|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
mimirom
Czech Republic
368 Posts |
 Posted - Nov 11 2008 : 12:05:02 PM
|
Hi fellow yogis & yoginis,
in the AYP system we do samatha (samadhi) meditation (called here deep meditation), right? But how about the other one of the two basic meditation types we know - mindfulness, or vipassana meditation?
We know from the Buddha that we need to skillfully combine both concentration and mindfulness, if we are about to attain enlightenment.
How come I do not hear about mindfulness meditation in AYP or other writings on yoga?
Mettá,
Roman |
|
|
AYPforum
351 Posts |
Posted - Nov 11 2008 : 12:07:07 PM
|
| Moderator note: Topic moved for better placement |
 |
|
|
tadeas
Czech Republic
314 Posts |
Posted - Nov 11 2008 : 1:54:20 PM
|
Hi, I'll be the first to respond again :)
Yoga and Buddhism have a little different conceptualizations of the process of spiritual transformation and the practices differ, too.
As far as I know, samatha meditation is a broader category than the specific practice of deep meditation (7th limb of yoga). It would probably be more correct to say that samatha is concentration (6th limb of yoga). Deep meditation is a flow of attention inwards and it's a more subtle process than just concentration.
After we feel some inner silence, it's possible to take up the practice of samyama (concentration + meditation + samadhi). In my experience this quickens the process of being able to enter various states of absorption (samadhi, jhanas) so in a way, that could also be counted as samatha. But I don't think this matters much and it's more of an intellectual diversion :)
There's another practice that is naturally practiced when inner silence is present (and sometimes before that). This is self-inquiry. It has many levels to it and in a certain stage of development it's simmilar to the practice of samyama. For me vipassana could be likened to samyama + self-inquiry.
As far as mindfulness/presence in daily living is concerned, there's no need to worry about that, because we are as mindful as our obstructions (in the nervous system) allow. So it's best to just carry on the practice :)
I found this thing on wikipedia (under "samatha"):
"The ways these two aspects of meditation are practiced is that one begins with the practice of shamatha; on the basis of that, it becomes possible to practice vipashyana or lhagthong. Through one's practrice of vipashyana being based on and carried on in the midst of shamatha, one eventually ends up practicing a unification of shamatha and vipashyana. The unification leads to a very clear and direct experience of the nature of all things. This brings one very close to what is called the absolute truth."
- Pönlop Rinpoche
In AYP terms, it would be something like this: The practice of deep meditation leads to the emergence of the witness (inner silence). On the basis of that it becomes possible to practice samyama and relational (=with inner silence present) self-inquiry. In time, the practices lead to understanding of identified perception, which creates duality, and to unification of all experience to be seen as That.
Hope that helps, enjoy and see you around :) |
|
|
|
jillatay
USA
206 Posts |
Posted - Nov 11 2008 : 8:31:54 PM
|
One thing most people don't know including Buddhists is this splitting of the Dhamma into two so called methods. There is much controversy on this topic being discussed in just the last few years. Mostly because of translation errors and political pressure. The split came almost immediately after Buddha's death when some wanted to do a more ascetic routine and some wanted a more ecstatic way (commonly known as dry vs. wet method) The split has been emphasized even more in recent times because when Europeans went east to study the ancients, they were loathe to explore the more woo woo side of the teachings. No one wanted to be laughed at for believing in magic nor for just contemplating their navels. 
In reality both jhana and vipassana are two sides of the same coin. You can't have one without the other though one might predominate in one person over another but eventually it all comes together with skill. Just like ecstatic conductivity and inner silence.
http://www.bswa.org/PDF/A_History_o...dfulness.pdf Here is a link about the history if you care to read it by Bhikkhu Sujato.
Love to all,
Jill |
|
|
|
cosmic_troll
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - Nov 12 2008 : 01:11:05 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by mimirom
How come I do not hear about mindfulness meditation in AYP or other writings on yoga?
Hi Roman,
I don't know the answer to your question. However, I tend to think that with AYP, mindfulness is probably seen as an effect of deep meditation. Hence the lack of emphasis on it as a practice. I find that the rise of inner silence (from deep meditation) does make mindfulness occur naturally and spontaneously without much effort.
You may find that some forumites here do practice mindfulness outside of their AYP practices. The two practices compliment each other beautifully.
As for why it's not included in AYP writings, only Yogani can answer that...
Peace 
cosmic |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Nov 12 2008 : 8:05:49 PM
|
| Yes the subject has been brought up many times but maybe not by that name, and it's scattered around among a lot of other subjects. |
|
|
|
mimirom
Czech Republic
368 Posts |
Posted - Nov 17 2008 : 6:47:55 PM
|
Hello all !
Tadeas, you again! Thanks for sharing your knowledge, it brings some clarity into the issue. And thanks for your comments on the split, Jillatay, it's funny how theravadan monks from Burma often raise a finger when talking about samatha.
I'm one of those you are mentioning, Cosmic.. Mindfulness practice is at the very core of my yoga. I do vipassana for about three years now and I certainly love it, because I love the moments of insight...
Over time, yoga practices (asana, pranayama, spinal breathing pranayama,tantra) became more and more important to me and so I recently face the issue how to skillfully, intelligently and efficiently incorporate vipassana meditation practice into that. I'm simply looking for a broad enough perspective to see all those practices as one integrated whole.
Maybe i could briefly describe how a classic vipassana retreat in the Mahasi Sayadaw tradition actually looks like. Some of you might help me to relate its components to AYP practices.
The idea is to practice meditation non-stop. Traditionally we start with two or three days of what we call SAMATHA (concentration). That means that we focus exclusively on ONE meditation object (the sensations of the rising and falling of the abdominal wall as we breathe in sitting practice, or the perception of the movement of the foot as we walk). Whenever we find ourselves to be off the object, we notice that fact and go back to it. (This seems to be very similar to mantra meditation, but i guess there is some difference.) Gradually the minds clarity and calm raises. Usually after two or three days people arrive at a point, where their mind is fully occupied (or almost) by the one exclusive object and the mind does not want to leave it anymore and wander. This is associated with very pleasurable states and yogis often get attached to it. (Is this some type of samadhi?) This is then used as a base for starting vipassana.
In the following days we gradually introduce more and more objects, while preserving high concentration, with the goal to achieve a state of choiceless awareness. (That means that we observe/witness whatever object manifests in the foreground of our awareness, without actually choosing it. This is a very interesting altered state of consciousness, which is not easy to achieve. I think it is called Khanika Samadhi.) When a yogi feels the need for more concentration/penetrative awareness, he or she goes back to samatha for some time and then returns to witnessing again.
High concentration causes then a huge influx of unconscious material into consciousness. The important moment then is that we do not act on whatever material surfaces into consciousness (emotions, thoughts, bliss, etc.) but only witness. So we allow rapid purification without creating new karma.
Simultaneously with this we also progressively uncover entirely new dimensions of all the mental and physical phenomena we have previously known from our life. (movement, sight, thinking, intending...) This leads to truly amazing insights - we gradually realize that reality is actually a bit different... (It is much like in the Matrix movie.)
And finally there is another part to the practice, usually called "daily activities". That's the part where we attempt to bring mindfulness to everything we do. It starts with eating, toilet, changing clothes, etc.. The goal is to never interrupt mindfulness even if not formally meditating.
mettá,
Roman
|
Edited by - mimirom on Nov 18 2008 5:40:14 PM |
|
|
|
Sparkle
Ireland
1457 Posts |
Posted - Nov 18 2008 : 08:23:46 AM
|
Hi Roman and all
Great thread, have learned a lot from it.
I have never done a formal vispassana retreat or practiced it as a separate practice. The main formal practices I have done are Soto Zen and Thich Nhat Hanh Zen practices.
The Thich Nhat Hanh practices have vispasanna within it the way one sits with whatever comes and allows the breath and the stillness to dissolve whatever comes.
It is a system that does not do anywhere near the amount of meditation that the Vispassana system does. It basically has two meditations per day, the same as AYP and the rest of the day is the practice of mindfulness. It is also strong on self enquiry with various tools and methods for maximising the harmonious and peaceful living of a community(sangha).
As you will know the three jewals of Buddhism are the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha.
For Thich Nhat Hanh the Buddha aspect would be regarded as "ones true nature" or whatever term you want to put on that. In AYP it would be "inner silence"
My understanding of the Dharma is "expressions of truth". A Dharma teacher would be one who has reached the stage of understanding this truth and speaking out of this place.
Thich Nhat Hanh says the true Dharma is in each breath we take, when taken with awareness or mindfulness.
To me we are all Dharma teachers, some more adept at it than others. The process of self-inquiry is what will reveal the Dharma within us, processes such as "the Work" by Byron Katie and NVC (non-violent communication) combined with inner silence can speed up the revelation of the Dharma within considerably in my opinion.
The Sangha (community) is regarded as key in Buddhism. It is what is happening here in this forum. This community supports and nourishes the process of self awareness within the community, this is the function of a sangha. There is no doubt that this forum (community) has and continues to contribute significantly to people's awareness.
I have simply replaced the mindfulness meditation with AYP meditation and the rest remains the same i.e. mindfulness throughout the day.
I think the process of vispassana then naturally occurs during the day as issues arise we can do self-inquiry with them but ultimately when they can be experienced as energy patterns within us and allowed to disolve in their own time with inner silence and awareness or mindfulness, I think this amounts to the same thing as vispassana.
The reason I have replaced mindfulness meditation with AYP meditation is that I personally find is more efficient and more enjoyable to practice. The second, more enjoyable, is very important for me, as I find the discipline of twice daily meditations much more accessable with AYP than with mindfulness meditation.
Please feel free to correct anything I have said, as I tend to adopt my own interpretations of things rather than studying other people's interpretations.
 |
|
|
|
mimirom
Czech Republic
368 Posts |
Posted - Nov 27 2008 : 08:40:40 AM
|
Hi everyone,
further questions and specifications on the issue arise in my mind.
Thanks Sparkle, the triple gem perspective seems to give a fairly firm viewpoint. (Yes, fairly firm... )
A full-time vipassana retreat is really a process that is different to the daily self-paced practice. (But of course it's complementary.) The intensive retreat is more like "scuba diving" into the subtler realms of consciousness and people usually do it once or twice a year during holidays, just like real scuba diving. People can go very deep within short periods of time in the safe and protected environment of a meditation center, where they really don't have to care about anything but exploring the depths of the unconscious and where they receive instant guidance whenever they need it. A well-balanced, long-term daily practice will certainly have different proportions.
Two issues still support my distrust in practicing solely deep meditation:
I've learned to meditate from two teachers, both of which are venerable monks in the theravadan buddhist tradition. Both of them repeatedly warned us not to rely solely on concentration practice. (And I still consider the AYP deep med. to be concentration practice, since there is selective focus on a single object with the exclusion of everything else.) Theravadan monks consider it dangerous to practice only concentration, because it is a fact (and I know it from my own experience) that yogis practicing solely concentration develop a very strong attachment to the blissful states achieved through it (absorption, dhyána or jhana in Pali) and they are later hardly able to give them up, even for a higher purpose . And this is a big problem, since the ultimate goal of all spiritual aspiration and practice is the cessation of all suffering, the final nondual realization, and no concentration practice can take us there, according to the Buddha. The final steps to complete liberation are achieved only by mindfulness (insight, njána in Pali). What the monks say than is that if we proceed with concentration practice too far, while ignoring insight practice, sooner or later we'll get stuck somewhere in the middle of our path, with rather slim chances to get things fixed.
The other issue is that I miss the direct experience of disidentification, which occurs in mindfulness practice, but can't occur if the mind is absorbed in one single object. (At least as far as I know. I'm not really much experienced in concentration.) According to guys such as C.G.Jung or K.Wilber, the actual moment of making a step toward human liberation is the moment of disidentification of the self with one object, followed by a new identification with the next higher object. Or in a 1st person perspective, what's been a subject becomes an object of the next higher subject. This typically happens with pain in mindfulness practice, to give an example. If we begin to feel pain in our legs while meditating vipassana, we initially just notice it as one of many objects of our mind. Then, as the pain grows we begin to be gradually obsessed with it and finally, when the intensity of it reaches a certain point we end up being completely identified with it. Pain is all there is. It is everywhere, it drives us crazy and it seems to be eternal. The self is fully identified with it. Later, at a certain point (if we are lucky meditators), we recognize that the pain is just a bunch of physical and mental processes and that this is not really what we are. We recognize that there is something bigger in the background that we can identify with and that the pain is merely an object of this next "something". (It is extremely surprising that the strong pain actually stops to be "painful" at this moment. It's still there, but it does not hurt anymore. I believe it's thanks to the precise insight into the complex nature of pain. Later on pain might cease to occur altogether in sitting, simply two hours in siddhasana without any pain. That's what happened to me.) That's the crucial shift towards liberation. This happens again and again in mindfulness practice, and it applies to everything we experience. Either not pleasurable or pleasurable or neutral - pain, thoughts, feelings, emotion, sensual input, etc. When the mind is absorbed in a single object, this just can't happen.
Would appreciate your thoughts, fellow yogis and yoginis.
mettá,
Roman
|
Edited by - mimirom on Nov 28 2008 09:00:23 AM |
|
|
|
YogaIsLife
641 Posts |
Posted - Nov 27 2008 : 09:13:09 AM
|
Hi Roman and all.
Great thread, been enjoying reading it.
quote:
Roman: What the monks say than is that if we proceed with concentration practice too far, while ignoring insight practice, sooner or later we'll get stuck somewhere in the middle of our path, with rather slim chances to get things fixed.
This is interesting. From my viewpoint, it seems this is not a concern in AYP. I am not really sure what you mean with "insight practice" (is it a formal sitting practice of mindfullness or something you do during the day? Could you specify please?). As I see it, in AYP, cencentration during meditation allows us to identify more and more with inner silence, the "background of everything". The aim is not to stick to the mantra but to repeatedly lose it and come back t it. According to some more advanced, you eventually reach a state of no objects, the same state described by you as desirable. In that sense AYP mantra meditation would not be an impediment (but rather an aid) to reaching that state but an aid. I am not sure about this so any comments are appreciated. The "insight practice" that you name, if that means mindfullness, can then be done during all of our moments - just being aware of everything taht arises in us. With the witness present that would automatically have a transformative touch effect.
quote:
This typically happens with pain in mindfulness practice, to give an example. If we begin to feel pain in our legs while meditating vipassana, we initially just notice it as one of many object of our mind. Then, as the pain grows we begin to be gradually obsessed with it and finally, when the intensity of it reaches a certain point we end up being completely identified with it. Pain is all there is. It is everywhere, it drives us crazy and it seems to be eternal. The self is fully identified with it. Later, at a certain point (if we are lucky meditators), we recognize that the pain is just a bunch of physical and mental processes and that this is not really what we are. We recognize that there is something bigger in the background that we can identify with and that the pain is merely an object of this next "something". That's the crucial shift towards liberation. This happens again and again in mindfulness practice, and it applies to everything we experience.
This again sounds different from AYP deep meditation. If you have a pain or disconfort you don't focus on it but return to the mantra. If the pain is indeed too strong to be ignored than you can rest in it for a while but, what will happen according to Yogani and which is quite the opposite of what you describe, is that pain will dissolve, not increase towards infinity. Then you come easily back to the mantra.
The theory of AYP makes sense to me and from the effects I've seen so far in almost 8 months of meditation it holds true. But you raise an interesting point concerning concentration as an obstacle to liberation. But I believe the crucial point is that in AYP deep meditation the aim is to return to the mantra (that you will keep losing), not to rigidly fixate on it. It is in the process of losing the mantra (that gap between mantra and thoughts) that we touch the nothingness. At least this is how it is described and I see it but any comments are most welcome! |
|
|
|
mimirom
Czech Republic
368 Posts |
Posted - Nov 27 2008 : 6:58:37 PM
|
| By insight practice I mean formal sitting and walking practice of insight meditation (vipassana/mindfulness). It is "observing and noting of mental and physical phenomena, as they occur, in their true nature". ("In their true nature" here actually means without thinking.) |
Edited by - mimirom on Nov 28 2008 08:15:21 AM |
|
|
|
tadeas
Czech Republic
314 Posts |
Posted - Nov 27 2008 : 10:11:57 PM
|
The AYP deep meditation is not merely concentration. Concentration is present only in the first phase of picking up the mantra or returning to it. Then we let go. So a session of deep meditation can look like this: you sit down, pick up the mantra once and then be completely absorbed for 20 minutes. The mantra's vibration going on effortelssly at a very suble level by itself for the whole period. No thoughts. Or maybe sometimes not even the mantra. Would that be concentration? I don't think so.
As for the description of pain, etc. in meditation//insight practice. That's a different approach from AYP. In AYP, we go as deep as we can and dissolve the obstructions from the deepest possible level we can reach. So it is not necessary to go through pain like this. It only hurts if you're trying to break the obstructions from outside so to speak. Dissolving them from inside is pretty quick and effective.
I think it comes down to using our innate capabilities as skilfully and broadly as we can. Does a practice make use of all these abilities? That and the way these are combined determines the system's efficiency. AYP is a quick way and the approach is different say from theravada buddhism, which I guess is much more stillness oriented. Anyway, there's only one nervous system we're operating, so we must end up with one user's manual in the end :) |
|
|
|
jillatay
USA
206 Posts |
Posted - Nov 27 2008 : 11:41:15 PM
|
Too much "according to so and so...." Experiencing things for yourself is best.
Concentration or becoming one pointed, does not lead to attachment to the blissful states. I speak from experience. For one thing, you don't get to blissful states until you are pretty at ease with whatever arises and for them to continue you have to remain so. Not only that but the internal states you call bliss lead to less and less attachment, that is their nature. It is like rungs on a ladder. You stand on one to reach the next. You don't cling to the lower rung once you grab the higher. That wouldn't be counterintuitive.
As far as what the Buddha taught, it is best to read his actual discourses yourself. You might get an eye opener. I have studied this for over 6 years now and venerable or not, some monks can be wrong. Hope this doesn't qualify as guru bashing but this common error is too oft repeated. The Buddha spoke about one pointedness of the mind in almost every discourse on meditation.
YogaIsLife is correct. Attention on pain makes it dissolve unless what you are really paying attention to is resistance to pain in which case it can lead to pain's increase. Close observation of pain shows that it is intermittent, comes in waves or spurts or is wobbly and when you can see the gaps in it you can focus on those gaps and in just moments "poof" it transforms to almost nothing. That is just one technique, there are others. I have found lately that almost as soon as I intone the mantra, all pain leaves my body. I don't know how this happens.  Once physical pain is gone, ease and contentment sets in, a real milestone.
Love to all,
Jill
|
|
|
|
YogaIsLife
641 Posts |
Posted - Nov 28 2008 : 05:47:01 AM
|
Hi all. This thread continues to be great!
I agree with Jill when she says "Experiencing things for yourself is best" and "you don't get to blissful states until you are pretty at ease with whatever arises and for them to continue you have to remain so".
I guess we are all here to find out for ourselves and experiencing with different techniques to arrive at "that" blissful state. Each person is different and I found I AM meditation works in calming me and at remaining more stable in daily life. But probably it is the state my nervous system is in (probably very dirty ) but there are still some moments/days that, for some reason (external/internal), I get pretty unstable (thoughts and emotions racing and me going with them). Sometimes just the fact that I do I AM meditation helps me remain present through the day and remain stable despite of these fluctuations but sometimes, I must admit, it doesn't. So, when I get like that, I try different techniques: slow breathing, remaining present, "being the witness"... But recently I found something that seems to work well: saying a mantra during those times. I read this in a book by Eknath Easwaran and talked about it in another thread. By fixating in a mantra (other than I AM) in this moments of agitation, my body/mind goes quiet. Quite amazing. Now I am watchful if one can overload with I AM meditation plus repeating another mantra during the day. But the results from Easwaran's simple technique were so good that I cannot afford to not use it and just be swallowed by the windmill of thougths and emotions. So, I am just trying to ilustrate that maybe solely AYP may not be enough for everybody or that different people may have different needs at different times. Having said that, AYP is definitely a blessing in putting such a good comprehensive system together and it is still the base and framework from which I work, but I guess we have to test things in ourselves to see what suits us best. "Different strokes for different folks" as I heard said. In any case, do you think there exists "the perfect universal spiritual technique"? Is this such an exact science or a mix of science and art?
Just my 2 cents |
|
|
|
mimirom
Czech Republic
368 Posts |
Posted - Nov 28 2008 : 4:52:21 PM
|
Hi all,
thanks Yogaislife and Tadeas, the info you add brings much clarity in my understanding of what deep meditation is and solves some misunderstandings. I appreciate your guidance.
Yes, I've been thinking of the picking up mantra - loosing - going back routine. In concentration practice this happens initially also, simply because we are not able to stick with the object. But the aim of this is ultimately to fix the mind on the object and then go ever deeper into it. So, is it that in deep meditation we don't aim for this? This is perhaps what I've misunderstood. Is the loosing and going back happening even in advanced stages of dm?
quote:
So a session of deep meditation can look like this: you sit down, pick up the mantra once and then be completely absorbed for 20 minutes. The mantra's vibration going on effortelssly at a very suble level by itself for the whole period. No thoughts. Or maybe sometimes not even the mantra. Would that be concentration? I don't think so.
This really doesn't sound like concentration practice at all. Thanks for the example, very instructive. Only one thing I don't really understand. What do you mean "to be completely absorbed for 20 minutes"? But you actually don't have to answer this, I'll better wait for my own experience.
Ah yes, I am speaking about distrust in deep meditation as a single meditation practice, but that doesn't mean I'm not trying it. I switched to dm twice daily about two weeks ago, because I'm curious after all
As to your reflection on the efficiency of a practice, thanks once again. Very inspiring. I know that I'm talking mainly from a theravadan practice perspective as that is 99% of my experience with meditation, and that this is an ancient perspective. But I'm definitely willing to explore new and modern approaches, as I believe they might well be more refined and better suited for the contemporary mind.
Jill, thanks for your input. My English might sound a little too formal, as I learned it mainly by reading popular scientific books, but what I am sharing here about meditation is mostly based on my own experience. So when I say "according to", I rather try to support my own experience then trying to argue for someone else's ideas.
When talking about attachment to blissful states reached by absorption into one object, I speak also from my own experience, to a certain degree. I ended up being attached to the initial state, when all other objects disappear, for six months. I was convincing my self that I practice vipassana, but actually have been hunting for that state. I've been deluding myself.
quote:
It is like rungs on a ladder. You stand on one to reach the next. You don't cling to the lower rung once you grab the higher.
Well, my understanding of this has always been, that the ladder we are climbing has two rows of rungs (or one row of two-sided rungs, if you will), one of them being rungs of absorption (jhana), and the other being rungs of insight (njana). The problem than would look like being too high on one row and too low on the other. Once we would discover that we can't complete our journey without climbing the other row as well, being pretty high already - which one of us would be willing to go all the way back down and start the hard work again? Wouldn't it be tempting to settle for what we have already? (Hope this is understandable )
So, one-pointedness yes, but not without sati.
As to the "poof" experience with pain, I know, I've been through it. I specified my previous description a little:
quote:
It is extremely surprising that the strong pain actually stops to be "painful" at this moment. It's still there, but it does not hurt anymore. I believe it's thanks to the precise insight into the complex nature of pain. Later on pain might cease to occur altogether in sitting, simply two hours in siddhasana without any pain. That's what happened to me
As far as I know, if I feel some mild pain during meditation, say, in my back and I observe it for some time, it might dissolve. But it is a different story with strong, severe pain. This kind of pain forces me to fully focus on it, it makes me concentrate on it like hell and it's very challenging to stay with it. The last time this was happening to me I was finally able to recognize components of that pain: hardness, pressure, coldness, prickling, hotness, pulsation (physical) and then hatred, fear, aversion and anger (mental). After this recognition the pain stopped.
And yes, YogaIsLife, thanks for your words of appreciation.
Roman
|
Edited by - mimirom on Nov 28 2008 5:15:56 PM |
|
|
|
YogaIsLife
641 Posts |
Posted - Nov 28 2008 : 6:43:09 PM
|
Hi Roman,
quote:
In concentration practice this happens initially also, simply because we are not able to stick with the object. But the aim of this is ultimately to fix the mind on the object and then go ever deeper into it. So, is it that in deep meditation we don't aim for this? This is perhaps what I've misunderstood. Is the loosing and going back happening even in advanced stages of dm?
Yes, I think so. The differences betwen what you descrie as concentration and AYP DM are subtle but important. In AYP you pick up and lose the mantra repeatedly and don't aim in fixating in the mantra forever. Even advanced practicioners use exactly the same instructions. What may happen eventually in AYP DM, from my understanding, is that the mantra becomes more and more refined and in subtler and subtler levels of the mind or conscioussness. But even there you will lose the mantra. And when you realise you are off it you go back to the mantra. But you see, when you realise you are off the mantra that is a thought isn't it? Well, it is in the gap between losing the mantra and realising you are off it where you touch "inner silence", even if for just one milisecond. There are no thoughts then. |
|
|
|
jillatay
USA
206 Posts |
Posted - Nov 28 2008 : 9:07:50 PM
|
Dear Roman,
I scratch my head when you say you can get stuck in the middle of the path especially when talking about what the Buddha taught. Perhaps you would go here and read this essay: http://www.greatwesternvehicle.org/...ipvsjhan.htm
Since your English is so very good especially in technical literature you should have no problem following his train of thought. Briefly it repeats some of the points made by the monk in my post above.
Hope it clarifies my point.
Jill |
|
|
|
mimirom
Czech Republic
368 Posts |
Posted - Dec 03 2008 : 3:08:17 PM
|
Hi everyone,
first and foremost I'd like to thank you all for what you are posting here, because it makes me question and recheck my own understanding of the process of fostering the emergence of "higher mental health" - as transpersonal psychologists would call it, as well as my understanding of the teachings of the Buddha themselves. A big sincere THANKS for that.
I decided to dig a little in the resources that formed my understanding of what meditation is, and how it actually works in the human psyche, because, as I've said already, you guys made me doubt my stances. And I believe to have found some interesting facts.
1) I still haven't found clarity in what you guys say about AYP deep meditation. It's not samatha, it's not vipassana. It's not concentration, It's not mindfulness. What the heck is it then? I found an excerpt from a beautifully written dhamma-book by Venerable Acariya Maha Boowa (It's actually collected Dhamma talks. You can download the book here - http://www.luangta.or.th/english/si...ttamagga.zip), where he describes his own path and how he began to meditate. Ajahn Maha Boowa is widely considered to be an arahant.
My choice was buddho meditation. From the moment I made my resolve, I kept my mind from straying from the repetition of buddho. From the moment I awoke in the morning until I slept at night, I forced myself to think only of buddho. At the same time, I ceased to be preoccupied with thoughts of progress and decline: If my meditation made progress, it would do so with buddho; if it declined, it would go down with buddho. In either case, buddho was my sole preoccupation. All other concerns were irrelevant. ........
Working at this practice day after day, I always made certain that buddho resonated in close harmony with my present-moment awareness. Soon, I began to see the results of calm and concentration arise clearly within the citta, the mind's essential knowing nature. At that stage, I began to see the very subtle and refined nature of the citta. The longer I internalized buddho, the more subtle the citta became, until eventually the subtlety of buddho and the subtlety of the citta melded into one another and became one and the same essence of knowing. I could not separate buddho from the citta's subtle nature. Though diligence and perseverance ,buddho had become so closely unified with the citta that buddho itself no longer appeared within my awareness. The mind had become so calm and still, so profoundly subtle, that nothing, not even buddho, resonated there. This meditative state is analogous to the disappearance of the breath, as mentioned above.
I believe Ajahn Maha Boowa is talking about the initial stages of building concentration alongside with mindfulness on the way towards Jhana & njana. Would be lovely if some of you more advanced in AYP DM could post if their experiences with deep meditation match those described here. I myself traveled this journey to some point when practicing concentration. But I used rising and falling of my belly instead of a mantra.
I'm aware of Yogani's words that the goal is not to stay on the mantra, but to follow the procedure of thinking it, loosing it, and coming back. In my opinion it is a slight misunderstanding, when we take this literally. I think the ultimate aim actually is to stabilize our awareness on the mantra, but as this is never the case in the initial stages of practice, and happens only in fairly advanced stages, a smart teacher tells you not to aim for staying on the object without interruption. The smart teacher knows that if you will aim for it, you will quickly become annoyed with the intrusive thoughts, and worried about your progress. And with these defilements in mind progress is obstructed. My teacher is doing exactly the same strategy. Otherwise Yogani's instruction is just pure samatha:
If your mind wanders off into other thoughts, you will eventually realize this has happened. Don't be concerned about it. It is natural. When you realize you are not repeating the mantra, gently go back to it. This is all you have to do. Easily repeat the mantra silently inside. When you realize you are not thinking it, then easily come back to it.
So, Tadeas and YogaIsLife, I still believe AYP DM is concentration (samatha) practice.
Will be glad for any comments,
Roman
|
Edited by - mimirom on Dec 06 2008 10:02:17 AM |
|
|
|
mimirom
Czech Republic
368 Posts |
Posted - Dec 03 2008 : 4:58:42 PM
|
Hi Jill and all others,
as to the issue of possible risk of getting attached to deeper stages of absorption, I must admit that my view on this has been formed by a single Dhamma-talk. I loked up a recording of that Dhamma-talk of Ven. Ashin Ottama and this is what he said about the issue:
There is a certain risk, when one attains deeper stages of this kind of mental development, that one gets easily attached to the blissful experiences, with the possible consequence of creating an obstruction of further development.
I must admit that I've never heard about this problem, except this one instance. So I'm not gonna argue with you on this issue, because I don't have sufficient knowledge of it. It is true that I've been clinging to a state achieved by concentration, but that wasn't really any of the jhanas.
I've read the essay you recommended. It certainly contains some valuable info - thanks.
I found a very hard criticism of theravadan buddhists in general and their knowledge of the techniques necessary for the attainment of liberation. Well, theravadan teachers really don't emphasize advanced absorption (jhana)
as much as Jhanananda does in his essay. But at the same time they always highly value concentration practice as to be necessary for good progress on the way to enlightenment. (And so some of Jhananandas arguments actually miss the target.) No theravadan teacher would ever argue that deep concentration is not absolutely necessary, if we are about to progress in the process of bhavaná (meditation). What they actually do is teaching an integrative path of concentration-mindfulness-loving kindness (samatha-vipassana-mettá) practice. (Samatha and mettá being forms of concentration.) It is true that they do not emphasize the attainment of all stages of deep absorption - jhanas, as a necessary prerequisite to full liberation.
On the other hand Jhanananda tends to reject mindfulness/vipassana (or satipatthana-cultivation of mindfulness, in his terms) as a practice altogether.
Well, I've always tended to sympathize with integrative approaches and doubt separative ones. And by the way, aren't statements like "By doing so this school of Buddhism (theravadan) has proven it does not understand the Noble Eightfold Path, which is defined in terms of absorption, nor do they understand what insight (vipassana) is, or what the Buddha's intentions were with the practice strategy he called satipatthana." suggestive of a clinging to what the speaker regards as "truth"? Of the very attachment to the precious jhana, so highly valued over everything else by that speaker?
As usual, will be grateful for your comments...
mettá,
Roman |
Edited by - mimirom on Dec 04 2008 10:40:37 AM |
|
|
|
mimirom
Czech Republic
368 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2008 : 11:19:48 AM
|
Hi folks,
I'd like to offer some more arguments, as to why ignoring mindfulness meditation might not be such a good idea.
An important question certainly is: What is the goal of our spiritual aspiration? What do we want to achieve through our practices? Is it ever longer periods of time spent in inner silence? Is it some kind of automatic transfer of inner silence into our normal daily life-consciousness?
I believe that the final destination is the cessation of all suffering, achieved by the ultimate and permanent uprooting of all mental defilements.
In some of the above posts I tried to describe how we move towards this goal in combined mindfulness/concentration practice. It is the process of gradual disidentification with whatever we believe we are. The moment of "making a step back" and seeing as an object what has been previously experienced as a subject. This is the moment of gaining a broader perspective, of overcoming the hurtful paradox of mutually exclusive opposites and seeing them as aspects of one and the same thing. That's freeing oneself from constraints, gaining more freedom, more space, more peace. That's overcoming the kilesas through disidentification, not needing to blindly act and speak on them anymore. That's overcoming of liking and disliking, again by means of disidentification,simply by seeing things as they really are.
If you wish to get a much clearer explanation of this point, here are two Dhamma talks by Ven. Chanmyay Sayadaw Ashin Janakabhivamsa. The first one is "Samathá and Vipassana Meditation" and the other is "Why we Practice Vipassana Meditation". Sayadaw U Janaka is certainly one of the finest living meditation masters, and is no doubt a highly realized being, respected by the world of Sangha.
http://www.meditation.asn.au/Docume...Talk%204.pdf
http://www.meditation.asn.au/Docume...practise.pdf
This is a link to a page where you can find a comprehensive set of Chanmyay Sayadaw's Dhamma talks, including the two above ones. The final talk describes how the major insights (njana) consecutively occur during practice of samatha/vipassana meditation, the final one being arahattamagga njana - ultimate liberation.
http://www.meditation.asn.au/talks.html
Samatha meditation can certainly take us to beautiful places and fill our minds with great calm and peace. And that's good. I know, it's all lucid and beautifully ecstatic there, when the kilesas are suppressed by the highly concentrated mind. But there appears to be a slight problem with this kind of freedom, for as soon as we have to stand up to go to bed, prepare our food or talk with our beloved, our concentration is gone and the kilesas will rush back into our minds.
Allow me to conclude this post with an excerpt from Walpola Rahula's famous book "What the Buddha Taught":
The word meditation is a very poor substitute for the original term bhávaná, which means "culture" or "development", i.e., mental culture or mental development. The Buddhist bhávaná, properly speaking, is mental culture in the full sense of the term. It aims at cleansing the mind of impurities and disturbances, such as lustful desires, hatred, ill-will, indolence, worries and restlessness, sceptical doubts, and cultivating such qualities as concentration, awareness, intelligence, will, energy, the analytical faculty, confidence, joy, tranquility, leading finally to the attainment of highest wisdom which sees the nature of things as they are, and realizes the Ultimate Truth, Nirvána.
There are two forms of meditation. One is the development of mental concentration (samatha or samádhi), of one-pointedness of mind (cittekaggatá, Skt. cittaikágratá), by various methods prescribed in the texts, leading up to the highest mystic states such as "the Sphere of Nothingness" or "the Sphere of Neither-Perception-nor- Non-Perception". All these mystic states, according to the Buddha, are mind-created, mind-produced, conditioned (samkhata). They have nothing to do with Reality, Truth, Nirvána. This form of meditation existed before the Buddha. Hence it is not purely Buddhist, but it is not excluded from the field of Buddhist meditation. However it is not essential for the realization of Nirvána. The Buddha himself, before his Enlightenment, studied these yogic practices under different teachers and attained to the highest mystic states; but he was not satisfied with them, because they did not give complete liberation, they did not give insight into the Ultimate Reality. He considered these mystic states only as "happy living in this existence" (ditthadhammasukhavihára), or "peaceful living" (santavihára), and nothing more. (See Sallekha-sutta (no. 8), of M.)
He therefore discovered the other form of "meditation" known as vipassaná (Skt. vipasyaná or vidarsaná), "Insight" into the nature of things, leading to the complete liberation of mind, to the realization of the ultimate Truth, Nirvána. This is essentially Buddhist "meditation", Buddhist mental culture. It is an analytical method based on mindfulness, awareness, vigilance, observation.
Mettá,
Roman
|
Edited by - mimirom on Dec 06 2008 10:19:27 AM |
|
|
|
Sparkle
Ireland
1457 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2008 : 1:30:59 PM
|
Hi Roman
Do you think their are any other methods that will take one to liberation besides mindfulness meditation? |
|
|
|
YogaIsLife
641 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2008 : 3:24:14 PM
|
quote:
Do you think their are any other methods that will take one to liberation besides mindfulness meditation?
Probably not.
I recently noticed a subtle but importnat shift in my meditation (I practice AYP). I realised meditation should not be about striving for anything, after all is all about being, isn't it? Just being. It's the "just" that is difficult, as we all know.
But now I go to meditation not expecting to "go" into meditation. I just allow myself to be, I don't sit and go "ok, now meditate" or "ok, now let's do this exercise well" or anything that would imply effort. I simply sit, however I happen to feel at the moment (no effort done to be "prepared" for meditation), and observe. Basically, for me, meditation is being watchful, aware, but in a simple effortless way. So, I watch my thoughts go by and introduce "I AM" there. I watch how my mind drifts, how it moves from thought to though, and then take it back to I AM, which I also observe. I think this might be the witness behind the thoughts, it is like you are just being watchful for whatever arises and for the way your mind bahaves. The mantra helps to make the mind still, as it is neutral, and gives soemthing for the mind to cling to (it's funny how we refer to the mind as if we were talking about a dog sometimes hahaha). Well, it seems to work. What I was doing "wrong" before was to try to be in a certain way in meditation, and to cling forcefully to the mantra. If I was doing this though, meditation still worked and I saw its effects and maybe I would not be able to remain watchful as I am now (witness cultivated) if it was not for those many months just trying to cling to the mantra. Now, I notice, just a simple introduction of I AM shifts the energy in the mind, and I don't really have to cling to it so forcefully.
I still think your contribution is very valuable Roman. I guess mindfullness is the most important practice, being watchful, present, aware. But the how to cultivate it is the trick, and it seems AYP has a simple effective mean, without the need for much effort or any complicated thought processes to make it happen (it is hard to just "be still and do nothing", isn't it?). The mantra helps, at least in the beginning, in cultivating the ability to be able to just "be still and be watchful". At least this is my opinion.
Thank you. |
|
|
|
themysticseeker
USA
342 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2008 : 8:54:44 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by mimirom
Hi everyone,
further questions and specifications on the issue arise in my mind.
Thanks Sparkle, the triple gem perspective seems to give a fairly firm viewpoint. (Yes, fairly firm... )
A full-time vipassana retreat is really a process that is different to the daily self-paced practice. (But of course it's complementary.) The intensive retreat is more like "scuba diving" into the subtler realms of consciousness and people usually do it once or twice a year during holidays, just like real scuba diving. People can go very deep within short periods of time in the safe and protected environment of a meditation center, where they really don't have to care about anything but exploring the depths of the unconscious and where they receive instant guidance whenever they need it. A well-balanced, long-term daily practice will certainly have different proportions.
Two issues still support my distrust in practicing solely deep meditation:
I've learned to meditate from two teachers, both of which are venerable monks in the theravadan buddhist tradition. Both of them repeatedly warned us not to rely solely on concentration practice. (And I still consider the AYP deep med. to be concentration practice, since there is selective focus on a single object with the exclusion of everything else.) Theravadan monks consider it dangerous to practice only concentration, because it is a fact (and I know it from my own experience) that yogis practicing solely concentration develop a very strong attachment to the blissful states achieved through it (absorption, dhyána or jhana in Pali) and they are later hardly able to give them up, even for a higher purpose . And this is a big problem, since the ultimate goal of all spiritual aspiration and practice is the cessation of all suffering, the final nondual realization, and no concentration practice can take us there, according to the Buddha. The final steps to complete liberation are achieved only by mindfulness (insight, njána in Pali). What the monks say than is that if we proceed with concentration practice too far, while ignoring insight practice, sooner or later we'll get stuck somewhere in the middle of our path, with rather slim chances to get things fixed.
The other issue is that I miss the direct experience of disidentification, which occurs in mindfulness practice, but can't occur if the mind is absorbed in one single object. (At least as far as I know. I'm not really much experienced in concentration.) According to guys such as C.G.Jung or K.Wilber, the actual moment of making a step toward human liberation is the moment of disidentification of the self with one object, followed by a new identification with the next higher object. Or in a 1st person perspective, what's been a subject becomes an object of the next higher subject. This typically happens with pain in mindfulness practice, to give an example. If we begin to feel pain in our legs while meditating vipassana, we initially just notice it as one of many objects of our mind. Then, as the pain grows we begin to be gradually obsessed with it and finally, when the intensity of it reaches a certain point we end up being completely identified with it. Pain is all there is. It is everywhere, it drives us crazy and it seems to be eternal. The self is fully identified with it. Later, at a certain point (if we are lucky meditators), we recognize that the pain is just a bunch of physical and mental processes and that this is not really what we are. We recognize that there is something bigger in the background that we can identify with and that the pain is merely an object of this next "something". (It is extremely surprising that the strong pain actually stops to be "painful" at this moment. It's still there, but it does not hurt anymore. I believe it's thanks to the precise insight into the complex nature of pain. Later on pain might cease to occur altogether in sitting, simply two hours in siddhasana without any pain. That's what happened to me.) That's the crucial shift towards liberation. This happens again and again in mindfulness practice, and it applies to everything we experience. Either not pleasurable or pleasurable or neutral - pain, thoughts, feelings, emotion, sensual input, etc. When the mind is absorbed in a single object, this just can't happen.
Would appreciate your thoughts, fellow yogis and yoginis.
mettá,
Roman
Hi mimirom, Well said, sir. I would like to add that what you have illustrated with regard to the ingredient of pain are just as noticeable with respect to pleasure. Some may say my assertion is dangerous, but I'm not one to *****-foot. Pain is something that one can become attached to, and so is pleasure. There's little difference; however, pleasure is the more difficult attachment to overcome.
Sexual tantra, the holding-off on the orgasm is a very effective way to disassociate from one's ego. Sex urge it the strongest. If you can develop the ability to withhold the orgasm at the moment before it happens, you will go farther in overcoming ego than withstanding pain.
My experience enduring extreme pain and extreme pleasure teaches me that pleasure is the greater challenge to overcome. Pleasure draws us back more and is the subject of our addictions. Addictions lead us into suffering. As such, pleasure inevitably results in pain. The archetype of all pleasure, including bliss consciousness is the S&M sex, where pleasure and pain are rolled up into an explosive ball of intensity.
Samadhi and bliss consciousness has limited use for the enlightenment seeker. I said, "limited" not "no use." So save your gripes. It has a use, an important use, a preparatory use. As preparatory, it is limited. To enter deep stages of samadhi and to attain deep insights, one must first of all be satisfied with who they are as a person. You have to feel good. That's number one.
However, many of these samadhi techniques induces intense waves of pleasure. You can see in many of the posts here where this and that technique is DYNAMITE! And people will obsessively pursue an experience for years. We CRAVE the pleasure. We mask our pursuit of pleasure and our addiction to bliss with the moniker of "spiritual practice." I mention this only to remind the serious seekers here to temper the bliss seeking. The road to liberation requires moderation.
Because there's so much pleasure seeking, my recommendation is seek more. Get your fill. Anyone who's told "don't do that," is definitely going to do it too much. So I say, "do it." "Do it too much." Try to be mindful of the point when that extra bit of practice or that extra dose of bliss doesn't add anything. Be aware of the law of diminishing returns. There comes a point when you add a dose of good feelings into the practice but nothing adds to the experience. At some point shortly thereafter, another added does will tip you over the peak and you will slide down a path of descent into great suffering. So be mindful. Beware!
WE ARE THE COSMOS!
HA!
TMS |
|
|
|
themysticseeker
USA
342 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2008 : 9:06:42 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by jillatay
Too much "according to so and so...." Experiencing things for yourself is best.
Concentration or becoming one pointed, does not lead to attachment to the blissful states. I speak from experience. For one thing, you don't get to blissful states until you are pretty at ease with whatever arises and for them to continue you have to remain so. Not only that but the internal states you call bliss lead to less and less attachment, that is their nature. It is like rungs on a ladder. You stand on one to reach the next. You don't cling to the lower rung once you grab the higher. That wouldn't be counterintuitive.
As far as what the Buddha taught, it is best to read his actual discourses yourself. You might get an eye opener. I have studied this for over 6 years now and venerable or not, some monks can be wrong. Hope this doesn't qualify as guru bashing but this common error is too oft repeated. The Buddha spoke about one pointedness of the mind in almost every discourse on meditation.
YogaIsLife is correct. Attention on pain makes it dissolve unless what you are really paying attention to is resistance to pain in which case it can lead to pain's increase. Close observation of pain shows that it is intermittent, comes in waves or spurts or is wobbly and when you can see the gaps in it you can focus on those gaps and in just moments "poof" it transforms to almost nothing. That is just one technique, there are others. I have found lately that almost as soon as I intone the mantra, all pain leaves my body. I don't know how this happens. Once physical pain is gone, ease and contentment sets in, a real milestone.
Love to all,
Jill
Hi Jillatay, You are correct about the Buddha's mentioning one-pointedness. You must also be familiar with the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. In the Buddha's meditation discourse he doesn't mention one-pointedness. Does he? He speaks of mindfulness. I believe the one-pointedness that you speak of is more aptly translated as "collectedness" or "condensed." I think there is an overuse of "concentration" and "one-pointedness."
In the Buddha's theory of mind, our minds are like a bowl of water. When we are up to our usual way, the bowl is shaken; water splashes all around the bowl. When we are still and relax our mind, the drops around the rim of the bowl drizzle down into the bottom where the water, collects and condenses. When the mind is allowed to condense, it is said to be concentrated mind.
This is the non-doing concentration of nirvana which occurs after several previous levels of samadhi. This is only possible when you cling to no-thing whatsoever. It is not possible if you cling to a dot or a mantra. That was the Buddha's theory. Entertaining it in the mind, picturing it or any of that is considered grasping for it and clinging to it. This act disturbs the mind, irritates it.
If you are on the Buddha's path, you seek peace and tranquility; you do not want to be irritated at all, not one iota, not even by the most subtle and abstract concepts. This is Gyan Yog at it's highest.
WE ARE THE COSMOS!
Ahhh...
TMS |
|
|
|
mimirom
Czech Republic
368 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2008 : 9:17:40 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sparkle
Hi Roman
Do you think their are any other methods that will take one to liberation besides mindfulness meditation?
Oh yes, Sparkle, concentration and wisdom. R  |
Edited by - mimirom on Dec 05 2008 9:26:55 PM |
|
|
|
Sparkle
Ireland
1457 Posts |
Posted - Dec 06 2008 : 05:32:11 AM
|
Roman
It is clear that both the Yogic and Buddhist traditions produce liberated people as a result of their practices.
So why pitch one against the other as in: one is right and one is wrong?
If you put your inquirying energy into finding why both of them work, even though they are slightly different, would this not be more fruitful and give a clearer understanding of the beauty that is in both systems.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Mindfulness Anyone...?
