narrow, it's tied to objects, etc. -- and 'awareness' as something vast, free, even ultimate. So they give Awareness a capital A, etc. I don't ultimately buy into that. I think it's actually clearer to just use the words interchangeably -- awareness and consciousness. And then we'll have to explain different senses or perceptions of the nature of awareness at different times. And they have different, we might say, 'relative truth value.' Anyway, all we need to know for now is, I will use those words completely synonymously and interchangeably.

So awareness knowing itself -- what's happening here is there's a kind of honing in: tuning to and honing in on awareness, on consciousness. Consciousness hones in on consciousness. Awareness hones in on awareness. The Pali word is viññāṇa. And there isn't, by the way, a distinction in Pali between a word for 'consciousness' and a word for 'awareness.' Viññāṇa -- I think the grammatical term in Pali -- it's a 'verbal noun.' I think that's the correct word. It literally translates as 'knowing.' So 'awareness' or 'consciousness' or 'knowing' are synonymous terms. What does 'awareness' mean? In Buddhist understanding, it means 'knowing.' It doesn't mean 'knowing something' -- "I know something; I'm clever because I know what the square root of two is to eight decimal places." It means 'knowing.' It means, well, being conscious. It means the recognition of something, the perception of something.

Again and again, in this state, there's this almost returning to, and a kind of locking in on the sense of knowing. And sometimes, depending on how you access it, you can use, again, these little grains, little tinctures of whispers, internal whispers in the mind, to direct the mind and help support it to kind of lock in on that primary nimitta. So the primary nimitta is consciousness. The primary nimitta is consciousness knowing itself. And you use these little tinctures, just like: 'knowing, knowing,' or 'consciousness,' or whatever it is, just to help -- very, very subtle -- help support the mind in its attuning to, finding, and then sustaining its focus on the sense of knowing. It's a very subtle whisper internally to direct the attention to the sense of 'knowing.'

I would say -- this is a long, long debate, certainly in Buddhist history, in the Mahāyāna as well as the Theravāda and the Vajrayāna, etc., and it's probably a debate outside of Buddhist history as well, Buddhist philosophy and psychology. But I would say, consciousness of consciousness is an integral aspect of consciousness. In other words, to be conscious involves the subtle, at least the subtle kind of recognition that one is conscious in the moment. Otherwise -- a machine can be aware of this or that, but a machine doesn't have consciousness. It doesn't recognize itself; it doesn't have that feeling of being aware. So I would say -- there's been a long debate about this, but in a way, I think it's a little bit ridiculous. It's just part of the definition of 'consciousness' that consciousness, in any moment, is conscious of itself. That's what we mean when we say this person is conscious, or that machine is not conscious, or I was conscious, etc. Usually, that sense of being conscious -- it's very much in the mix of a moment of consciousness. There's much more attention to what we're conscious of -- the object, this or that thing that I'm paying attention to, this or that object of consciousness. But to some degree, some subtle degree, mixed in with any [moment], in any moment of consciousness, and as part of what defines it as 'consciousness' (as I said) is some small degree of a sense that "There is consciousness right now." And it goes with a subject: "I am conscious. This is conscious."

Now, that subtle sense, that subtle portion, if you like, or strand within consciousness, can be amplified. And again, how do things get amplified? First they need to be noticed. Then they need to be attuned to. And that attuning to what we notice amplifies it. In other words, in the mix of what consciousness is in any moment, by noticing this sense of being conscious, this awareness of awareness, by noticing it and tuning to it repeatedly, it amplifies that sense within consciousness, until eventually, the relative balance can go from mostly I'm conscious of the object (whatever the object is I'm paying attention to), and very little sense of the consciousness of consciousness, with noticing it, tuning to it, and the amplification that will happen naturally with that, that can start to reverse. And it starts to be that eventually, all the attention, all the consciousness is the consciousness of consciousness.

So there's this kind of 'lock' effect. You know, 'lock,' canals, water -- when they do that? Do you have that in Israel? Yeah? Because it's a desert. You don't know. [laughter] Like that. Can you just either look at something right now, or feel a body sensation, or listen to the heating sound? So there's the object, the sound, the sensation, the visual object, whatever it is. And at the same time that's there, can you get a sense that there is awareness there? You're conscious of being conscious. Can you be aware of the awareness there? It's mixed in with it.

[silence]

This is a beginning of something. It's quite a hard thing to stay with. It's a subtle thing. As we go into the jhānas, everything gets subtler and subtler. But you can train the mind to pick that up, and stay with it, and amplify it. But we're really talking about in the present moment: this moment, this moment, this moment of awareness, and getting the sense of awareness of awareness in the present moment. This is key to the whole thing. It's subtle, and so some of you might not have been able to get a sense of that. That would be very normal. Some of you might have practised already doing this. Either way, fine. But we're talking about a subtle sense, and therefore it needs practice to develop that -- to notice it, to stay tuned to it, to kind of develop it.

And as I'll explain later, there are many ways into this, but this sense of consciousness can then expand. This lock effect, there's no other [object]. All the other objects are kind of filtered out of it, and it becomes just an infinite consciousness, infinitely expansive consciousness. And here, now, again, we're really talking about, "Wow!" It's so different a perception, so different an opening than we usually have as human beings. So I think I shared much earlier in the retreat, someone coming in for an interview and saying, "Oh yeah, I think I got into the sixth jhāna the other day, and it was all very like, meh." It can't be. We're really talking about something that's immensely striking and very, very impacting on the consciousness, on the sense of being. So it's a deep realm of existence. It's what that word āyatana means, as explained: a deep realm, a deep dimension of the cosmos. Something divine there, for sure -- that's the sense.

It's very intense. It's quite an intense experience. Electric, almost, I would say. Consciousness, moment after moment, focusing on itself, with nothing else there, and just an infinite expanse of this. It's electric. It's compelling. It's intense, usually. And there's something in that -- it's almost like it's sufficient unto itself. It's just consciousness. There's nothing else, and this consciousness just knows itself. And it pervades infinitely, and it has this kind of transcendent quality of being to it. It's sufficient unto itself. It does not need anything. Just consciousness knowing itself forever, eternally sufficient unto itself, eternally transcendent, 'eternal' in the sense of lasting forever. So again, it is, as the Buddha calls it, nissaraṇaṃ: an escape.[2] It's another dimension of the cosmos, another dimension of being. It's another realm. There is a freedom from everything else there, freedom from the phenomenal, material world. A release, a letting go of all else. There's just nothing else there but this pure consciousness knowing itself, sufficient unto itself, infinitely expansive. And the objects are filtered out. Everything else -- gone.

I've mentioned a couple of times on this retreat, and I know some of you are familiar in practice with what I call the practice of the vastness of awareness. It's actually worth lingering on this and comparing the two, because they can sound very familiar. They're both infinitely vast consciousness or infinitely vast awareness, both of them totally unperturbed by the arising or passing of phenomena, of other things. Both of them, there's a sense that they last forever, that they're eternal in that sense of 'eternal,' forever duration, forever undisturbed, forever radiant, forever peaceful. So there's clearly some similarity, and people might -- well, it's good to distinguish them, because we've just said there's a letting go of everything else in the sixth jhāna, in this infinite consciousness. The vastness of awareness, too, if we just compare, is also a letting go. It's quite difficult to pinpoint, actually, what the differences are.

But I would say that the vastness of awareness -- yes, it's a letting go, and it has all those other similarities that I just mentioned in common with this infinite consciousness, this realm of infinite consciousness. But the vastness of awareness also -- it more includes phenomena, objects, experiences. It's more inclusive. And particularly, what it does is it includes and is even accessed by way of its relationship with phenomena, with other experiences. So it's their relationship with the vastness of awareness -- that's the key difference. That's one of the key elements, including what we might call their 'substantive relationship.'

In other words, as I think I mentioned, when one practises vastness of awareness, there are different stages of it. As it moves into its deeper stages, there can be very much this beautiful sense that not only (as it was earlier, in earlier stages) do phenomena seem to arise out of this vastness of awareness, this beautiful, peaceful, radiant, and divine space of awareness. Not only do they rise out and die back in, they're born out of and die back into this source. After it gets deeper, it also feels like their very substance is awareness. There's a sense that the substantial nature of all phenomena is this awareness, is this vast, divine awareness, so that the vastness of awareness also feels like a freedom, but it's a freedom with and within appearances and experiences and phenomena. It's a view or a way of looking or a perspective on phenomena. It's a view, a way of looking, a perspective on phenomena, experience, on this life as we experience this life. It's a different view, sense of this world and this life, whereas the sixth jhāna is something transcendent. It's beyond. It's gone beyond this world. The infinite consciousness is more intense than the vastness of awareness, which has a sort of almost infinitely deep ease to it. There's a real intensity in the sixth jhāna, and it's a much rarer state for people to access, for a number of reasons -- sometimes because it takes a lot to sustain that intensity, or even build up enough intensity that one would find oneself in such a state.

It's also much rarer because one can open to the vastness of awareness, or the vastness of awareness can open up for one from much more common ways of practising insight meditation. In fact, if we just practise insight meditation with a more open awareness, and then it's just aware, and let things come, go, let things come and go, it will start to open up the beginning stages of the vastness of awareness, so that quite a number of experienced insight meditators will have opened -- to some degree, to some level -- to the vastness of awareness. If you're interested in the vastness of awareness (we've mentioned it a couple of times on this retreat), there's a whole chapter, I think, in Seeing That Frees on it.[3] It, in a way, depends on maybe the three chapters that come before that, but it's there. It should be very, very clear. Really, really worth that opening, and the modicum of trouble it takes to open is so worth it.

There are also, I think, four guided meditations (I know some of you know this) that I think I did years and years ago. They each have the title "The Space of Awareness," and they've each got a different subtitle, and they're guided meditations on different ways of opening up the vastness of awareness, if I remember.[4] So it's a different state. It's not the sixth jhāna. You could say it's related, definitely. Definitely worth visiting and opening to, and putting some time in there, and being touched by that, and the beauty of that, and the liberative and healing qualities of that. But the sixth jhāna, the infinite consciousness is something rarer. They're also slightly different (as I said) in their after-effects on perception. Again, in the vastness of awareness, you could get up and go for a walk and see a stone, and the substance of the stone is that awareness, is the divine awareness, is this vastness of awareness. Or somehow, the appearance of the stone is the play of this awareness. It's really hard to put your finger on, but I think it would be more accurate to say, in the infinite consciousness, with the after-effect on perception, a phenomenon or a stone or an object feels more as if it has consciousness -- not so much that its substance is awareness, but that is has consciousness, even if it has consciousness as part of a cosmic consciousness. Does this make sense at all? They might sound very abstruse differences if you're not familiar with all this.

[inaudible response from yogi] Which bit? [inaudible response] Yeah, so I would say, now distinguishing in the after-effects of perception between these two states: the vastness of awareness and the infinite consciousness. The after-effect on perception of the vastness of awareness will be something akin to that the stone, the appearance of the stone feels like its substance is awareness, or that the appearance of the stone is the play of awareness. Infinite consciousness can feel as if -- the after-effect on perception is more, perhaps, moving towards, the stone has consciousness, and even if the stone's consciousness is part of a much more unified cosmic consciousness or divine consciousness. So it's hard to articulate. I've never really heard anyone even attempt to make these articulations, but that's my current thinking.

Both of them, though, are undisputably mystical senses of divinity. And it's very often the case that a person will start using words like 'divine,' even if they've never in their life used those words before -- actually, at either of these two experiences: the vastness of awareness or the infinite consciousness. One really feels as if there's something of a divine order here, or something of the nature of the divine that is being revealed to one, that's being opened to one: "This is God's awareness." That can be the sense. But as we said, the sixth jhāna, the infinite consciousness is more purely transcendent. It's really a realm beyond, beyond phenomena. I would say that both of these experiences are immeasurably precious -- immeasurably precious, I would say.

I would also say that they're part of our human birthright. As human beings, this is part of what is available to us, and what is our human birthright -- to know this, to open to this, to be touched by these levels of being, these dimensions of being, these openings. They're available. And particularly with infinite consciousness, with repeated exposure, it brings such a different sense of existence, such a sense of adding or opening up a sense of the dimensionality of existence, of the cosmos, of being. There are also many other -- I won't go into them now, but there are many kind of variations and sort of 'satellite states' around the sixth jhāna, especially when we practise with the eyes open, and especially in terms of the after-effects on perception.

But I just want to, again, take a slight detour -- not detour, but again, just a comment about desire. It's so, so important. I think it would be really understandable if someone -- with repeated going in and out of this infinite consciousness, and really being touched by it, and opened by it, and opening to it, and assimilating that opening and that sense and that perception, assimilating that into their sense of existence -- it would be really understandable if such a person were to kind of then look back and think to themself that life knowing that realm is so much richer and so much richer in dimensionality than life not knowing that realm, what they remember from not knowing that realm. It's almost like, "How would I not? How did I live that way?" It would be very, very understandable. And they might also think, "I wouldn't want to live without knowing this, without that opening, without that sense of dimensionality," that it would feel to them, in almost retrospect, as if that was a kind of impoverishment, or something was taken out of life, an impoverished life, in some sense. Or felt like life without that would, in some way -- not that they want to escape there into this transcendent realm, but in some way, maybe this person would feel like life without that is, in a subtle way, less worthwhile. That would very understandable as a view or a feeling.

But it's tricky, isn't it? It's tricky. I'm hesitant even saying all this stuff, and I don't know how it lands, because it's loaded, and it's loaded because of many things that we've talked about on this retreat so far, in terms of desire, in terms of goals, in terms of all that, in terms of what I said yesterday about living in a Western culture that, let's say, *post--*the Protestant Reformation, or starting with the Protestant Reformation, or beginning with the Protestant Reformation, there has been this kind of deconstructing and dissolution of any agreed-upon idea of what makes life worthwhile, etc. And don't underestimate how influenced we are, not by Buddhist history so much, but by Western history. Things that happened in relation to medieval theology influence us today, way more often than people realize. Something happened, starting with the Protestant Reformation, that it fractured, it fragmented and dissolved any sense of agreed-upon idea of what was holy. And that influences very much what anyone can say to anyone else about what is worthwhile or what one should desire, etc. So all this is kind of here when we talk about such states. It's loaded. It's charged, in all kinds of ways, potentially painful in all kinds of ways, etc. -- potentially enticing in all kinds of ways.

So the usual insight meditation way of teaching -- or at least it used to be -- usual insight meditation teaching (and you've probably come across this) is not about experiences, right? It's just: "Don't try and get experiences. Just notice what experiences there are. Just be mindful. Just notice what comes up and what goes." And to say something, or this person saying, or it's me saying: "This is ..." -- what did I say? Something about how precious they were. And even to say that is a little bit loaded. It's implying something. It invites, it opens the door for the pain of striving, the pain of desire that we've revisited several times on this retreat. So the usual way -- or what used to be; I don't know if it even is any more -- but the usual way of teaching insight meditation is a lot easier, because it effectively just closes the door on any kind of striving like that. It's just, "All you have to do is be aware. Whatever comes, whatever goes -- it's all the same. Good experiences, bad experiences, remarkable experiences, boring experiences -- all you have to do is just be aware, and when you're not aware, you just notice it and you come back." And there's such value in that way of practising and that way of teaching. It's a lot easier. It's a lot easier, I think, for both the student and the teacher. When you start saying, "Oh, this is really precious, or that's really precious, or this experience is," then you start running risks. But there are risks both ways. If you go just into the mode of "Experiences are not important," there are risks. There are significant risks.

And all this, again, is tied into desire, and what do I desire? And why do I desire what I desire? What's going on with me? What's authentic desire? What's deep desire? What's involved in my desire? And how we teach regarding such experiences, such openings, such perceptions -- if one goes into an interview and reports such an experience, and what comes back from the teacher is a response of, "Sounds good, but it's just another experience. It's impermanent. Let it go. Don't get attached," that response itself is a kind of teaching. It's set in a framework, again, that needs to be at least semi-coherently set, nestled within a whole idea of what awakening and liberation is, and what insight is. Again, we get this tracing down or feeding down from a top-level conception into how I'm responding to this or that experience in any moment, or someone else reporting this or that experience in any moment. So if I say "immeasurably precious," it's loaded. But it's tricky. And I think it would be understandable if a person did report such a sense of almost like, "I can't almost imagine life without that, the sense of that kind of dimensionality to it." It would be understandable. They may have some work to do, but it would potentially be understandable.

So, such a different sense of existence, such a different sense of the cosmos, of the dimensionality of being that comes with this, and we, as I said, assimilate that, incorporate that into our being, in addition to the usual sense of consciousness. It doesn't then replace it 100 per cent of the time. It just becomes available sometimes, this completely other sense of consciousness, this completely other dimension. But our usual sense is still available. And the usual sense of consciousness is: it's 'mine,' and it's somehow in here or usually in here, in the head, and from here, in my head, it's somehow sensing out, and it's associated with this materiality, meaning this physical matter, this physical organism. That's the usual, agreed-upon idea, but also sense of consciousness in our culture. So that's still available, but other senses become available as well.

It's not the case that this infinite consciousness is the ultimate nature of consciousness. It's not. And even just labelling it as the sixth jhāna would strongly suggest that it can't be. Nor is it ultimately the true nature of mind, nature of awareness, nature of consciousness -- nor is the vastness of awareness. So neither of these are the true or ultimate nature of awareness or consciousness. They're not the final truth regarding awareness, regarding consciousness.

Also, I don't think they really -- such an experience doesn't really prove the possibility of a consciousness, let's say, without or not contained by matter. So that's the experience -- this consciousness, it's an immaterial realm. We're now in the immaterial realms, arūpa-jhānas, arūpa-āyatanas, and there's just this infinite consciousness, sufficient unto itself, and the experience would seem to suggest: here's a consciousness without being contained in matter. To me, it doesn't prove that. So then there's a whole question of epistemology from meditation experiences, and what we can deduce from a certain meditative opening. I don't think it proves that. We would need more convincing, other kinds of experience, other phenomena, other things to happen, to be more convincing that there's a possibility of consciousness without being contained or associated with matter.

So again, how are we to regard all this? I think there's value to say: here, now, we're opening to deep, provisional truths. They're deeper truths, but they're still provisional. So we can talk about almost like a scale of relative truth, if you like. They're deeper truths -- still provisional, provisional truths, experiences, openings, insights. What are the Buddha's words? 'Perception attainments.'[5] And he talks about them in a scale of perception attainments -- the attainment, the ability, the achievement to perceive this or that as a level of truth, if you like. It's still a provisional truth, not a final, not an ultimate truth. That feels, to me, really, really important.

How do we get there? How does such a place, how does such a realm, how does such a dimension of existence, of being, open up for us? There's a number of possibilities.

(1) One is simply, as usual, just hanging out in the previous jhāna, the realm of infinite space. Just hanging out there, really getting into it, revisiting over and over, hanging out, hanging out, and it will naturally mature. It naturally matures at a certain point from the previous jhāna. That would be a very normal occurrence. I think I very briefly mentioned this earlier in the retreat, though: I think (though I know one teacher who disagrees with me, and one teacher who agrees) the order of ease of access through these arūpa-jhānas, much as (for some) the order of ease of access through the rūpa-jhānas, is individually variable. So I feel, for me, I felt it was easier to access, for example, to learn this infinite consciousness than the infinite space. Other people, it might be the other way around or something. I think there's individual variation here. So one teacher I had insisted on doing them in their numerical order, and another teacher was much less pedantic about that, less emphatic about that. But I would agree -- I think there are individual variations in tendency there. But one way, as I said, is just hanging out in the realm of infinite space, and just really, really getting into it. And when the fruit is ripe, it ripens. It matures.

(2) Then a second possibility is, to be in the realm of infinite space, to hang out there, and then at some point, when it's steady, when you're really into it, when it's established, when you've got some mastery, then begin becoming aware of the awareness there in that state, in that space. There's just a subtle shift of the attention and of the intention to pick up on that subtle sense of awareness that we experimented with earlier today, but within the realm of infinite space. So that would be a very kind of straightforward way of going about it, if it needs a little nudging. [44:54]

(3) Third possibility is any jhāna -- well, any of the jhānas up to now, let's say, better, easier to say, or even a normal state of consciousness, a non-jhānic state of consciousness, and actually, just what we did earlier. So can you get a sense? If it's a jhānic state of awareness, the object of that, the object of the consciousness at any time will be the primary nimitta. If it's a non-jhānic state of awareness, it could be any smell, taste, touch, sight, sound. Something that's quite steady, though -- you don't want something flickering too much. Something quite steady, or it's probably easier if something's quite steady. So something you can look at, and it's not going to disappear on you, or a sound that's continuous. If I pick the heating, and not -- well, there are no birds right now, but pick the heating; it's more of a constant thing. And so, normal consciousness with a normal sense object, or any jhānic consciousness with a consciousness of the primary nimitta, and then noticing, tuning to, and focusing in on that sense of knowing, that sense of consciousness. So in other words, this realm of infinite consciousness can be approached not from the fifth jhāna, not even from the fourth, third, second, first -- can be approached from normal consciousness. It's just a matter of noticing, tuning, and then amplifying that very sense of consciousness. And then it can begin to open up and open up. So that's one way as well.

(4) A fourth way is obviously related to that (but I mentioned it I think yesterday -- I can't remember -- and the Buddha says it somewhere or other): he kind of classifies the arūpa-jhānas, the arūpa-āyatanas, as, if you like, perspectives on the fourth jhāna. So it's really that there are not eight jhānas but four jhānas, and the fourth one has five variations: the fourth jhāna and then the four arūpa-jhānas. So somewhere or other in the Pali Canon, I'm pretty sure the Buddha frames it like that.[6] And already, we said in his description, what he emphasized in his description of the fourth jhāna was the pure awareness, the body wrapped in pure awareness -- or he sometimes says 'pure mindfulness.'[7] So it's right there in the fourth jhāna, and if I pick up on that, pick up on the sense of presence, the sense of consciousness, of pure mindfulness, pure awareness right there in the fourth jhāna, the body has become that. That will open up into the infinite consciousness.

(5) Fifth, there are insight ways of looking that will open up the infinite consciousness. They're actually the same as what opens up infinite space. In other words, the same ones might take you to either the infinite space or the infinite consciousness. So we mentioned them yesterday.

(6) And lastly, as always, with experience, with enough familiarity, enough in and out -- part of the whole deal with mastery is eventually, we can access these realms, or this particular realm, just by subtle intention, just by remembering it, remembering that realm, remember our experience of it. And that opens the doors, opens the doors to this divine awareness, this God's mind.

Again, I don't think there's any need to push or stretch it to infinity. It's more, whichever way you go, I don't think that's so necessary. It should -- I think it will, but it should automatically just expand that way, partly because there's nothing else in consciousness. There's nothing in the way. There's nothing but infinite consciousness.

And again, that could be a little tincture. If it's not quite stable yet, and you're working to consolidate it, you can just drop in the 'nothing but infinite consciousness.' That kind of primes -- it's very, very subtle. It's not like a big thinking; this is an alchemical tincture one's putting into the space, just to very gently direct and guide the mind, and support that opening out. So it should go -- it probably will go automatically, because there's nothing in the way, really. There's nothing to limit it. Sometimes we just need to relax into it. So it's strange: it is a very intense state, but as you work with it, there might be times when, actually, more relaxation is needed. And other times, it's more like really honing in with the intensity on that focus on the consciousness -- on the consciousness of consciousness. So one can just let it expand.

This 'leaning forward' business that I mentioned to you can happen, start happening, actually, sometimes in the third jhāna, but certainly in the fourth and later. This more relaxed approach may help with that, because sometimes the leaning forward is, again, in the usual -- not just intellectual construal, but sense of attention placing its object, its mental object in front, and then just a little bit of trying, we end up leaning forward, because just a little bit of effort -- we're aiming in front of ourselves. But the more relaxed approach can open it up more evenly. So it may help with that leaning forward issue.

[50:44] A lot depends on how you access this infinite consciousness, because if you're coming from infinite space, there's sort of nothing there to prevent it becoming infinite. It's already infinite, so it just kind of flips to the consciousness. If you're coming from, let's say, just a normal consciousness, then you're focusing, you're noticing the sense of consciousness, you're noticing the awareness of awareness, you're tuning to that and amplifying it, then it may well be that other objects come in and out of the awareness as you're trying to do that. And either you just stay really, really with the sense of knowing, really, really with the sense of consciousness, or you somehow see, sense the other objects as consciousness.

Okay, again, the Buddha talks about escape, as we said, nissaraṇaṃ.[8] Again, I still forgot to look up the word, but he talks about what's often in English translated as 'releases of awareness.'[9] The different jhānas, and then particularly the formless, are releases of awareness. So again, it's a realm. We're talking about a realm here, completely free, completely free from, completely transcending the hassle and the reach, completely free from and transcending the hassle and the reach of material perceptions. Sometimes the Buddha calls the four formless realms the 'peaceful liberations.'[10] That's a synonym: the peaceful liberations. And then there are passages where he talks about fully liberated beings, arahants, liberated in one way or liberated in two ways. And an arahant, fully liberated being, liberated in one way is just someone who's gotten rid of, exterminated, expunged all greed, hatred, and delusion.[11] They've ended their kilesas.[11:1] But an arahant liberated in two ways is someone who also has access to these formless jhānas.[12] And the Buddha has this lovely passage:

They remain touching with their body the peaceful liberations.[13]

So again, their whole sense of existence has this -- they're touching with their body something that's beyond the body and immaterial. They remain in the world, touching with their body the peaceful liberations. And other arahants, other fully enlightened beings, don't know these realms. They haven't developed them. They're not necessary. So there's difference.

But again, experientially, the very sense of release, of a beyond, of realms beyond -- that very sense can help maintain. Again, if you're working in this space, in this realm, and it's kind of just working to really settle it at any one time, then the very sense of release and beyondness and escape can be part of what helps consolidate it in that moment. But I need to enjoy that. In other words, the very sense of this transcendence of it, the beyondness, the release of it -- they're slightly different things, because release is "I am released" or "This is released"; beyondness, transcendence is "There is that" -- but the enjoyment of that, the subtle enjoyment of that is, again, also part of the binding glue, the consolidating of moisture, liquid of the experience.

So again, such an opening, such a perception, such a revelation relativizes this world, the world that we all agree on: this world of material forms, of things, of beings, etc. Opening to that relativizes this world. It takes its place in a series of worlds, of realms. It's not just: "There is this world and nothing else." And then it relativizes our relationship with this world, and that could happen in different ways. It could, as we said before, become (to me, to my way of thinking) problematically dualistic. It can certainly become dualistic to some people's thinking -- it's rarer and rarer these days -- but to some people saying, "Dualism is not a problem at all. This is saṃsāra. This is not worth much. We want out. We want not to be reborn." And that's, I think, traditionally, the thrust of Pali Canon teachings. It's much, much less common these days. [55:48] So for some people, that kind of dualism is not at all a problem. But I think it can be dangerous, that kind of dualism, because then how am I regarding this world? Am I caring for it? Do I love it? What's my duty to this world and others in it? What's my relationship? Has it become problematically dualistic?

It could. For some people that's not a problem. I think there's a danger and a problem there, in the way that I would see the whole movement of the Dharma, but it's much less so, much less risk of being problematically dualistic -- again, same principles as before -- if we let the after-effects of perception open up, if we really explore them. What I want to emphasize in teaching all this is, as I said, the after-effects on perception are as significant as the pure jhānic experiences themselves. Why? Partly because of this dualism thing. Partly because it's that that really changes, or -- those after-effects on perception have a big impact in our sense of this world. So if I have the after-effect on perception and the stone has consciousness, and there's divinity radiating from everywhere, this kind of divinity radiating from everywhere, everything is that, then the dualism, as we've discussed before, gets evened out. So that's one important reason.

Second kind of level of approach in targeting or in rehabilitating any tendency towards problematic dualism is, again, understanding the dependent arising, and therefore the emptiness of perception -- everything that I talked about the other day. This experience of the world that 7+ billion people agree upon, this experience of infinite consciousness, this experience of a subtle realm, world, this experience of infinite space, whatever it is -- they're all dependent arisings. They all arise dependent on certain ways of looking. This world and that, this realm and that are perceptions arising dependent on different ways of looking. And understanding that, in the most powerful way, transcends duality and gives us freedom to be dualistic when we want to be dualistic, and non-dualistic when we want to be non-dualistic. As I said, [it] collapses any duality between non-duality and duality. And we're free -- free with a range of ways of looking, free to move, free to give all a sense of equal sacredness, because we've understood something about the emptiness of it all, the dependent arising of it all, because we've played with insight ways of looking, we've played with ways of looking enough to open that whole understanding out.

So the Buddha also talks about these states and characterizes them as -- they're a kind of equanimity. And certainly, they're very equanimous. I mean, as I said, they're completely unperturbed, completely undisturbed. In that sense, they're really equanimous. There's no push-pull towards anything, any other objects there, let's say. Actually, that's not quite true, but it's a state of very deep equanimity. Certainly, they're very calm, and they're very focused. But it's also true, I think, that again, with experience, there might be secondary background emotions. So yes, equanimous; yes, calm, and all that. But somehow it might be that in the background, one is jumping for joy at the same time. There's wonder, potentially, love, peace, ecstasy. All these can be kind of background experiences, I would say, and naturally so, rightly so. We already mentioned release and freedom.

Just like the infinite space, I would really recommend practising these with eyes open, practising this realm as well, opening to this realm with the eyes open, definitely. Again, looking at the sky, or at the space, and letting that expand. Maybe it goes to infinite space first, and then it flips. Maybe you're just beginning to get the sense of consciousness in that much bigger visual space or kinaesthetic space -- or not. In other words, as we described, with a much smaller sense, not with the sky, not with the space, just with any object. Like the infinite space, profound sense and profoundly impacting sense of oneness -- mystical, cosmic oneness, almost overwhelming in the perception of it. That emerges both in the jhāna, in the sort of pure jhānic experience, and in the after-effect on perception.

Again, this is why I so much emphasize the after-effects on perception, really taking that time off the cushion in a kind of much more relaxed way, walking around, cup of tea, whatever it is, and noticing the effects after formal practice on perception. Now, right now, what's happened to my perception of self, of world, of consciousness, of whatever it is, of things, of materiality -- all that? And really noticing that, because that does something very profound. But oneness can be in the jhāna or in the after-effect on perception. Yesterday we said the primary oneness that came, that comes with the infinite space is a oneness of materiality, of material substance, this "We are all star-stuff," "We are all the same Big Bang," "We are really one matter, our bodies, etc." This, in contrast, is a oneness of consciousness. It's a oneness of awareness. One can have the sense that there's not really -- there's the appearance of separate awarenesses, separate consciousnesses, but actually, at another level, there's one. There's one divine consciousness of which we are part, or in which we partake.

When you get to Soulmaking Dharma, there are important variants of this. And it actually gets significantly different. And I've noticed when I'm teaching Soulmaking Dharma, and I say something about participating in God's mind, sometimes people write to me, and from what I read, from what they're saying, it sounds like they're relating or they're hearing what I said in a Soulmaking Dharma context -- they're hearing this, this oneness of awareness. But it's actually something different in a Soulmaking Dharma. There are more variants and more subtlety and more allowances for the individual particularity. God's awareness needs my awareness, my particular awareness, my particular dukkha, my particular ways that my mind works, and yours -- your particularities, your foibles, your struggles. That's different than "It's just there is one awareness, a simple, pure, clean awareness that somehow we all participate in." So there are significant differences there, but this is not a soulmaking retreat -- just for those of you who are interested.

The oneness, technically, I suppose, again, is a secondary nimitta. The primary nimitta is the consciousness. The oneness -- I mean, in a way, they'll get completely fused at times, of course, but technically it's a secondary nimitta. So we should focus primarily, as always, on -- primarily, most of the time, on the consciousness. And the oneness -- it will come. It will also arise, just later, just naturally in the after-effects of perception. You can trust that. So even though, in some ways, you could say, perhaps one of the most significant, and most impactful, and most potent, and most transformative perceptions and knowings and digestions here is the very sense of oneness, still we don't need to -- probably most people don't need to go looking for it. You can trust that it will arise, and it will do its work. Of course, there are always exceptions, but I would say that.

Again, same deal with mastery, all the little tricks of the trade and the little things that we play with -- same deal, going for walks and all that. And just to emphasize -- I don't know how all this sounds, but it's really just a matter of training. So when we talked yesterday about the fifth jhāna, the infinite space, or even today -- you know, yesterday, with the infinite space, we said, you know, looking at an object, that we would usually sense, in the very looking at it, even though I'm not touching it, my sense in the looking is of solidity. That would be the normal sense of it. And then seeing and sensing physical objects, material objects as space, seeing and sensing them as not solid, and staying with that. So getting that sense, and then staying with that, and infinite space can open up from that, if I sustain it -- what's basically then a training. There are different elements here. So I can see, what I usually sense as solid -- can I flip the perception so that I sense it as space, as not solid? And then, can I sustain that? And then, can I allow that to open? These are all just elements of a training. Just what is it? Training the perception of space. I'm training the perception of space. Space is not something that we usually pay attention to. Usually, we're basically addicted or imprisoned, or habitually, we pay attention to objects in space. And even if an architect or something talks about paying attention to space, it's not quite the same thing. [1:06:49] What they really mean is a geometry that has shapes. But the actual space itself is not something that human beings habitually pay attention to. So we're training a perception, training an ability of what's a more refined perception.

But the point I want to make is: it's all training, just training of perceptions, and the training has slightly different elements in it. And how many suttas are there where the Buddha says, and he's describing some meditation and describing a monk doing this, and "Thus he trains himself"? And then a little bit of, "Thus he trains himself. Thus he trains himself." It's just training. And what that means is, it's possible. It's available. So again, even the thing we did earlier today: can you get a sense of the awareness of awareness? Can you become aware of awareness in the moment, in the moment? And then, can you sustain that? And can you focus in on it? And can you let it amplify? And then can you let that expand? It's all training. It's just training. And what that means to me -- it's an important word, because it means it's totally possible. It's totally available.

Again, I don't know how it sounds, but we're really talking about something majestic in its grandeur, unfathomable in its beauty, and wonder, and depth, and sublimity, and dimensionality, and divinity. But also, that, in another sense, or at the very same time, is just a training. Yes, it's very rare, and even rarer, as I said, than the vastness of awareness. But it's just a training. It's rare just because people have not been taught or don't sustain their journey of working towards it, playing towards it. So it's possible and available if we get our desire, our relationship with desire right -- all this. And that's why I keep coming back to that. I can talk about blah blah blah blah blah and all this great-sounding stuff, but if I don't understand myself in relationship to desire, I don't understand what I'm bringing in, or what is brought into my desires at different times, and how I relate to that -- not just in this moment, but over time, in a sustained way, for a retreat, but also for years, months and years -- it's possible and available if I have that fundamental inquiry and understanding and right relationship with desire, and, I think, if I bring a kind of intelligence to my working and playing.

And by intelligence, I don't mean scholarship. I've said that before. Nor do I mean something really intellectual; I don't mean that at all. I mean everything that we've emphasized: the flexibility, the responsiveness, the attunement, the coherent conceptual framework of, what am I doing? And why? And where is it going? And how does this fit into where I'm going? Because that larger, bigger picture conceptual framework will, should guide me in my momentary choices and momentary emphases. So if that's askew, or I haven't kind of got a coherent one, or it doesn't make sense, or if I'm trying to work towards this jhāna, but actually, I'm labouring under the umbrella of a conceptual framework that doesn't really support it, or emphasizes an aspect like "How long can I stay on one object?" -- we've talked about this before -- I'm emphasizing something that's actually just going to capsize the boat and not let this boat deliver me to where I want to go. So if there's the right relationship with desire and inquiry into that, that's the hard thing, you know? That's not an easy thing. That's a big ask, and it's more fundamental. And if there's this intelligent -- what I mean by 'intelligent' -- work and play, then these things are really possible and available. They're just trainings.

So last thing about desire, and someone wrote a note. A couple of people wrote a note, in fact. Again, it's just a small thing for people who are already familiar with Soulmaking Dharma, just very briefly. We talked about this: the importance of, the absolute necessity of having a helpful view of the self on the path, a helpful view of the practitioner self. And in Soulmaking Dharma, we talk about fantasies of the path, fantasies of the self on the path, and I've talked about that several times in other soulmaking retreats over the last years -- can't remember where, but it's there.[14] A couple of people were asking, "Yeah, okay, but when you're on a jhāna retreat, for example, or let's say it's an emptiness retreat, or let's say it's a mettā retreat, or it's a themed retreat, and it's not a soulmaking-themed retreat, how do I relate to this whole idea of fantasy? How can I work with the whole idea of fantasy? Because I'm supposed to be doing jhāna practice, or I'm supposed to be doing emptiness practice, or whatever it is." So, a fantasy is something, as I said, that's almost something in the background. It's a background kind of imaginal narrative, if you like, or semi-narrative. It, in fact, has an eternality to it, but it's in a narrative appearance, if you like. But it's the background.

And what can happen, or what we can do sometimes is, when we notice that fantasy, we can bring it into the foreground and work on it with our imaginal practice. In other words, what was fantasy in the background becomes image in the foreground, and then we work and play with that image. And of course, it might be an image of myself. So that's what we're working with. I glimpse a fantasy, in the corner of my eye, when things are going really well, when I'm into practice, when I'm inspired. I glimpse the fantasy, and then if I want, I can bring that to the foreground and work on it in a sort of conscious, deliberate imaginal practice. [1:12:58] But then, once you've done that, it can go to the background again. So that's one way of doing it.

Or you might find there's no fantasy, actually; there's just dukkha. I'm just stuck here. I'm hitting my head against a brick wall. I feel completely contracted or imprisoned or whatever it is. There's no fantasy. Or what there is is a self-view that's not an imaginal fantasy. It's an impoverishment, and it's a reified self-view that's painful. Then, as I said yesterday, then what I have to do is I have to go through that dukkha. I have to go right to the middle of the dukkha and feel the dukkha of it and feel the pain of it. I have to hold it in certain ways. I cannot approach it just with simple mindfulness. Simple mindfulness would drain the self out and drain the story out. Very useful at times, but here we want a certain kind of crucible, a certain kind of holding which allows the self to be there, and the dukkha, and the story, but allows them to alchemically reconfigure or arise differently, in a much more helpful way. So through the dukkha, and through the very heat of the dukkha, and the material of the dukkha, in that crucible, if I hold it right in my imaginal practice, then an image of the self and an image of the path will arise. And then that can go to the background. If this is all in the context of a jhāna retreat, or an emptiness retreat, or a mettā retreat, and not a soulmaking retreat, it can go to the background.

In other words, we only use these fantasies, we only bring them to the foreground as much and when they are needed. Otherwise they can stay in the background. And from the background, they quietly but powerfully do their work, in their subtle, half-hidden, almost subliminal way, from the background. So you bring it forward, or you concentrate on your dukkha and allow the image to become primary only when you need it -- a bit like using insight ways of looking on a jhāna retreat, if an insight way of looking is not your base or springboard practice. For some people it is, and that's fine; they're doing that all the time. For other people, it's almost last in the list of things to do when, "Hmm, something feels stuck. I try this, I try imagining, I try breathing through, I try this and this and this, etc." -- last on the list, maybe, is an insight way of looking. But I'm just taking something else, bringing it into primacy for a certain time, for the sake of lubricating and opening up the jhānic path now on this retreat where there's an intention, and an intention to stay constant with my intention, and on a certain path. And I bring it, and when it does its work, I can let it go again, unless it's my base practice. So we only use it when we've tried everything else which hasn't helped.

Okay. Let's sit quietly for a bit.

[silence]

Okay. Thank you, everybody. It's time for tea now.


  1. AN 9:35. ↩︎

  2. E.g. MN 111. ↩︎

  3. Rob Burbea, "15: Emptiness and Awareness (1)," in Seeing That Frees: Meditations on Dependent Arising and Emptiness (Devon: Hermes Amāra, 2014), 192--208. ↩︎

  4. The four guided meditations, dated 9 Sept. 2009 through 12 Sept. 2009, can be found at https://dharmaseed.org/teacher/210/?search=the+space+of+awareness, accessed 27 Feb. 2020. ↩︎

  5. AN 9:36. ↩︎

  6. Source unknown. Rob may be alluding to the commentarial notion that the fourth jhāna and the four arūpa-jhānas are all 'imperturbable' (āneñja). Following this interpretation, one could argue that the arūpa-jhānas are variants of the fourth jhāna because they all belong to the same category of 'imperturbable' states*.* However, as Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu writes in a footnote to his translation of MN 106: "According to the commentaries, 'imperturbable' denotes the fourth jhāna and the four formless attainments. MN 66 provides partial support for this interpretation, saying that the first three jhānas are perturbable while the fourth is not, but this sutta does not include the dimension of nothingness under the term -- or, apparently, any of the formless attainments higher than that." See Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu, tr., "Conducive to the Imperturbable: Āneñjasappāya Sutta (MN 106)," https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN106.html, accessed 27 Feb. 2020. ↩︎

  7. E.g. AN 5:28. ↩︎

  8. E.g. MN 111. ↩︎

  9. cetovimutti: ceto ('awareness') + vimutti ('release') ↩︎

  10. santā vimokkhā, e.g. at MN 69, MN 70, AN 8:72, AN 10:9. ↩︎

  11. Arahantship (arahattaṃ) is defined as 'the ending of greed, the ending of hatred, the ending of delusion' at SN 38:2. ↩︎ ↩︎

  12. DN 15. ↩︎

  13. MN 70. ↩︎

  14. E.g. Rob Burbea, "In Love with the Way: Images of Path and Self" (10 Feb. 2017), https://dharmaseed.org/teacher/210/talk/40178/, accessed 28 Feb. 2020. Also see Rob Burbea, "On Blessed Ground: Fantasies of the Self on the Path" (31 Mar. 2017), https://dharmaseed.org/teacher/210/talk/43945/, accessed 28 Feb. 2020. ↩︎

Sacred geometry
Sacred geometry