Vajra Fist

Thanks, I didn't want to set this up as a zen v thai forest thread, just wanted to share my experience of how the latter helped me overcome some blocks in practice. I know Meido Roshi's teachings well, and have spoken to him several times. He's an inspiring guy! My zen teacher has less of an emphasis on the yogic side of the Rinzai tradition, but nevertheless comes from a Japanese monastic background. But my point was that control of the breath in any form, feels a little bit - to me at least - contrived, and reflective of a subtle craving. You want something to happen in a particular way. I've found passive attention to the breath to perhaps yield deeper states than any intention surrounding the breath. Not controlling, or directing the breath, just observing its gentle movement in the body. Of course - I could be totally wrong in that, it's just what feels right for me for now.

Let's see what GB says: That said, I've seen plenty of teachers say sitting in a chair is totally acceptable too, especially if you plan to sit for three hour periods and practice jhana. Some schools don't emphasise jhana as much, and there they tend to practice full lotus. In some schools of zen for instance, they sit for 25 minutes, then stand up to do walking meditation, followed by another 25 minute sit. Because of the short sits, full lotus is more feasible. I can't imagine sitting for three hours in full lotus. That would not only probably destroy your knees, but make it difficult to enter absorption. So I guess, it depends on what you're practicing.

Also, just a note on this. In the oral instructions, he has a different emphasis: "Wheneve you bring your mind back reward yourself with a deep, relaxing breath - whatever would feel really good. To let you know that this is where you want to be." So yes, it is still a directed activity. But it is perhaps more carrot than stick. My worry about allowing the mind to settle of its own accord - as a beginner with no experience of kensho - is that you're effectively allowing the mind to stew in its own hindrances. Some effort to bring the mind back to the meditation object would seem to be important, although I agree it should be more gentle than the 'mind crushing mind' approach you often find.

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I admit, it is a bit of a diversion from my main practice, but it has proven quite fruitful so far. For instance, it's taught me the importance of bodily relaxation in going deep. I didn't realise it, but I had been developing a lot of tension in the body during zazen. Although the practice has always been extremely quiescent, at times during the day I would sometimes become quite irritable or uncharitable. But through relaxing the body through Ajahn Geoff's instructions, ive had the space to step back from conflicts and consider a more skillful approach to handling the situation. Secondly, it's taught me the value of noncontrivance. The common instruction you'll find in rinzai is to expand the belly on the inhale and contract it on the exhale. The mind must rest on the hara. Count the outbreaths etc. I appreciate it gets more refined the longer you practice, but a lot of that is trial and error (aka 'kufu'), and perhaps also direct transmission. Personally, I've found the instructions to observe the movement of the breath at different parts of the body, more conducive to the emergence of a calm, peaceful state, than perhaps the intimation that the breath should be directed or controlled. To me, I find the lack of specificity and emphasis on exploration to have meant I progressed perhaps slower than I needed to over the past year as a beginner practicing rinzai. I think I'll probably find my way back to zen at some point. I have an excellent teacher and a group that meets online on Zoom every morning for zazen. I know how important a teacher is in the long run and a sangha too. While I don't believe there are any teachers here in the UK from the Ajahn Lee thread of the Thai Forest tradition. As far as I know, the Thai buddhists here are all from Ajahn Chah. I may find my way to Chan, rather than Zen. I know Guo Gu has a group here and they place a lot of emphasis on bodily relaxation and noncontrivance - similar in many ways to the just sitting approach in Soto.

Nice! These are very similar to the ones from Stephen Hayes. I always struggled with getting my ring finger of one hand in the right position for the fourth mudra. Do you hold each mudra for an extended period in meditation?

It's definitely getting better. Stuff like Beat Saber is incredible fun, while Swarm is like spiderman with machine guns. There's lots of sword fighting and boxing games on there too that are excellent, and in some cases provide a full workout. But yes, the games are fairly unsophisticated, as they're developed by indie studios. There's nothing yet with the open world immersion of Witcher III or Skyrim. Slowly though they're getting more major studios in to release big budget titles, like the new Iron Man game by Marvel. So that could change pretty quickly.

Is there any way to stop seeing someone's posts and comments here? There's quite a bit of spamming going on, most of it gibberish at least to me.

Urgh

It's a little outside the scope of the thread, but the reference ranges are quite arbitrary. For instance, my levels prior to treatment were just above the lowest point on the normal scale. Because of that, I wasn't eligible for free treatment under the national healthcare system, so I had to use a private clinic. Now my levels are at the highest levels of the normal range. Both are normal levels as defined by the health system, but the difference in terms of how it feels is significant. Personally, if it was possible that a better diet, sleep training and regular exercise would naturally raise my levels enough to provide a better quality of life, I'd do everything I could to pursue that course. But there's only so much work that be expected from a floundering mono-ball

The answer I saw was given by possibly the highest-level public teacher of these arts in the west. We all know who it is, but I won't break confidence as it was a question answered privately. I'm fairly confident it wouldn't be an issue. That said, different teachers may have different requirements. I'm not currently working with an alchemical system, so it's not something I have a great deal of understanding about.

I had testicular cancer, so my natural production of hormones has been permanently damaged. TRT isn't the same as steroid abuse - the purpose is to ensure that levels are at a normal level, rather than a level higher than the average person, like a body builder would seek. Accordingly, sexual desire is at a normal and manageable level. I try to stick to once or twice a week, as I did before. In terms of energetics, I haven't noticed any difference. Someone asked an excellent western neigong teacher a few years back on a private FB group, as they said it was fine from an internal perspective. He said: "People equate hormones and Jing a little incorrectly in Chinese medicine these days as they attempt to mix western and eastern medicine." The only obvious benefit I've noticed is that I have a more positive outlook, my energy levels aren't completely wiped out by a bit of physical activity, and I don't wake up feeling like a reanimated corpse in the morning. I'm early 40s, and I no longer feel like I'm physically in my late 60s. In short, I feel more normal than I have for a long time. Edit - it goes without saying that this is my experience, and everyone will likely react a little differently. Also, that you should only look into this treatment under the supervision of a doctor and with continuous medical oversight. Messing with hormones is no joke and should only really be considered as a last resort.

This is off topic, but I started testosterone replacement therapy a few months ago, and it's like I've turned the clock back 15 years. If you're suffering in this regard, go visit an endocrinologist and get your levels checked. Some people also benefit from a daily microdose of cialis, which also has the added effect of increasing blood flow and lowering blood pressure. I would say using spiritual methods to achieve something so humdrum, is like being given a genie's wishfufilling lamp and using it to produce an endless supply of Big Macs. I think not only is a wasted opportunity, but probably also disrespectful to the original intent behind some of those practices, and therefore likely to generate some form of additional karmic hindrances. Just my opinion anyway!

I would say the existence of any particular deity is only important in so far as it impacts on your practice. One of the neatest definitions I've seen is in Japanese Buddhism, where practices are commonly divided into 'self power' or 'other power'. The idea is that with other power, or devotional practices, your transformation is due to the influence of an external deity. What's happening really is that you're letting go of control and allowing things to be as they are naturally. It's an ingenious method really, as it leads to equanimity and non attachment. Many Mahayana practices that profess to be 'self power' in fact still have devotional practices, and that proves useful down the road. There is often a part of you that identifies with, clings to and seeks after attainments. And that can prove problematic. Having some concept of divine grace can take away the illusion that those things are in 'your' hands at all. In regards then to the Christian god, I acknowledge the possibility it might exist. But it doesn't weigh on my thoughts at all. One deity isn't necessarily better than another. But devotion to a deity can nevertheless serve as an expedient means, depending on your tradition.

I wouldn't want to say for sure. It seems some of the basic methods can be taught online, but I would assume that if you plan on taking it further you would most probably need first person instruction sooner rather than later. In terms of what you might need by way of a foundation, it's probably worth sending a message to Nathan directly, as different schools have different requirements.

I was mightily impressed by his first book. It seems a fairly intensive system that he offers, which is mostly practiced on retreat. Looking forward to the cinna-bar thing launching, so I can at least dip my toes into this.

Off topic, but I found this pretty funny

Holy fuck I need to listen to this properly now. Except perhaps with a different set of expectations.

Ah, this debate again. I hate to once again use the theravada model, but awakening, as in stream entry, is defined by loosening of the three fetters. The first of which is seeing through the concept of self. Later, the seven defilement, like envy, greed, domineering etc also reportedly drop away. One of the things that stood out to me from the interview above, was that Bruce has a very strong and obvious sense of self. He talks a lot about his own achievements. I don't believe that someone can teach meditation without stream entry, or whatever equivalent there is in your own system. I wouldn't trust a guide to help me cross an ocean, who hasn't at least caught a glimpse of the other shore, and knows which general direction to face in. That's not to say that his methods aren't beneficial. They have clearly helped many people restore their health. But in terms of walking a spiritual path, I wouldn't personally put my faith in Bruce Frantzis as a guide.

He had Bruce's student Paul Cavel on there a couple of years ago. And he came across pretty well, apart from a few weird conversational ticks. But yes, if I ever had any inclination to learn from Bruce's material before, I now have none whatsoever. Not everyone who he interviews has to be awakened in some way. But of all those Steve has interviewed, Bruce certainly comes across as one of the least so.

A very pernicious term indeed 😉

.

Yes, of course I'm not saying they don't have vipassana. It's just they emphasise samatha and jhana a lot more than other Burmese 'dry insight' traditions. Incidentally, I've had some interactions with Pa Auk graduates - Beth Upton in particular - who was a monastic for a decade there. I have incredible respect for the way they approach the dharma. I do think though that it is a very heavy duty approach, especially for a non-monastic, and that approach might not even be necessary in the grand scheme of things.

This is a side tangent, but this is such an interesting discussion I thought I'd tear open this can of worms. The obvious answer is theravada rather than mahayana. But theravada is a broad church. In modern times, you'll see the main contention within theravada as being samatha-based systems, that emphasise jhana and trace back to the vishuddimaga, and vipassana. The vipassana approach largely centers on schools established by two teachers Mahasi Sayadaw and SN Goenka. Whereas the samatha tradition largely comes from Pa Auk Sayadaw. Now a main bone of contention between the two is the visuddhimagga. This was a later codification (500 years or so after Gautauma's death) of many, many types of meditation, as well as explanation of the various jhana states. It's slightly controversial though because many see its heavy emphasis on jhana as representative of the pre-Buddhist Hindu traditions, rather than what the Buddha actually taught in the suttas. Mainly the stuff that Gautauma himself had learned from aesthetics and rejected, prior to going and sitting under the Bodhi tree. They see vipassana as the main practice. This is often called 'dry insight' because it does not rely on a foundation of samatha. Meanwhile those who practice samatha and jhana see those meditative skills as a tool in sharpening the mind, so that insight when it arrives is stable and permanent. They see the visuddhimagga as an exposition on the methods contained in the suttas rather than a departure from them. Now what's interesting is that many states of altered conscious, profound experiences and siddhis, normally arise from the samatha type school, rather than the vipassana stuff. The samatha crew will say those are signs their practice is working, whereas the others will say they've gone off at a tangent and even if they've mastered all eight jhanas (as the Buddha had before abandoning the path of the aesthetic) it's still not stream entry. Now, you can probably tell what camp I fall down in. Japanese Zen in particular is more on the vipassana side of things. We practice with eyes open. Practicing with eyes closed in an absorption state is considered to be 'makyo' (literally devil's cave). Edit - that's a long way of saying, find what tradition best fits your own character. No one has a monopoly on authenticity, and most if not all traditions have produced enlightened masters. Work with a teacher, preferably in person.

I knew you wouldn't mind me being a bit facetious. You're a good egg @freeform Glad you're back

It's alright, he doesn't consider anapanasati a type of meditation either, despite the suttas saying that practicing it gives rise to the seven factors of awakening and ultimate liberation from suffering. In fact, I don't call it meditation either. I call it 42.