This is a report based on a forum MIG held in December 2023

You can read Tejananda’s introductory comments (“A History of Insight in Triratna”) here.

Mitras experience of working with Insight and deeper practice

Thank you to all the mitras who took part in the forum. We very much valued your sharing your experience and following the meeting, we have put together some of our observations and reflections from the evening, as well as a summary of Tejananda’s introduction.

The Forum

We in MIG were aware that many mitras have deeper levels of practice and insight than might be normally expected. We had already noticed some themes from our own discussions, and in addition, we wanted to hear directly from mitras what were the effects of having such a practice on their experience in Triratna.

Mitras with a range of experiences and from different parts of the country took part.

Some with experience of more formal insight practice such as LU ot the 10 fetters approach developed by ex Satyadana. For some insight had developed more organically from the traditional Triratna practices of TMOB and Metta.

Everyone saw Triratna as their spiritual community and appreciated the opportunity they had had in being part of the wider mandala.

Observations and notes from discussions at the Forum

Because resources at different centres and parts of the country vary widely, while some had found support locally, many mitras had experienced difficulty in finding support and understanding for their practice. This was more common if they were actively in training for ordination.

Often through their interactions with OMs, mitras were given the impression that insight and deeper experiences in practice were at odds with Triratna’s system of practice, rather than a natural part of unfolding practice.

Mitras actively training for ordination often met with OMs who had a more inflexible way of seeing practice, and who considered that the mitra’s experience and ways of seeing the Dharma were not what was expected for being ready for ordination. OMs could be very reactive at times and refuse to engage in some conversations. Some experienced this as having a black mark being put against their name, even if they had not directly used specific insight methods or talked in terms  of insight.

There was some hurt and confusion by this unwillingness to see them as they were, because of the strong emphasis in training for ordination about sharing your practice. Some mitras found support locally but others felt more isolated. Most found it harder to find support in other training for ordination situations. There was sadness expressed  that they were not able to share themselves and their deepest experience of the Dharma and be met with understanding or resonance, with those who had said this is what they needed to do.

Vajraloka was mentioned by a number of people as being a context where they felt freer to practise in a way that was more in tune with their own unfolding practice.

The self development model was the one way of practice that was emphasised by a lot of OMs mitras came into contact with, especially at centres concerned with ordination training.

Often OMs were interpreting insight experience through the lens of this self development model, which easily leads to a misunderstanding of insight being seen as an ego experience, which then can lead to seeing some sort of inflation of the ego rather than its opposite.

These sorts of experiences had led to some mitras pulling back from ordination, or dropping out of ordination training. There didn’t seem a clear path for them or a welcoming of their practice and sharing the benefits of their practice with others.

Some reflections and conclusions.

Over recent years we have made an effort in Triratna to understand and talk more openly about insight and deeper forms of practice. This seemed to be primarily happening in order discussions and practice and had not reached the wider mitra sangha.

In our forum we heard directly from mitras, that indeed this was true. It was often very difficult for them to talk about insight and deeper practice. From their feedback there were common areas of concern across the country and in both wings of training for ordination.

The experience of mitras was very patchy, and seemed to be largely down to luck as to whether they managed to make helpful connections with OMs who could relate to their practice. Vajraloka, as a resource available to all, is very helpful, though finding OMs locally and/or in the Ordination team could still be difficult

When we connect with deeper practice, it tends to develop its own internal logic, it unfolds in its own way, and we cannot usually just choose to practise in another way.  You could say that the “inner guru” emerges. This does not seem to be widely recognised in our community, and leads to difficulties particularly with approaching Ordination, where the teams may want people to practise in a particular way, and not be able to recognise the momentum of someone’s organic process.  This is a topic that needs wider discussion in Triratna.

More specifically, mitras could also be met by strong reactivity from OMs in response to their conversations, this was often a quite shocking experience, as it was completely unexpected and could come across as dismissing, disbelieving and harsh.  OMs could also become quite reactive when being questioned about their  responses. Because it was so widespread  we believe it is not so much a result of someone’s individual practice, the OMs would not be intending to respond and come across in this way but rather something arising in response to, or caused by underlying belief structures in Triratna particularly around ordination. Seeing where these beliefs are coming from, and what aspects of our understanding around training for ordination can be deepened and changed to include the variety of levels of practice and experience that more and more mitras are already experiencing seems another vital aspect to be discussed.

There is a fundamental need for all of us to be met, be able to connect with and be supported on our Dharma path by others in the sangha. We have heard this is not the case for some mitras so we need to look at how these mitras can be more included and supported if they have not got this experience in local centres.

It would be strange indeed to expect all OMs to have the variety of experience and practice to meet all mitras needs, and so this will always be an issue for a few mitras in all sanghas, especially smaller ones. A simple system could be put  in place with support from OMs in the wider sangha to help with this situation.