Buddhism in general I see has this two different language structures called goal language and method language. These are concepts I came out with from observation, so you can't find it in suttas or books.
The goal language is language which tells us what's the goal, what happens if you practise this or that. The method language is the language which tells you how to practise this or that as you practise it.
In the conventional non spiritual world, usually we don't need such clear separation, because if you're an athlete, you want to break the world record on 400 meter dash, that's your goal. The method, keep on practising the run. Craving associated with the goal can sometimes be used as a method to motivate the running.
Whereas in Buddhism, generally, methods cannot include craving. While in the same way, if there is too much emphasis on goals, cravings still arises. This is one of the important ways to see the difference between the two. Many of the sufferings associated with the practise is a result of taking goal language as method, taking method language as goal.
Say for a beginner, we introduce to them the 4 noble truths. There's suffering, cause, nibbana and noble 8fold path. So the goal language here is we want to attain to nibbana. Usually we say the noble 8fold path is the method, but the common way to present noble 8fold path is wrongly understood to be in goal language formulation.
Before going into that, first let's see the method language counterpart to attaining nibbana is. To attain to nibbana, one has to let go of the desire to attain to nibbana. As any craving is cause of suffering and nibbana is the abandoning of all cravings.
That's the method language with regards to nibbana. We cannot teach this to beginners generally because they might misunderstand and take that as the goal language: oh we should not want to attain to nibbana, no need to practise. Then their progress is halted until someone breaks their wrong views.
The opposite of taking goal language as method is the common thing we all do as a beginner and it's sort of the necessary step, not really a mistake. Oh I want to be a Buddhist, must develop this buddhist identity, then read all the suttas, meditate everyday, go for super a lot of retreats. Driven by a lot of desire to join in all things Buddhism, to learn all dhammas, wanting to renounce etc. All these are necessary parts of the beginner's journey.
At some point, after establishing well the morality, meditation, the practitioner should keep the method in mind, to let go of the craving for nibbana. At this point, the momentum, habits, direction of mind goal is already towards the deathless, so it's possible to practise the method safely.
On noble 8fold path, right view, right thoughts... right thoughts is one of the strongest thing we can identify with as method. Using the language of sayadaw u tejaniya, it's right attitude, not craving, not rejecting. Using the language of ajahn brahm, it's making peace, be kind, be gentle.
If you read it as goal language, you might sit in meditation and say: make peace, be kind, no be kind to the object, why is there still aversion? Stop, get out, I want my peace.
If you read it as method language: aversion is there. Make peace with it. It's ok. Still. Still got hate in my mind, be kind to the mind, it's ok. Be gentle, oh mind you're good enough.
In the language of Thich Nhat Hanh: there's no way to peace, peace is the way.
Right speech, right action, right livelihood- morality As a goal language, it seem that anything goes, as long as we keep the precepts. So suppression, making feelings numb, etc is the usual method some beginners try to employ. In other words, using control via will, brute force, rather than wisdom power.
Yet, as method language, we employ right attitudes towards morality, we employ wisdom power, with brute force only as the last resort. We practise reflection, we seek advice of fellow dhamma farers (like people in this subreddit) on how to deal with this or that, and receive the wisdom bits to be applied, reflected upon to overcome arisen defilements. Then morality is much easier to keep. We tell people that as you practise mindfulness, you have more control, more choice.
Then right effort. This is the formulation which is actually a goal language formulation, but commonly mistaken as method language. The goal is to remove arisen defilements, to not allow unarisen defilements to arise, to maintain arisen good habits, to develop unarisen good habits.
As a goal language, we can have a guide of direction. This is especially important when we encounter the teachings regarding will as not self, not under our control, that all things are conditioned. Without the right effort in place, one might give in to fatalism and non action, but with right effort as guide, one is still directed towards good, avoid evil. Part of the causes for this direction is the very teaching of right effort itself.
As a method language, right effort is misused in like imagining that practise must put in effort like the weightlifters push so hard, or sprinters pushing themselves beyond their boundaries, the concept of no pain no gain. Also, taking right effort instead of right thoughts as method, one easily gives rise to aversion towards unwholesome states in us. Or gives rise to craving for the arisen wholesome states within us. Both aversion and cravings are unwholesome qualities, so it's actually cultivating defilements if practised in this way, going opposite of the intention of right effort being used as a goal language.
Actual effort on mindfulness is just to remind oneself to remember to be mindful. Just knowing. Lightly knowing, without putting in energy, or else one gets tired being mindful the whole day. Like the effort to touch a wall, not the effort to push trying to topple a wall. Actual method to practise right effort is to use right thoughts: make peace, be kind, be gentle to fulfill the goal language description of right effort.
Right mindfulness: it's sort of a goal to maintain constant mindfulness, as much as possible, commonly misused as a method. Depending on practitioner's level and condition. If you tell a person to be mindful, then they take it as a method, they may forget how to be mindful, and put in too much effort, ending up being tired and dislike the practise of mindfulness. If you tell them just sit, ask what's happening now? The proper method language maybe to remind the practitioner that it's lightly knowing, just ask what's the mind aware of right now? Or zen's method of letting go of all concepts, just sit with dunno mind. Then the mindfulness is developed without being forced upon. Mingyur Rinpoche has this saying: the best meditation is no meditation. Ajahn Brahm has this story of letting his mind do whatever it wants to do, then it stays still with you, don't be a police to your mind. Right thoughts comes in again as method.
Right stillness. As we go into the Jhanas, some people take Jhanas as the method language, so a lot of craving arises. Jhanas is a goal language. It's stages of letting go. With craving, that craving disturbs the stillness, jhanas cannot happen. So in meditation to Jhanas, goal language has to be forgotten, only method of: make peace, be kind, be gentle, mindfulness maintained as a result of the method language used above, and doing nothing in meditation.
Doing nothing itself can be seen as a goal language, method of doing nothing? Stilling the mind onto the breath, having an object of meditation as the mind stills down like mud in water. Doing nothing, that means no craving allows the water/mind to be clear and still.
Eventually, doing nothing becomes a method as one enters into 2nd jhana and the will disappears. The statement of letting go of cravings to attain to nibbana makes sense now. This stage cannot be rushed, the habits of morality has to be build up first. If beginners have a view that they are not in control, they cannot effectively practice and cultivate morality.
That's pretty much it I got so far, based on theoretical understanding of teachings of ajahn brahm and sayadaw u tejaniya.
##########################
B using the Ultimate Truth to subvert the Conventional Truth. That's not how it works.
Ultimate Truth is that Buddha Nature is inherently complete. There is nothing to attain, nothing to gain.
However, the three afflictions block this fundamental wisdom. The practice is to remove the dirt from the gold to recover its value. You don't gain gold, you just recover what's already there.
You can't call that pile of mud with some gold in it complete and stop right there.
Conventional Truth is the path to the Ultimate Truth, and in itself is the Ultimate Truth. You do not throw one away for the other. You do not use the 'higher' truth to subvert the 'lower'.
##########################
#####################
B MISERY X CHANGE
###################
a
#######################
####################
