|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Joti
3 Posts |
 Posted - Sep 06 2007 : 5:32:10 PM
|
Hi everyone,
I have been practising AYP for about a year now (10' spinal breathing + 20' deep meditation, morning and evening). I can feel that I have quite progressed since I started, with a lot more silence and ectasy... I also practice a lot a physical yoga (asanas), taking about 3-4 vinyasa yoga classes every week (for the last 2 years).
Recently, I attended a 3 day Vipassana retreat (Goenka style) for the second time (the first one was a 10 day retreat). Basically the difference between these two meditations techniques is that in AYP we focus on the mantra and in Vipassana we focus on the breath (at first during anapana) and also bodily sensations. It was really a rewarding experiment. I was meditating for about 5 hours per day and I attained concentration levels never before experienced.
Now, I am in the dilemma of choosing between these two meditation techniques, trying to decide which one will I use in a day-to-day basis. Each technique has their own advantages and benefits... The way I see it is that ayp is really concerned about purification of the nervous system, cultivation of spiritual energy, inner silence and ectasy, which is fine with me. But what I don't get is how does this help in a day-to-day basis? Does this practice make me a better person, or rather does this make me happier? It has not been my case in the last year... Sure, there's lots of really pleasant experiences, but does it make me more conscious, more mindful when the practice is over, while not meditating.
Here is a quote form Jack Kornfield, a vipassana teacher expressing that concern (taken from "meditation for beginners" audiobook):
"There are many types of meditation. Some of them use a candle flame, an image, a sacred prayer that's repeated over and over, that have a single focus, and when we repeat that focus over and over our mind becomes quiet and concentrated and still. It's as if we leave the world behind. They're wonderful kinds of meditations. One of the drawbacks of this kind however is that when we finish with our prayer or candleflame or mantra, it's as if we come out of our cave and go back into the world and in the supermarket or on the highway, again the complexities of life are difficult for us.
A second major category of meditation, (which is what we'll work with today) is the meditation that uses the process of life itself as the subject, as the focus of the meditation practice and in that way, we will use our breath and body, the sounds, the feelings within us, our heart and mind, all of the stuff of our life, as the place to focus. We'll begin however very simply just by coming here, to this moment. to become aware in the simplest way, of what is in our own body, and
heart and mind."
So that's basically it. I would like to read about your experiences with AYP and how it has helped you in your day-to-day life. Thanks!
Joti
|
|
|
riptiz
United Kingdom
741 Posts |
Posted - Sep 06 2007 : 6:10:05 PM
|
Hi Joti,
I don't think his quote is complete if he is endorsing the other aspects of Buddhism.AYP meditation I believe is not meant to stand on it's own but is part of integrated practices just as other types of Yoga are, and just as Buddhism is.By that I mean that an integral part of yoga includes how we live our lives,how we treat others etc. No meditation system is complete without these aspects in my opinion.
L&L
Dave |
 |
|
|
SuperTrouper
USA
49 Posts |
Posted - Sep 06 2007 : 7:39:53 PM
|
Have you considered pitting the two in a duel? 5 hours of vipassana is a stark difference from 1 hour AYP. Perhaps you should try one weekend, boosting the time-frame of AYP's SB and DM and then trying an equally extended time frame of Vipassana.
I prefer much longer meditations -- 1.5-2 hrs. in the morning before work, and then 30 min. in the evening. Perhaps your spiritual/mental muscle has simply grown as much as 30 min 2x/day can take you and you need to increase.
It is true that each meditation technique, even slightly modified, produces different experiences both during and after the practice has ended. For some, a certain technique is inherently more effective, and for others another.
I've always been a proponent of a more scientific approach to meditation -- start with a theory or practice, test it in the lab of experience, adjust and tinker with it to see the differences and what it can do, and implement it as a steady sadhana if proven effective among others.
Just some suggestions. |
|
|
|
sadhak
India
604 Posts |
Posted - Sep 06 2007 : 10:29:36 PM
|
Hi Joti,
Ripitz and SuperTrouper present valid points.
For the effects of the meditation and combined practices to show up in daily life takes variable time for each person. Since you ask to know of the experiences of other AYP practitioners, I offer mine.
I too, have been following AYP for over a year, and cyclically I have experienced calmness, peace and subtle joy in daily life. I have had negative symptoms too, but invariably, I'd have been moving too fast, and self pacing was an issue. I do have more direction, more 'let go' and more insight into myself and, as a result, people around me than I did about a year ago. And I'd been doing intense practices from another system of yoga for three years before that, and others before that. I also find the twice a day short durations easier to sustain, and carry on in daily activities than something that demands several hours a day of me. I've tried the latter, and ended getting more stressed out than anything else.
Vipassana I haven't done, though often considered doing way back in the past... so you're the best judge. I would think that introducing one complete system while doing another would lead to a lot of confusion, as is happening with you. The road branches out so many times... and now-a-days, like the supermarket, everything comes in nice packages. But there's only so much time to spend. Welcome to the dilemmas of the practitioner... but you will be able to resolve it in a while if you address your inner silence. |
|
|
|
Jim and His Karma
2111 Posts |
Posted - Sep 07 2007 : 12:20:05 PM
|
Hi, Joti
Agreed with sadhak...beware of mixing and matching!
All techniques lead to the same goal, which is a cessation of our delusion of separateness. You talk of happiness, and, yes, that is ultimate happiness, because everything that makes us unhappy stems from that delusion. I feel something missing in my life....I am frustrated because I want more of this, and I am irritated because I want less of that. That's all based on the faulty notion that I'm "me" in here trying to make my way through the universe out there. Remove the faulty notion of me-as-bag-of-skin (to use a Kornfield-ish image) , and the suffering is also removed.
But even before that point, AYP increases happiness and real-world interaction, because as our windows clear of mud and we see things more clearly, we spend less time struggling with What Is. That spares lots of wasted energy and heartache! The rising silence you are experiencing provides increasingly potent consolation and stability in the winds of the world, no?
There are some problems with breath-based meditation. For one thing, as you get deeper, you may find that breathing all but stops. Then what do you do? Perhaps Vipassana teachers have another practice to steer students once they reach the point where breath attenuates *. But AYP can take you the whole way.
As for taking what you get from meditation into everyday life, that's always a concern. AYP (which is of course based on ancient yogic principles) is certainly not about training you to be a better meditator, period. But it doesn't have built-in attempts to link meditation to day-to-day life. In zen, you meditate with your eyes open for this reason. Same with walking meditation. It's true that such techniques help "bridge the gap", so to speak, but they also attenuate the method, so the purification is slower. AYP is ultra-fast purification. And as you're purified (and your silence grows less and less encaked with mud) you can't help but see day-to-day effects. Major ones. In fact, all the ones spoken of in other traditions, as well.
You're at an important point and asking good questions. I'd highly recommend you have a look at Yogani's Deep Meditation book (see link to the right of this window), which answers these questions pretty thoroughly.
Finally, Vipassana is a beautiful tradition, and you'd not be making a mistake in choosing it. But it's not that one or the other is fatally flawed. Again, they all lead to the same place, and spin off plenty of what you're looking for on the way.
JIM
* Since the gap-bridging elements of Vipassana type meditations reduce the rate of purification (you can't have it both ways..there's a trade-off), it may be that there's no anticipation within that system of the point of spontaneous cessation of breath because adherents rarely get that far. |
Edited by - Jim and His Karma on Sep 07 2007 12:33:29 PM |
|
|
|
SuperTrouper
USA
49 Posts |
Posted - Sep 07 2007 : 2:07:10 PM
|
I feel inclined to say something in regards to Jim's conception of how meditation is supposed to deepen with breath-based meditation.
I actually have practiced breath-based meditation heavily for a period in my life, so I'm fairly familiar with how it operates, not just on the gross level as described in the previous post, but also how it operates on the subtler level.
I'll try to delineate the progression of the breath from gross to subtle. I have never abruptly experienced samadhi the way Jim describes, and I really can't say that I've experienced it at all, so take this for what it's worth.
Initially in focusing on the breath, good effort is needed, because the breath is already so simple that the thoughts practically dance all over it without any regard to one's intentions. But I believe this is similar with most techniques of meditation. Slowly as the the awareness concentrates more so on it (for me, it was always the in-going/out-going sensation within my nose), thoughts begin to subside. If one continues in this way, after some time one will notice that awareness begins to flow like an uninterrupted stream on the breath. At this point, occasional thoughts interrupt the stream and cause a ruffle, but we go right back to practicing. The more steady and uninterrupted the stream is, the more peaceful and utterly delightful it feels to be concentrating. Here, the mind would be fully introverted and wouldn't experience any external phenomena unless very disturbing. When, after a period of time, no thought has moved between the stream of awareness and the object, causing ruffles, the breath becomes wholly subtle. By this, I mean that the physical breathing process which has gotten slower, and smaller to the point where it hardly seems you're breathing, the awareness transitions from the introverted concentration on the physical breathing sensations onto a ... for lack of better terminology, mental breathing process. The breath remains as a mental signature upon which one concentrates, as the physical breath has been left behind. At this juncture, the mind might suddenly get scared that one has stopped breathing and start looking for signs that we're still breathing (it happened to me for several weeks when I reached this point.. it's hard to break through). One can feel the energy begin rushing outward towards the skin and we begin to become aware of our bodies and then our surroundings. And that's pretty much the end of the practice, because it's very difficult to return to the same point of concentration within that same sitting. But if we get to the point where the breath registers only as a mental signature upon which we concentrate and continue to concentrate on it, it continues to get sublter and subtler, until something else replaces it. In my case, it was hearing internal sounds. In others, one might see things, like the spiritual eye. These subtle phenomena, if one can keep oneself from getting excited at them (which takes many tries), help to quickly bring a person even higher. These experiences are still very subtle, but they're of such an unbelievable flavor as to wholly absorb one's attention in their intensity. So, the transition to samadhi very gradual. Not immediate, as what is described by Jim in the experience of PY, Vivekananda, Swami Rama, etc. They were given samadhi and didn't simply create the state themselves. I think the abruptness of it lies in the fact that these people were aware of the physical world and then they were given samadhi and didn't experience the subtle grades of refined awareness steadily leading towards it.
The drawback I found with this path is not that one cannot progress; this is definitely not the case. But that one climbs the spiritual ladder straight up so quickly that inner purification can't keep up and often I experienced symptoms that I could only call "growing pains." Not only that, but being that it's easy to progress if one is diligent, it's also very easy to fall.
With kriya or AYP, the growth is all-around, stable, fairly quick, and brings many benefits that keep a person coming back. I still prefer longer meditations, however... 30-60 minutes is not enough for me to get the same feeling and experiences.
Hope this is of some help. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
AYP vs Vipassana
