|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Lookatmynavelnow
52 Posts |
 Posted - Feb 12 2008 : 7:03:45 PM
|
Is the practise of Buddhist vipassana meditation suited as a deep meditation after doing the spinal breath?
Christi wrote in another post:
“I have practiced vipassana (insight) meditation for many years before coming to AYP. Yes, it is a form of self-enquiry”
Do you still practice vipassana? If not, why not?
|
|
|
Eitherway
USA
100 Posts |
Posted - Feb 12 2008 : 8:42:02 PM
|
Hi,
The deep meditation of ayp and vipassna are completely different. Deep meditation is based on the mantra being the primary object while vipassana (i believe) relies on passively observing the sensations/thoughts that arise in the body/mind.
I believe vipassana can be done for long periods of time and thus can be used as a form of self-inquiry while going over the recommended time limit for deep meditation (20 mins) will quickly show you how potent/different the practice is.
Incidently, I have found that vipassana (insight) meditation becomes sort of an automatic happening when enough inner silence has been uncovered. The uncovered inner silence is the witness which , as you start identifying with it, makes it very easy to make objects of the minds machinations.
The recommendation is to ready the main lessons that pertain to deep meditation. They are free!!! I have done it (along with additional practices) for about a year and can only state that I wish I had started earlier (oh lets see as early as possible!).
Good luck |
Edited by - Eitherway on Feb 13 2008 12:58:59 AM |
 |
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Feb 13 2008 : 01:37:04 AM
|
Hi LAMNN
quote:
Is the practise of Buddhist vipassana meditation suited as a deep meditation after doing the spinal breath?
I agree with Eitherway. I wouldn't substitute vipassana for AYP deep meditation.
This issue is slightly confused by the fact that there are 2 different kinds of vipassana currently being taught in the west. One is taught by S.N. Goenka and is called "vipassana meditation". It comes from Burma, and is a kind of very slow body sweeping practice. The other, which is what I think we are discussing here, is called "vipassana meditation" and comes from Thailand/ Cambodia/ Sri Lanka. It is a form of self enquiry but done sitting in silence, with leggs crossed and eyes closed. All phenomena that arise are contemplated as having the three characteristics of impermanence, selflessness, and unsatisfactoriness.
AYP deep meditation is a far more powerful practice, combining tratak (concentration on a single object (in this case a mantra), with the power of various mantras (AYAM, SRI, NAMAHA, OM) to both bring the mind to stillness, and transform the flow of prana in the subtle body.
Theravadan Buddhists also practice a form of tratak (one pointed concentration), but use the breath as an object instead of a mantra (this practice is called anapanasati).
I still practice vipassana meditation at times, but as Eitherway says, with the cultivation of the witness, this kind of self enquiry becomes automatic in daily life. |
|
|
|
x.j.
304 Posts |
Posted - Feb 13 2008 : 1:33:57 PM
|
| As to whether the practice of Buddhist vipassana meditation is suitably practiced after spinal breathing, the answer is: Yes, Sure, absolutely, no reason not to. Anything goes. Spinal breathing can be an excellent and effective preamble to vipassana. All roads lead to Rome. For that matter, all pranayama practices including nadi shodana, full yoni mudra (with closing of all 7 gates including ears with thumbs), and dynamic chin pump are all excellent prior to vipassana. I do them all prior with great results. |
|
|
|
ymladris
Czech Republic
20 Posts |
Posted - Feb 13 2008 : 2:29:29 PM
|
My understanding is that ayp deep meditation somehow corresponds to shamatha (calm abiding). In emptiness the witness is discovered. Then, when the witness is present/available while the mind performs various activites during the day, this corresponds to vipassana (insight meditation, "clear seeing")
"Shamatha practice initially requires a retreat - a certain distancing from disturbing distractions. Progress in meditaion requires this detachment, which can be gained through sitting meditation. But later with vipasyana practice, direct presence and attention arises, an immediate experience of things. Having reached this stage, we can meditate in any and all situations." (Luminous Mind: The Way of the Buddha)
(more on this from the point of buddhism:
http://books.google.com/books?id=eW...9U#PPA159,M1
)
Please comment on this speculation ;) thanks
-- Mirka |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Feb 14 2008 : 03:46:12 AM
|
Hi All,
quote:
John C. wrote:
As to whether the practice of Buddhist vipassana meditation is suitably practiced after spinal breathing, the answer is: Yes, Sure, absolutely, no reason not to. Anything goes. Spinal breathing can be an excellent and effective preamble to vipassana. All roads lead to Rome. For that matter, all pranayama practices including nadi shodana, full yoni mudra (with closing of all 7 gates including ears with thumbs), and dynamic chin pump are all excellent prior to vipassana. I do them all prior with great results.
Yes.... but if someone thought that vipassana was the same as deep meditation and could be substituted for it, giving the same results over the long term, then the answer is: no it isn't the same and doesn't work in the same way as a substitute.
But I agree with you, that all the add-ons can be added on to vipassana, but then vipassana can take a lot longer to cultivate silence (depending on the person), so it could end up being a pretty long practice settion twice a day. And, something would have been lost by cutting out deep meditation.
Christi |
|
|
|
Lookatmynavelnow
52 Posts |
Posted - Feb 14 2008 : 08:41:35 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Theravadan Buddhists also practice a form of tratak (one pointed concentration), but use the breath as an object instead of a mantra (this practice is called anapanasati).
I still practice vipassana meditation at times, but...
What is then, in your opinion, the benefit of doing vipassana at all?
If the AYP mix is perfect, why bother? |
|
|
|
x.j.
304 Posts |
Posted - Feb 14 2008 : 5:06:34 PM
|
Hi folks,
I am interested to see what Christi says about Buddhist meditation versus the mantra based AYP meditation practice referred to as Deep meditation. I feel kind of simple minded weighing in on this but am not known for tact or restraint around here.
That said, for me, Buddhist Vipassana meditation amounts to just continuing to bring the awareness back to the breath when thoughts stray. I am embarrassingly naive in my Vipassana practice and understanding of Buddhism, I guess, (judging from the sophistication of the above opinions which sound so good that they are undoubtedly true in some intellectual sense, maybe in some ultimate profound sense. I just don't know.)
And I may be equally embarrassingly naive about AYP Deep meditation, because I understood that amounts to bringing the awareness back to the mantra when thoughts stray.
So now you know what a simple minded guy I am!
But from that simple perspective, who is to say whether AYP Deep meditation or Buddhist Vipassana meditation is much different. I thought they were more similar, instead of much different.
For a man of my limitations...All roads lead to Rome.
|
|
|
|
yogani
USA
5241 Posts |
Posted - Feb 14 2008 : 6:20:02 PM
|
Hi John:
There is a fundamental difference between forms of meditation that use breath or mantra as the object. The difference is that when metabolism slows down and breath suspends, breath can no longer be the object of meditation, whereas a mantra can be used far beyond breath suspension deep within the faintest realms of awareness. In that sense, breath meditation will cycle to where metabolism/breath suspends, whereas mantra meditation will cycle to where mind is transcended.
One might argue that suspended metabolism and breath are the same as transcended mind. Maybe, but that is not the experience of mantra meditators, who can keep meditating to deep absorption in pure awareness (samadhi) regardless of the degree of suspension of metabolism and breath.
It seems reasonable to say that vipassana with breath depends on functioning of both body and mind, while deep meditation with mantra depends on mind only.
It is well known that short twice-daily sessions of deep meditation with mantra are more than enough to get the job done (with longer sessions becoming problematic), while vipassana with breath can be practiced for much longer periods without overdoing. This suggests that deep meditation with mantra is a much more potent practice. Hence the need for careful regulation, self-pacing, etc.
I agree that all roads lead to Rome (or home). It is only a matter of the posted speed limit, and how fast we'd like (and can stand) to travel. 
The guru is in you.
|
|
|
|
Eitherway
USA
100 Posts |
Posted - Feb 14 2008 : 6:34:25 PM
|
HI LAMNN,
If you are looking for a set of practices, I can wholeheartedly recommend AYP. You can start by reading the main lessons and undertaking deep meditation for the recommended 2x 20 mins per day. In time, please read lessons, you can begin adding pranayama, etc..... There are a lot of practices but without a good foundation in deep meditation they are not as effective.
The key thing to realize is that there are no shortcuts to the spiritual path. This will most likely take years if not decades for most people to complete (even enlightenment is of a dynamic nature).
The good news is that you will start seeing a positive impact on your daily life much sooner than that, i.e, weeks, months. The positive impact will reinforce your practices enough and this wonderful cycle should continue as long as you keep on practicing. Ofcourse, there will be lulls but having some faith and the positive reinforcement should get you through.
I have tried a version of vipassana (j. Krishnamuriti's) in the past and I did like the practice. However, it did not cultivate enough inner silence (the witness quality) for me to continue. If you do the deep meditation of ayp, you will start uncovering the witness state much sooner in my opinion.
The witness state will allow to you to start seeing emotions/feelings/thoughts as objects. This will improve with time and practices and you will begin to disidentify with the mind. The cool thing is that once you start seeing the abovementioned as objects, you can start choosing between those that hold you back and those that help you on your spiritual path as well as daily life.
So honestly, after a while you begin doing insight meditation as a result of uncovering the witness state.
I don't know if any set of practices can be considered perfect for all but honestly, Ayp has been a Godsend for me. It cultivates inner silence, begins to wake up the ecstatic energies (prana/kundalini) and just flat out has improved my everyday life. I think you could do a dynamic version of vipassana throughout the day to accompany the ayp practices, but as I stated before, this has become automatic for me.
John, sure the ayp deep meditation and buddhist meditation are similar in a sense,but I've found there to be a vast difference in potency. The vipassana can be done for a long period of time whereas 20 minutes 2x per day is all most people can handle. With me, vipassana always felt like I was observing my mind with my mind, i.e, it was hard to disidentify with the mind. This was the same early on with ayp, but somewhere along the way (1year), enough inner silence has been uncovered to somewhat change the identity.
All roads do eventually lead to Rome but the nature of the roads available does differ i.e, faster, safer, less bumpy, etc....., Surely, ayp won't be the method for all, but Yogani has really organized and presented it in such a clear, concise, cultural baggage free way, that it should work for the majority of seekers (in my opinion ofcourse). |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Feb 15 2008 : 07:17:22 AM
|
Hi all,
O.K. first off... we seem to have a terminology problem going on here. This is caused by the fact that different teachers teach in different ways, and use different terms. It seems that one thing we are not discussing here is Burmese vipassana, as made popular by S.N. Goenka. That is the body sweeping one....
So that leaves two more meditation techniques which are called vipassana meditation. One is a contemplation of the nature of the body and the mind as impermanent, unsatisfactory and not-self. The other is a form of concentration on the breath. These are both called "vipassana" by different teachers. Technically the latter should be called "anapanasati", but then, things are called what people call them.
Sometimes (just to add to the confusion), the two meditations are combined, so people will concentrate on the breath whilst contemplating all phenomena as essentially having those three basic characteristics. Confused? It's not really that complicated when you do it... it's a bit like riding a bicycle.
But we are discussing (if we are discussing the combination form of vipassana) a meditation approach which combines the cultivation of the witness, the cultivation of silence and self-inquiry, all at the same time, which could be why folks are getting confused. (There was another thread recently about how vipassana fits into AYP self-inquiry).
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Theravadan Buddhists also practice a form of tratak (one pointed concentration), but use the breath as an object instead of a mantra (this practice is called anapanasati).
I still practice vipassana meditation at times, but...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAMNN wrote:
What is then, in your opinion, the benefit of doing vipassana at all?
If the AYP mix is perfect, why bother?
Hi LAMNN,
I didn't say that the AYP mix was perfect (just for the record I have never said that  ). What I did say was that I still practice vipassana in addition to AYP, but that I was finding increasingly that it was something that happened automatically with the rise of the witness. What I meant by this is that increasingly there is less difference between on-cushion, and off-cushion awareness. The awareness of the breath, the silence and the contemplation of the phenomenal world (self-inquiry) go on in daily life much more automatically.
quote:
And I may be equally embarrassingly naive about AYP Deep meditation, because I understood that amounts to bringing the awareness back to the mantra when thoughts stray.
Hi John,
Yes, the AYP technique of gently bringing the mind back to the meditation object (mantra) every time it strays, is the same as the vipassana technique of gently bringing the mind back to the breath.
quote:
The difference is that when metabolism slows down and breath suspends, breath can no longer be the object of meditation, whereas a mantra can be used far beyond breath suspension deep within the faintest realms of awareness. In that sense, breath meditation will cycle to where metabolism/breath suspends, whereas mantra meditation will cycle to where mind is transcended.
Hi Yogani,
I don't get much natural breath suspension, so I don't know much about these things. What I do know is that many people who practice breath awareness meditations (like vipassana) get around this problem by changing the object of awareness as they go. In classical (Theravada) Buddhism the object of awareness is gradually refined as the meditator is refined. This is the order :
1. breath
2. body
3. mental objects (thoughts and feelings)
4. consciousness.
I guess this is partly true for AYP too, as there are states of samadhi where there is no longer any awareness of the mantra, as this is still essentially a mental object. We are starting at no.3 and once we transcend the mind, we are into no.4 in the Buddha's scheme of things, no?
Actually I like my vipassana practice, and I do it in addition to the AYP practices, because I think it adds something. I think something is added by simply bringing the awareness to the breath for a period of time each day, because of the connection between the breath and prana in the body. It is also a nice way to practice self-inquiry for a period of time every day without all the distractions of normal life.
Christi
|
|
|
|
Katrine
Norway
1813 Posts |
Posted - Feb 15 2008 : 09:48:40 AM
|
quote:
1. breath
2. body
3. mental objects (thoughts and feelings)
4. consciousness
Oh!
Thank you Christi
I never pinned it down like that, but I was saying to myself () before reading your discription in the previous post: I call this "landing in the moment".
When landing in the moment.....noone is doing vipassana. And it most certainly doesn't feel like a "practise". Now is a wonderous place to be. Landing in the moment is always spontanious. Not that I cannot decide to "stop"....but if i decide to stop...then it is more like "looking at space"...rather than landing in it. Landing in it is melting in it. It is the feeling of....surrender....the willingness to accept that I will never be enlightened.
It took many years of practise (deep meditation and self-inquiry) to be willing to not reach that goal.....since it was all that mattered to me. Yet - even if I will never be enlightened - the surrender is the sweetest of moments. Always. As such..it is always enough...this moment
I find that in deep meditation the mantra has a way of "repeating itself"....it is as if the very resonance of it ...is the bypassing of the meditator. By simple entrainment. When a guitar string is plucked....then another guitar (the same string) in the same room will start to resonate...unplucked by any finger. The very sound of the mantrastring corresponds to .....an unknowable depth. And it is the ressonance - not the meditator - that makes it possible to dive deep. It is a mystery...it is.
Without the deep meditation....self-inquiry and vipassana (i just call it "paying attention") could not be effective - in my case at least. Since it is always the brilliant darkness of the silence that makes things visible......
"Landing in the moment"....the surrender...is like surrendering into "darkness" (unknown). And....paradoxically....right here is the Shine.
I will never, ever understand it.
But with such lovingness present....who cares?
|
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Feb 19 2008 : 07:21:20 AM
|
Hi Katrine,
quote:
but I was saying to myself ( )
Who’s talking to who? How many of you are there in there? 
LOL.... sorry, couldn’t resist that one!
quote:
1. breath
2. body
3. mental objects (thoughts and feelings)
4. consciousness
Oh!
Thank you Christi
I never pinned it down like that,
Don’t thank me... thank the Buddha.
It comes straight from his 4 stages of mindfullness teaching. (He was never known for giving his teachings imaginative titles.) But it is interesting (and not too surprising) that the Buddha had already worked out the limitations built into the system with vipassana, that Yogani points out above. Great minds think alike....
It is beautiful to see the areas where different paths meet.
quote:
vipassana (i just call it "paying attention")
Yes, that’s all vipassana is, just paying attention. Was it Krishnamurti who said that knowing how to listen was the highest form of art? Of course he was talking about listening to every movement of the mind.
Christi |
|
|
|
rps
USA
2 Posts |
Posted - Feb 23 2008 : 12:28:25 AM
|
I've been practicing AYP for a month or so, and I have done a 10 day Goenka-style retreat (the kind where you scan your body for sensation). I would say that they are NOT the same.
First of all, I should clarify that I'm talking about Goenka's body-scanning version of vipassana. You end up feeling these vibrations all over. Breathing is optional. I had never heard of observation of breath being described as vipassana, though Goenka has you do that as a warm-up.
AYP concentrates the mind much more quickly than vipassana does. Goenka admits this in his discourses, but he claims that the use of a mantra only calms the surface level of the mind, leaving all sorts of garbage below the surface, and that the lower levels of the mind can only be reached through observation of physical sensation.
I don't know if this is true or not, but I quickly found that you can't go that deep with vipassana outside of the retreat environment anyway, even if you do 2 hours/day as Goenka recommends (Goenka also warns you that this will happen in the last discourse). So I prefer AYP as a daily practice, because it's quicker. On the other hand, I can't imagine doing AYP for 10 hours a day without having my head explode, and I find it hard to imagine getting the mind as deeply concentrated in a cumulative hour a day doing AYP as it did on the retreat (of course, I'm still a beginner at AYP - and vipassana, for that matter).
The philosophy behind it is also different. AYP is full of talk about bliss, etc, while vipassana is Buddhist and is focused more on developing equanimity and non-attachment. Blissful experiences are downplayed.
Personally, I don't have an opinion about which one is better, but AYP seems more practical for a householder, and I've always had a problem with Buddhist philosophy anyway. |
|
|
|
Nirodha
New Zealand
86 Posts |
Posted - Feb 27 2008 : 5:01:38 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by yogani
There is a fundamental difference between forms of meditation that use breath or mantra as the object. The difference is that when metabolism slows down and breath suspends, breath can no longer be the object of meditation, whereas a mantra can be used far beyond breath suspension deep within the faintest realms of awareness. In that sense, breath meditation will cycle to where metabolism/breath suspends, whereas mantra meditation will cycle to where mind is transcended.
One might argue that suspended metabolism and breath are the same as transcended mind. Maybe, but that is not the experience of mantra meditators, who can keep meditating to deep absorption in pure awareness (samadhi) regardless of the degree of suspension of metabolism and breath.
It seems reasonable to say that vipassana with breath depends on functioning of both body and mind, while deep meditation with mantra depends on mind only.
The above reflects a fundamental error in the way Anapannasati (breath meditation) is understood and taught. I'm not saying yogani is at fault here, as a lot of seemingly experienced Buddhist teachers perpetuate these errors; which in turn leads everyone to believe what is being repeated.
If one examines the way Anapannasati was originally taught, as specified by the Buddha in the Anapannasati Sutta (MN 118), one will quickly realize that focusing on the breath only serves an entry point into this type of meditation. And, that in later stages, the mind is the object of meditation.
Please review the below excerpt from the Anapannasati Sutta (MN 118):
"There is the case where an aspirant, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding one's legs crosswise, holding one's body erect, and setting awareness to the fore. Always mindful, one breathes in; mindful one breathes out.
"(1) Breathing in long, one discerns that one is breathing in long; or breathing out long, one discerns that one is breathing out long.
(2) Or breathing in short, one discerns that one is breathing in short; or breathing out short, one discerns that one is breathing out short.
(3) One trains oneself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body, and to breathe out sensitive to the entire body.
(4) One trains oneself to breathe in calming bodily agitation (the breath), and to breathe out calming bodily agitation.
"(5) One trains oneself to breathe in sensitive to bliss (piiti), and to breathe out sensitive to ecstasy.
(6) One trains oneself to breathe in sensitive to joy (sukha), and to breathe out sensitive to joy.
(7) One trains oneself to breathe in sensitive to mental agitation (feeling and perception), and to breathe out sensitive to mental agitation.
(8) One trains oneself to breathe in calming mental agitation, and to breathe out calming mental agitation.
"(9) One trains oneself to breathe in sensitive to the mind, and to breathe out sensitive to the mind.
(10) One trains oneself to breathe in satisfying the mind, and to breathe out satisfying the mind.
(11) One trains oneself to breathe in steadying the mind, and to breathe out steadying the mind.
(12) One trains oneself to breathe in releasing the mind, and to breathe out releasing the mind.
"(13) One trains oneself to breathe in (mindful of) inconstancy, and to breathe out focusing on inconstancy.
(14) One trains oneself to breathe in mindful of dispassion [literally, fading], and to breathe out mindful of dispassion.
(15) One trains oneself to breathe in mindful of cessation, and to breathe out focusing on cessation (emptiness).
(16) One trains oneself to breathe in focusing on relinquishment, and to breathe out focusing on relinquishment.
Unfortunately, the Buddha was rather terse with his instructions - he probably did so as most of his ancient disciples seem to have already been skilled contemplatives by the time they encountered him. I think this leads to a lot of misunderstanding among modern-day aspirants, as they repeatedly get told to always focus on the breath - regardless of what else happens during Anapannasati. Where as the ancient contemplatives would have already known that once the Samadhi-Nimitta (meditative absorption sign) had arisen, the breath can be abandoned for it. There are a few Buddhist meditation teachers out there that understand and teach this. Unfortunately, they are few and far from being the norm.
Please review the below excerpt from the Satipatthanasamyutta (SN 8):
"Suppose, contemplatives, a wise, competent and skillful cook were to present a king or royal minister with various kinds of curries: sour, butter, pungent, sweet, sharp, mild, salty and bland.
"That wise, competent and skillful cook observes the sign of her master's preferences. 'Today this curry pleased my master...or she spoke in praise of the mild one.'
"That wise, competent and skillful cook gains gifts of clothing, wages, and bonuses. For what reason? Because, that wise, competent and skillful cook observes the sign (nimitta) of her master's preferences.
"So too, contemplatives, here some wise, competent, skillful monk dwells contemplating the physical body, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure with respect to the world. While he dwells contemplating the physical body, his mind becomes absorbed (jhana), his corruptions (nivarana) are abandoned, he observes the sign (samadhi-nimitta). He dwells contemplating sensations (vedana)... perception (sañña)... mental states (sañkhara)... cognition (viññana)... ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure with respect to the world. While he dwells contemplating phenomena, his mind becomes absorbed (jhana), his corruptions (nivarana) are abandoned he observes the sign (samadhi-nimitta)" of absorption (jhana) (1).
"That wise, competent and skillful contemplative gains the joyful home of the way (Di.t.thadhammasukhavihaaraa), he gains mindfulness (sati) and clear comprehension. For what reason? Because contemplatives, that wise, competent and skillful contemplative observes the sign (samadhi-nimitta) of his own mind."
Kind regards
|
Edited by - Nirodha on Mar 10 2008 01:32:23 AM |
|
|
|
x.j.
304 Posts |
Posted - Feb 27 2008 : 7:04:39 PM
|
I loved that message Nirodha. Thank you very much.
John |
|
|
|
Nirodha
New Zealand
86 Posts |
Posted - Feb 27 2008 : 11:02:16 PM
|
| Sure, John. I'm glad you found it useful. :) |
|
|
|
powerhawk
USA
8 Posts |
Posted - Dec 22 2008 : 10:59:12 AM
|
Bumping an old thread... does anyone have a comment on what is said here:
Mantra Practice vs. Mindfulness
by Shinzen Young
Many people in the West get their first exposure to meditation through what is know as TM or Transcendental Meditation. TM is essentially the classic mantra practice of India presented in a contemporary format, easily accessible to Westerners. Mindfulness meditation is another practice which is growing in popularity in Europe and North America. It is also known as Insight Meditation or Vipassana. As a teacher of Vipassana meditation, I am frequently asked about the relationship between mantra practice and mindfulness.
On the surface they would seem to be very different, perhaps even antithetical. Typically in TM one leans back against a wall, withdraws from the phenomenal world and repeats a mantra to oneself for perhaps twenty minutes. It's relatively easy and usually brings immediate calming effects. In mindfulness practice one sits bolt upright with intense alertness, attending to the flow of ordinary experience. This usually means focusing on rather banal and sometimes uncomfortable phenomena such as itches, sounds, thought patterns, pains, etc. It would almost seem that the mantra practice "takes you out" while the mindfulness practice "brings you down." (However, beneath the surface differences, these two practices have a commonality that can easily go unrecognized.)
For one thing, both practices build calm and concentration, although in different ways. In mantra practice, one relaxes, withdraws and lets the rhythmic sounds of a mantra replace the chaotic sounds of ones internal conversations. This develops concentration, since internal talk is the major source of distraction in daily life. In mindfulness practice, each moment of ordinary experience is "penetrated" with awareness. The awareness literally soaks into the itches and sounds and thoughts like water into a sponge. This in effect represents a kind of silent merging or samadhi with each phenomenon as it arises in the six senses - hearing, seeing, smelling, tasting, the feeling body and the thinking mind. Thus in mindfulness practice, though ones attention may shift rapidly through a sequence of diverse phenomena, one experiences samadhi with each in turn. The net effect is the same as having maintained samadhi on a single object (such as a mantra) for the same length of time. In Pali, the classical language of early Buddhism, this is technically referred to as khanika samadhi or "sequential momentary deep concentration."
Most people find this much harder to do than the simple mantra practice; so why bother? The answer to that question has many sides to it. I will only discuss one here. But before I can do that, we need to first clarify an even deeper way in which mantra and mindfulness are related. Because mantra is a repetitive rhythm, it sets up periodic waves or vibrations in ones consciousness. Let me try to explain this with a somewhat crude metaphor. You are probably familiar with hand-held electrical vibrators that are used for massage. Imagine the effect of holding such a vibrator in contact with the surface of a pool of water. It would impart very regular pleasing patterns of ripples throughout the water. Focusing on those patterns of ripples could easily take you into a state of relaxation. This is one facet of how mantra works. Its repetitive nature sets up rhythmic ripples throughout the meditator's whole consciousness. The meditator then focuses on the regularity of those ripples and rides them into deeper and deeper levels of relaxation, concentration and integration.
In mindfulness practice one focuses on a sequence of "material objects" but because of the penetrating way one focuses, those objects sometimes break up as soon as they arise. Break up into what? Pleasing ripples and vibrations! Buddhists call this aniccha or "impermanence." The mindfulness meditator can then ride these ripples into deeper and deeper states of peace and fulfillment just as the mantra meditator does. In advanced stages mindfulness meditation in essence turns each ordinary experience into a mantra. To extend the metaphor of the pool of water, in fully developed mindfulness practice, there is no mechanical vibrator imposing regularity. Rather, drops of rainwater (thoughts, feelings, sounds, etc.) incessantly impinge on the pool, but they immediately dissolve into pleasing, relaxing patterns of energy.
Should we then consider mindfulness to be a better form of meditation than mantra? Not at all! Such simple comparisons between meditation techniques are not appropriate. Each way of meditating has its own characteristic strong points and weak points. And each meditator has his or her needs and proclivities. The mindfulness practice can be difficult if not downright painful, especially at the beginning. By way of compensation it equips the meditator with a systematic procedure that will transform any ordinary experience of daily life into a profound contact with ones spiritual source. Mantra practice is easy to start with and has (at least theoretically) the potential to influence daily life.
|
|
|
|
Anthem
1608 Posts |
Posted - Dec 22 2008 : 12:57:21 PM
|
Hi powerhawk and welcome to the AYP forums.
It's a good article and helps spread more insight into the two types of meditation. The most interesting phenomena about the difference between the two types of meditation from my perspective is that most people who meditate with a mantra reach the maximum amount of change they can tolerate after approximately 20 minutes of practice, whereas those who use mindfulness seem to be able to go for much longer, hours sometimes. Also, mindfulness meditators seem to hop up from meditation quickly with no ill effects, where as mantra meditators need to rest for at least 5 minutes after practice which illustrates to me either an increased potency of the latter and/ or a more on-going effect of the latter.
quote:
It would almost seem that the mantra practice "takes you out" while the mindfulness practice "brings you down."
Does mantra meditation take you out? Well maybe out of normal mental thinking patterns and more quickly into touch with pure-being (the infinite, nothingness, etc.) particularly for newer practitioners. Mindfulness, once the ability to differentiate between thoughts and being is achieved, would be a very effective practice, but I wonder if most beginners don't simply go from thought to thought as they would in their daily lives?
quote:
In mindfulness practice, each moment of ordinary experience is "penetrated" with awareness.
I like this perspective, but I can say that with twice daily mantra practice over the last 4 years, I am much more present than ever as my mind has been repeatedly trained to let go of all arising allowing me to be much more fully present with the experience of life. The information gleaned from observation is far more plentiful now for me than it once was, suggesting a greater penetration of awareness into each moment of "ordinary experience".
Interesting stuff and good to hash out from different perspectives, thanks for posting.
|
|
|
|
Jo-self
USA
225 Posts |
Posted - Dec 22 2008 : 2:03:59 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by powerhawk
Bumping an old thread... does anyone have a comment on what is said here:
Mantra Practice vs. Mindfulness
by Shinzen Young
Many people in the West get their first exposure to meditation through what is know as TM or Transcendental Meditation. TM is essentially the classic mantra practice of India presented in a contemporary format, easily accessible to Westerners. ...
Well, that right there is incorrect. TM is not classic Japa practice. There is a subtle difference. In fact, when TM practice became more of a norm, other schools suddenly changed their practices, gone where the reference to the "monkey" that was hard to control, etc. They became easy and all that. I saw this even in the mindfulness 'camp'.
Do they all lead to the same goal? That remains to be proven. You can build a bridge to span a river in many ways. Some will break.
- jo-self
|
|
|
|
mimirom
Czech Republic
368 Posts |
Posted - Dec 29 2008 : 06:39:41 AM
|
Hi everyone,
I've been practicing vipassana for almost three years on a daily basis + I attended several intensive retreats, three days up to one month. Recently I'm trying to understand DEEP meditation a learn how to practice it well. So far it's very interesting.
One thing I love about vipassana is the retreat. It is precisely that thing everyone here says you cannot do with mantra meditation. I mean to meditate non-stop for days and weeks. Yes, it will be perhaps hard or even painful, especially the first three or four days, but the teacher will urge you strongly not to stop trying, and that helps a lot - they've got their strategies, and in my opinion it's definitely worth undergoing.
Because: In mindfulness practice one does not exclude anything from the field of observation, as it has been mentioned many times. After one week of constant uninterrupted (or relatively uninterrupted) mindfulness/concentration, amazing things begin to happen. After two or three weeks of tireless penetrative observation, your world will literally begin to fall apart in front of your eyes. It's making one shocking discovery about the nature of reality after the other. (Not that this wouldn't be the case with DM, I believe, but on a very different rate.) For the curious mind, this is extremely interesting and exciting. After a couple weeks of nearly-non-stop meditation one ends up in an ongoing PROFOUNDLY altered state of consciousness. Extrasensory channels open up to you to deliver new and essential information about reality. It is like activating ones brain to receive additional frequencies, so one can experientially travel through subtler realms of the unconscious.
It is a kick-trip. Inspiring, enlivening, revealing... And of course, it's a hard job at times.
metta,
Roman
P.s.: I mean the Burmese style vipassana (Mahasi Sayadaw tradition), with people moving around the med. center sloooooower than snails. |
Edited by - mimirom on Dec 29 2008 8:01:53 PM |
|
|
|
AYPforum
351 Posts |
Posted - Dec 30 2008 : 11:35:06 AM
|
| Moderator note: Topic moved for better placement |
|
|
|
harmony
Hong Kong
18 Posts |
Posted - Jan 26 2012 : 10:34:10 AM
|
I'd like to know if Goenka's Vipassana has any equivalent of Samyama in their process.
I understand Samyama is a sanskirt term, and wondering if there is an equivalent practice in Buddhism. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Deep medtiation = vipassana?
