Was That A Fetter Shift?
Determining if a Belief is Gone
At each of the steps along the way through the fetters, a longstanding belief about something that “I” supposedly have, am or need disappears. If that particular belief truly disappears, then the looking for it is over: the idea of it possibly existing no longer even comes to mind, other than as a memory. For example, if we completely drop the belief that there is a separate “self” who controls and experiences what happens (i.e., the first fetter), the notion or sense that there is such an entity never again arises. It’s not that we have seen how or why there isn’t one: we have seen that there isn’t one, by which the idea never arises again. Or, in the case of the fourth and fifth fetters of desire and ill will, the urge to react no longer arises, by which it would never occur to us to look for the reason we have such an urge.
In the case of a separate “self”, an analogy might be the Tooth Fairy, which is a childhood myth that is found in various forms throughout the world. For children, it really does seem there is a tooth fairy because, when a tooth falls out and is placed under their pillow, in its place will be some money in the morning. Eventually, we come to know there really isn’t anyone called the “tooth fairy”, perhaps if we happened to be awake when a parent or someone else exchanged some money for our tooth while they thought we were asleep. Thereafter, when we are in a conversation in which children are talking about the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, or any other mythical being, we know what people are talking about, but there is no longer even a brief moment where we believe there is such a being.
When working with and through the fetters, it happens quite often that we, or the person who is helping us, believe that we have “broken” a certain fetter, when we only have a conceptual understanding that what the fetter points to doesn’t exist. We might be convinced that it doesn’t exist, or that it cannot exist, and yet in daily life there still seems to be (for example) a “self”, a “subject”, or the “perception” of actual things. This is rather different than an experiential knowing that such a thing doesn’t exist, by which the belief is completely gone, and we never experience such a thing in the future.
Indicators of Conceptual Understanding
There are types of phrases that we can watch and listen for, whether we are guiding others or are doing a self-guided inquiry, that indicate that there is still only a conceptual understanding that whatever we are searching for doesn’t actually exist. Examples of these might include phrases such as:
At each of the steps along the way through the fetters, a longstanding belief about something that “I” supposedly have, am or need disappears. If that particular belief truly disappears, then the looking for it is over: the idea of it possibly existing no longer even comes to mind, other than as a memory. For example, if we completely drop the belief that there is a separate “self” who controls and experiences what happens (i.e., the first fetter), the notion or sense that there is such an entity never again arises. It’s not that we have seen how or why there isn’t one: we have seen that there isn’t one, by which the idea never arises again. Or, in the case of the fourth and fifth fetters of desire and ill will, the urge to react no longer arises, by which it would never occur to us to look for the reason we have such an urge.
In the case of a separate “self”, an analogy might be the Tooth Fairy, which is a childhood myth that is found in various forms throughout the world. For children, it really does seem there is a tooth fairy because, when a tooth falls out and is placed under their pillow, in its place will be some money in the morning. Eventually, we come to know there really isn’t anyone called the “tooth fairy”, perhaps if we happened to be awake when a parent or someone else exchanged some money for our tooth while they thought we were asleep. Thereafter, when we are in a conversation in which children are talking about the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, or any other mythical being, we know what people are talking about, but there is no longer even a brief moment where we believe there is such a being.
When working with and through the fetters, it happens quite often that we, or the person who is helping us, believe that we have “broken” a certain fetter, when we only have a conceptual understanding that what the fetter points to doesn’t exist. We might be convinced that it doesn’t exist, or that it cannot exist, and yet in daily life there still seems to be (for example) a “self”, a “subject”, or the “perception” of actual things. This is rather different than an experiential knowing that such a thing doesn’t exist, by which the belief is completely gone, and we never experience such a thing in the future.
Indicators of Conceptual Understanding
There are types of phrases that we can watch and listen for, whether we are guiding others or are doing a self-guided inquiry, that indicate that there is still only a conceptual understanding that whatever we are searching for doesn’t actually exist. Examples of these might include phrases such as:
|
|
It is of course quite helpful when we start to see, even at just the conceptual level, that what we believe exists is not actually so. It can then be helpful, though perhaps not decisive, to go through a period of thinking and reflection based on that conceptual understanding, for example analyzing how desire and will can’t be real, or don’t manifest at certain times. As long as we don’t conclude that a conceptual understanding is the same as an experiential shift, there is likely no harm in coaxing our intellect in the right direction.
One common way in which a merely conceptual understanding manifests is when we still apply descriptors to whatever we are inquiring into or looking for. For example, regarding the separate “self” of the first fetter, we might conclude that the self is transparent, impermanent, an interpretation, an illusion, merely a thought, and so on. If we apply the concept of impermanence to the “self”, we might convince ourselves that there couldn’t be a self, or (worse yet) that there is an impermanent self which inherently cannot be found. Implicit to any descriptor is that it must apply to something; in other words, it indicates that the belief in such a something still remains. However, if one has truly broken this fetter, it would never occur to us to describe the “self” in any way, because we no longer experience a “self” to begin with.
Another way conceptual understanding might manifest is that whatever we are looking for isn’t there, but only if and when we are looking. We might then conclude that we fully know there isn’t such a thing, even though at times during the rest of our day there does still seem to be such a thing. For example, if we are looking for what corresponds to the terms “desire and ill will” and we clearly don’t find anything, we might suppose the inquiry is done because we have seen it so clearly. And yet, whether it is 10 minutes or 10 hours later, the push and pull of reactivity can once again start up, indicating that seeing one time (or many times) there isn’t anything called “desire and ill will” was not sufficient. Just as cockroaches disappear when we turn on the light, but are simply waiting for us to turn it back off and leave so they can come back out, so too it often is the case with whatever corresponds to the name of a fetter: it isn’t actually gone, even though we can’t see it right now.
When to Move On
Another area in which there may be confusion has to do with the types of experiences we have during the inquiry process. We may have experienced something, perhaps even the actual paradigm shift; however, there can be a tendency to move on too soon. For example, it often happens that there is a remarkable experience, perhaps of feeling like there are no boundaries or an upwelling of bliss and joy, which is taken to be an actual shift. In combination with a deeper conceptual understanding (see above), the tendency can be to assume the fetter is broken, and that it’s time to move on to the next one. However, as significant as such experiences are, they may not coincide with an actual shift in an underlying belief, but instead are simply rather remarkable experiences.
When working with desire and ill will, we might prematurely move on after there has been a noticeable second shift, by which it seems that all reactivity is gone. If we assume that a second shift means that the belief in desire and ill will is gone, simply because the traditional formula says that they are first weakened and then broken, we might assume we are done. However, while our level of reactivity may be much less than it was before and may stay at that low level, often it is the case that several such weakenings need to occur. If a given shift has occurred, what reactivity remains must be allowed to regroup so that it can again manifest, once things have settled down and allowed to consolidate, so that we can see “what’s left”.
In the case of an actual shift, we still need to allow enough time for things to settle down. For example, once the first three fetters are broken, some experience a lack of suffering, which can go on for several days or even weeks, and we might conclude that suffering has in fact ceased (i.e., the entire path is “done”). It may be that when we realize that there is no such thing as a separate “self”, it can be so profound and even shocking that it sends something of a depth charge into our experience, by which it can take a long time for what remains to be noticeable. Or, due to the level of suffering we were once so accustomed to, it may take some time for our sensitivity to shift down so we can see how we still are in fact suffering, albeit not as intensely as we did before.
In the Buddhist tradition, a piece of advice is that, if it seems like a shift of some sort has happened, it is a good idea to wait a year and a day before making up our minds that it has in fact happened, even if we press on to work with the next fetter. In the meantime, whatever remains will have a chance to re-form, similar to an enemy that regroups after a skirmish but is nevertheless a potent adversary.
One common way in which a merely conceptual understanding manifests is when we still apply descriptors to whatever we are inquiring into or looking for. For example, regarding the separate “self” of the first fetter, we might conclude that the self is transparent, impermanent, an interpretation, an illusion, merely a thought, and so on. If we apply the concept of impermanence to the “self”, we might convince ourselves that there couldn’t be a self, or (worse yet) that there is an impermanent self which inherently cannot be found. Implicit to any descriptor is that it must apply to something; in other words, it indicates that the belief in such a something still remains. However, if one has truly broken this fetter, it would never occur to us to describe the “self” in any way, because we no longer experience a “self” to begin with.
Another way conceptual understanding might manifest is that whatever we are looking for isn’t there, but only if and when we are looking. We might then conclude that we fully know there isn’t such a thing, even though at times during the rest of our day there does still seem to be such a thing. For example, if we are looking for what corresponds to the terms “desire and ill will” and we clearly don’t find anything, we might suppose the inquiry is done because we have seen it so clearly. And yet, whether it is 10 minutes or 10 hours later, the push and pull of reactivity can once again start up, indicating that seeing one time (or many times) there isn’t anything called “desire and ill will” was not sufficient. Just as cockroaches disappear when we turn on the light, but are simply waiting for us to turn it back off and leave so they can come back out, so too it often is the case with whatever corresponds to the name of a fetter: it isn’t actually gone, even though we can’t see it right now.
When to Move On
Another area in which there may be confusion has to do with the types of experiences we have during the inquiry process. We may have experienced something, perhaps even the actual paradigm shift; however, there can be a tendency to move on too soon. For example, it often happens that there is a remarkable experience, perhaps of feeling like there are no boundaries or an upwelling of bliss and joy, which is taken to be an actual shift. In combination with a deeper conceptual understanding (see above), the tendency can be to assume the fetter is broken, and that it’s time to move on to the next one. However, as significant as such experiences are, they may not coincide with an actual shift in an underlying belief, but instead are simply rather remarkable experiences.
When working with desire and ill will, we might prematurely move on after there has been a noticeable second shift, by which it seems that all reactivity is gone. If we assume that a second shift means that the belief in desire and ill will is gone, simply because the traditional formula says that they are first weakened and then broken, we might assume we are done. However, while our level of reactivity may be much less than it was before and may stay at that low level, often it is the case that several such weakenings need to occur. If a given shift has occurred, what reactivity remains must be allowed to regroup so that it can again manifest, once things have settled down and allowed to consolidate, so that we can see “what’s left”.
In the case of an actual shift, we still need to allow enough time for things to settle down. For example, once the first three fetters are broken, some experience a lack of suffering, which can go on for several days or even weeks, and we might conclude that suffering has in fact ceased (i.e., the entire path is “done”). It may be that when we realize that there is no such thing as a separate “self”, it can be so profound and even shocking that it sends something of a depth charge into our experience, by which it can take a long time for what remains to be noticeable. Or, due to the level of suffering we were once so accustomed to, it may take some time for our sensitivity to shift down so we can see how we still are in fact suffering, albeit not as intensely as we did before.
In the Buddhist tradition, a piece of advice is that, if it seems like a shift of some sort has happened, it is a good idea to wait a year and a day before making up our minds that it has in fact happened, even if we press on to work with the next fetter. In the meantime, whatever remains will have a chance to re-form, similar to an enemy that regroups after a skirmish but is nevertheless a potent adversary.