Bumps on the Cultivation Path

[Spotless]

Hi Spotless,

I am not talking about only vocalized mantra. I am talking about vocalized (out-loud), subvocalized (no audible sound) but still using the location of the vocal chords to produce 'silent friction', super-subvocalized (relaxed throat but still using the linguistic function at the back left of the brain) , pure thought mantras (where you think the mantra) and intuited mantras (spontaneously manifested off the top of the head).

 

All of these methods of creating a repeating thought-form in all consistencies of coarse to finer gradients start with the navel chakra, which is the main source of the wind. The source is closely connected the will. Without the enactment of the will which is started by intent and brought to fruition through the combination of intent, will, source/prana/chi, nothing happens. There is no movement.

 

Now, you may say that there are three sources (dantiens/tan tiens etc), the navel, the heart and the brain (medulla). That is correct to a degree, but you will notice that when the head center collapses into the heart and the breathing stops, the navel center is still emitting its own energetic breathing. Therefore, I assume that the main controller for prana/chi/wind is the navel center.

 

Try this experiment. Start to sound off a mantra. but just before it becomes a sound or a mentally repeated thought, STOP. See what part of the body was first to move. It is the lower tan tien, the navel center. If you repeat this a few times, you will see that just by holding the initial intent, the navel chakra emits a flow of energy/heat/prana/wind. If you do this when you've completely relaxed the body, you will see that the energy from the navel first flows downwards towards the root chakra. When you perform any form of the mantra, you are taking that energy and transforming it into various formations, various vibrations, various manifestations of form.

 

You can't use form to reach the formless. Instead, you have to silence and still the winds. You can do that by dissolving the winds into the central channel. You can also do that by stilling the mind, by letting things be exactly as they are, dissolving on their own as is natural, until finally, all veils are dissolved revealing what lies beneath, has always existed and was in plain sight all along. Clear, vivid, infinite yet beyond these limiting concepts.

 

Gee, I'm starting to sound like a guru or something..

 

TI

The original question was: can you use a mantra to still the mind?

If you are starting out with big waves in all directions, white water, hail and thunder - then by all means - mantras can help to still the mind. (that is all I ever intended to address). They can be of tremendous help for quite a bit of the journey.

 

What you are talking about is something I became intimately familiar with many decades ago - you sound like I did at the time, but look at our original poster here - he is asking things like "can we dumb this down a little".

 

You are explaining subtle things - giving advanced answers that require very subtle awareness - and some of your answers are pretty self assured based on what appears to be relatively new awareness on your part.

 

I greatly appreciate that you are not one of the cut & paste writers here and that you speak from experience and you are also well read. I hope you do not become identified with your accomplishments so far.

Edited April 28, 2013 by Spotless

[Spotless]

Well, just that in the suttas/sutras the sense of "I AM" is referred to as the "conceit of I AM," which is held as largely responsible for a sentient being's ignorance and continued suffering in cyclical existence. In Buddhism, an individual isn't free of the residual "I AM conceit" until arahantship is reached. This is emphasized because stream-enterer's up to non-returner's still experience the fetters stemming from ignorance, aggression, craving despite having severed clinging to 'Self-view.' Arahant's are free of both the 'eighty-eight deluded viewpoints' and 'eighty-one cognitive delusions.' [http://books.google.com/books?id=cFEfrVMdxiEC&pg=PT98&lpg=PT98&dq=eighty+one+cognitive+delusions&source=bl&ots=1HnU4r5nUa&sig=cbBJXXO-yYmEor9nYl0-UtJDH-4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tv17UZmuJ6WL0QHLqYCIAw&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAQ]

 

In actuality, it's (very) possible that someone can come across the experience of "I AM" (in the equipoise/post-equipoise period,) even if they weren't actively directing their efforts towards that direction. This is has been brought up in this thread by Daniel Ingram, author of MCTOB: http://jaytek.net/KFD/KFDForumOld/kennethfolkdharma.wetpaint.com/thread/3329416/Impermanence,%2BNo-Self%2Band%2BSuffering.html. Keep in mind this is an old article and that the MCTOB does not follow the traditional sutta categorizing of anagami, arahant, etc. Alex Weith has also changed his views based on his more recent experiences: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/10/zen-exploration-of-bahiya-sutta.html

 

 

 

I'm in no way discouraging anyone from takeing up self-enquiry a la Ramana Maharshi style or from pursuing this experience if they already came across it. Just that Buddhist practice is not focused on pursuing this experience and the suttas/sutras are very straightforward about regarding it as delusion.

Again - my context has nothing to do with what you are assigning to it.

 

Look at the context and not the words as labeled by your studies. I could say the "I" "Awareness" "the unborn" the "am" and a whole host of other words - look past your labels - these same words are used by many enlightened teachers in the very same context as i use them - and yet - they have also been used in the context with which you are so familiar.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Now again as I understand it in Shamatha as thoughts arise you note them and then go back to your point of focus (be it breath, counting, a word, what ever). But what happens if thoughts just keep arising the whole time, no matter how long you meditate (I'm talking two hours sometimes). With a non-ending stream of thoughts to note one after the other this almost seems like it morphs in to Vispassana by default.

In shamatha, we don't note interrupting thoughts. We just drop them and divert our focus back to the object. We use some effort (BUT DON'T STRAIN) to focus on the object with as much one-pointed constant concentration as possible; and whenever that concentration wanders we just patiently bring it back - without actively doing anything to whatever it has wandered off to.

[Jetsun]

Continuing the Shamatha vs Vispassana discussion I have a question. So as I understand it in Vispassana you observe your thoughts, whereas in Shamatha you focus on one object. Now again as I understand it in Shamatha as thoughts arise you note them and then go back to your point of focus (be it breath, counting, a word, what ever). But what happens if thoughts just keep arising the whole time, no matter how long you meditate (I'm talking two hours sometimes). With a non-ending stream of thoughts to note one after the other this almost seems like it morphs in to Vispassana by default. Is there something I'm not understanding?

Adyshanti says the point of meditation isn't to become a good meditator, if all you get is thoughts that's fine, if you have a bad meditation that is fine too, if you get no gaps in your thoughts for the rest of your life that is fine. Its more about allowing whatever happens to happen, as the more you try to find the gap in your thoughts the more you want it to happen the harder it is to find and for it to occur.

 

I think the majority of meditation is just worthless struggle, but the struggle eventually brings you to moments where you give up struggling and submit.

[C T]

 

 

 

Shamatha Meditation. Pointers by Trungram Gyalwa, PhD, Harvard.

Edited April 28, 2013 by C T

[Simple_Jack]

Jack,

As Alan Wallace puts it, each persuasion has it's own version and interpretation of Shamtha, but the goal is essentially the same. However, I was discussing shamatha, and you brought in the jhana aspect of it.

The Dzogchen Shamatha practice is different from Theravada. Different in understanding and terminology.

 

You said: "If that were true: then being unconscious or in a dull state devoid of course thoughts would count as 'shamatha."

There is no relation there. Unconsciousness or a dull state devoid of thoughts is missing the 'vividness' and 'Clarity' that is characteristic of shamatha. You argument is faulty.

 

The qualifications for shamatha, in the preliminary practices of Dzogchen, will of course differ because Dzogchen doesn't emphasize jhana states. Like ChNN said, you're not officially practicing Dzogchen until you reach the stage of 'released-shine.' I have yet to hear (when receiving teachings/empowerments, etc.), anyone In Vajrayana mention jhana as necessary for progress. I didn't even think that they found it necessary in order to engage in vipashyana (much like the Burmese Theravada traditions), which would seem true in the (sutra) Mahamudra tradition of the Kagyu lineages. One example of it here, http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=100&t=9598&sid=6a58298f669b9e425bc4738f91abc265&start=20: Jnana - "With sūtra mahāmudrā one is introduced to the view after having established some degree of śamatha. Kagyu teachers usually consider the ninth stage of mental abiding of the desire realm to be a sufficient degree of calm. Dakpo Tashi Namgyal's Moonlight:

 

• How then should one seek to realize tranquility? It is highly praiseworthy for someone to achieve simple tranquility on the preparatory level of the first concentrative absorption [on the plane of sublime form], as stated before. Failing that, one would do well to realize a one-pointed concentration on the plane of desire.

And:

 

• If, during this quiescent state, the mind unceasingly perceives forms, sounds, and the other senses gently, serenely, fearlessly, vividly, and quietly, tranquility has been achieved.

This differs from Je Tsongkhapa who maintained that the preparatory level of the first dhyāna was necessary. But generally, mahāmudrā and dzogchen are mindfulness based practice traditions, and with essence mahāmudrā and dzogchen one is introduced to the view and then maintains non-distraction as the meditation. Tsele Natsok Rangdröl, The Circle of the Sun:

 

• Concerning mindfulness serving or not serving as the meditation: some deluded people appear to concentrate with rigid fixation and believe that keeping their mind hostage is the meditation of mahāmudrā. That is nothing but their personal fault. The authentic great Kagyu masters took self-cognizant mindfulness as their practice, which is identical to the primordially pure self-awareness of the dzogchen system. Thus, despite different terminology, there is no difference in meaning. Neither system, mahāmudrā nor dzogchen, considers that meditation is the conceptual mind that fixates on mindfulness.

The reason for this is succinctly stated by Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche, As It Is, Vol. II:

 

There is no need to do anything to your present wakefulness at that moment; it is already as it is. That is the true meaning of naked ordinary mind, tamal kyi shepa, a famous term in Tibetan. Ordinary mind means not tampered with. There is no 'thing' there which needs to be accepted or rejected; it is simply as it is."

 

I assumed you equated 'shamatha' merely as a state free of discriminating intellect. Sorry for the mix up.

 

I don't think you understand what you are saying. According to the "shamatha-jhanas" and "vispassana-jhanas", the first jhana is supposedly a shamatha jhana (along with the second, third and fourth material jhanas). If you are using mantra to gain accses to the first jhana, then you aren't in the first jhana. Or the second. Your self-assessment is erroneous. By the way, these variations and deviations, although popular today are not accepted by Alan Wallace.

 

I've heard this on many occaisions, by Ajahn Brahm, Shaila Katherine and others. If you do not realize the nimittas, you do not gain access to the jhanas. Now, no doubt you can find the opposite point of view, which there seems to be prevalent in Buddhism, as is the downfall of Buddhism (too many people saying opposite things), but when accomplished meditators say that you need to have nimittas to get to the jhanas, I believe them.

 

The terms 'shamatha-jhana' and 'vipassana-jhana' are modern terminology, which are not found in the tipitaka. Samatha-Vipassana aren't mentioned or taught as separate meditations in the suttas nor are jhanas described in the fashion of Ajahn Bram, etc. In the suttas, there isn't a dividing line between the two. 'Samatha-jhanas', would be the deep absorption as taught in the Visuddhimagga and by Ajahn Brahm & co. 'Vipassana-jhanas', would be a lighter state of absorption, where one is also applying vipassana. http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=4730 - nana: "Hi Mike & Oleksandr,

 

Ajahn Brahm correlates his experience of what he designates as "jhāna" with a very selective and narrow reading of a few sutta-s. Such an interpretation doesn't accurately represent what the sutta-s actually have to say on the matter.

 

Similarly, Ven. Pa Auk Sayadaw teaches what he designates as "jhāna" based on a very narrow reading of the Visuddhimagga.

 

Best wishes,

 

Geoff"

 

In the Anupada Sutta, Sariputta is described by the Buddha as simultaneously entering each of the 9 jhana's, while applying vipassana (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.111.than.html).

 

It's very possible, I hadn't reached the 1st or 2nd jhana: I really don't think my practice should be an example for others. I'm just a novice practitioner. Though, there are objections on the web from practitioners who don't agree with the criteria for jhana as propagated by Ajahn Bram & co. This goes for visual signs of lights appearing as nimittas also: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=15578 - "alan... wrote: what does this say of teachings that do not use any mental imagery or at any rate, people who pay them no mind? for example leigh brasington? is there support in the suttas for this as well? as far as i can tell his method involves a feeling instead of an image.

 

mikenz66: I think that's still a "sign of concentration". Just not visual."

 

I don't think that one approach or description is "wrong" and the other "right." It's natural that there are going to be variances based off of people's practice and what they emphasize.

 

 

Well, yes I have read Daniel Ingram's "MTCTOTB". I found it overly intellectual and complex. Further, I was not impressed with two things: the practice of noting is very similar to mantra repetition and does not lead to stilling the mind. If your mind actively participates in hunting for thoughts in order to note them, that is not a practice of "letting be". In order to note thoughts you have to grasp at them. You have to hunt them down, move your attention all around, keep your mind active. Besides, as one progresses in shamatha, there are so many thoughts that arise and pass that it is literally impossible to note them all. So, I don't believe what he says.

 

The other objection that I have to Daniel Ingram's writings, is that his teachings have a malicious thought-form of the "the dark night". If you spend time with his writings and give credence to his over-emphasis on the 'the dark night', it will soon envelope your karma too and become a reality. If the dark night were true, or worthy of so much note, then you'd find it in many other writings and teachings (Dzogchen included), but you do not.

 

Well, this is your experience. Why should this dictate the decision of someone else? Who's to say that this approach wouldn't work well for another individual? It's true that the Mahasi style of noting wouldn't appeal to everyone. There are many different approaches to samatha-vipassana people could apply.

 

Personally, I prefer the pure sutta style approach . I just recommend MCTOB, because it's somewhat well known and there's a dedicated forum for people who go by that map.

 

I think his description of the 'dark night', is a valid descriptor of a phase of experience that a lot of people have described going through. This phrase was coined from the experience of Christian Saint John of the Cross.

[Simple_Jack]

Continuing the Shamatha vs Vispassana discussion I have a question. So as I understand it in Vispassana you observe your thoughts, whereas in Shamatha you focus on one object. Now again as I understand it in Shamatha as thoughts arise you note them and then go back to your point of focus (be it breath, counting, a word, what ever). But what happens if thoughts just keep arising the whole time, no matter how long you meditate (I'm talking two hours sometimes). With a non-ending stream of thoughts to note one after the other this almost seems like it morphs in to Vispassana by default. Is there something I'm not understanding?

 

That's one approach to vipassana. You could also focus on the body, feelings, mind and mental qualities. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.22.0.than.html.

 

 

 

Again - my context has nothing to do with what you are assigning to it.

 

Look at the context and not the words as labeled by your studies. I could say the "I" "Awareness" "the unborn" the "am" and a whole host of other words - look past your labels - these same words are used by many enlightened teachers in the very same context as i use them - and yet - they have also been used in the context with which you are so familiar.

 

Still not relevant.

 

 

In shamatha, we don't note interrupting thoughts. We just drop them and divert our focus back to the object. We use some effort (BUT DON'T STRAIN) to focus on the object with as much one-pointed constant concentration as possible; and whenever that concentration wanders we just patiently bring it back - without actively doing anything to whatever it has wandered off to.

 

That's yet another approach to samatha-vipassana.

 

Who's, "we?"

[RongzomFan]

Shamatha is Shamatha. Shamatha is not Dzogchen. Allan Wallace specifically says "not Vajrayana, not Dzogchen" and "later practice of Dzogchen". Tertons reveal a whole spectrum of teachings, not just Dzogchen.

 

[Seeker of Wisdom]

To quote Spotless: "look at our original poster here - he is asking things like "can we dumb this down a little"."

 

The OP is asking for advice on shamatha/vipassanna, not a debate about jhana in relation to various traditions and the sutras.

[Maddie]

That's one approach to vipassana. You could also focus on the body, feelings, mind and mental qualities. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.22.0.than.html.

 

 

 

Yea that's pretty much how it seems to play out as I'm doing it. I sit there and thoughts just keep coming one after the other. Sometimes the thoughts are more mental so I am aware of my mind. Other times the thoughts make me feel particular sensations in my body, so I just note that for a while until it goes away. Ect, ect...

Edited April 28, 2013 by dmattwads

[Maddie]

I want to make sure I understand the types of meditation, what they are and what they are not. So the two (or three depending on how you classify it) types of meditation I have been doing are mantra (Zhunti mantra specifically) and mindfulness (both Samantha and Vispassana.

 

Now as far as Mantra goes it seems rather straight forward. You chant your mantra while trying to stay focused to yourself saying it and not letting your mind wander, and when it does bring it back to the mantra.

 

As far as I understand Samantha its pretty much the same as I just described but no mantra, at least no verbal mantra. The manner in which I do it is to think "Buh" on the inhale and "Duh" on the exahale. Again just focusing on that and when the mind wanders bringing it back to that one point of focus. I actually find this one to be the most difficult and least favorite because my mind desperately wants to be engaged in something lol.

 

My understanding of Vispassana is that you welcome what ever arises and simply observe it with out becoming involved in it.

 

So do I seem to have a correct understanding of the types of meditation? If anyone has any pointers and/or advice about any of these I'd be happy to hear it.

[ChiDragon]

Thanks for the link. Ha ha I'm feeling better today. Yesterday, at least the second half of the day I sort of got stressed out about meditation. Pretty much the whole week I had been doing lots of it no problem. And then yesterday I was meditating and really hated it, and then started to feel like I was doing it poorly, and then started to feel like I didn't have any idea what I was doing. I think I was pushing myself too hard and that was stressing me out. I really do more or less understand mindfulness, I guess I was just in a weird place. Oh life.....

 

The key to Chi Kung or meditation is not to fight anything in your thoughts. I recall that you do practice breathing in your meditation. Just remember, even if you see a naked woman teasing in front of you; when you inhaling you just concentrate your inhale; when you exhale, you just exhale. Then you will see nothing and hearing nothing. That is what mind cultivation is all about as part of Chi Kung practice.

 

PS....

This sound so simple, but no one knew how power that was....!!!

Edited May 5, 2013 by ChiDragon

[DragonScholar]

As far as I understand Samantha its pretty much the same as I just described but no mantra, at least no verbal mantra. The manner in which I do it is to think "Buh" on the inhale and "Duh" on the exahale. Again just focusing on that and when the mind wanders bringing it back to that one point of focus. I actually find this one to be the most difficult and least favorite because my mind desperately wants to be engaged in something lol.

 

If I can offer a suggestion, you could try dropping the mantra entirely and just focusing on the sensations of the breath - you could try doing this both at a particular point on your body (maybe the dantien or the end of the nostrils) and also trying to focus on the entire body (i.e. field of bodily sensations) as you breath in and as you breath out.

 

For dealing with boredom I also found this advice to be useful:

 

Boredom. This usually comes from not paying careful attention to what you're doing. If you feel that nothing is happening in the meditation, remind yourself that you're right at the ideal spot to observe your mind. If you're not seeing anything, you're not looking. So try to look more carefully at the breath, or make an effort to see potential distractions more quickly. Remember that the boredom itself is a distraction. It comes, and then it goes. In other words, it's not the case that nothing is happening. Boredom is happening. The fact that you're identifying with it means that you missed the steps in its formation. Look more carefully the next time.

 

A useful perception to hold in mind is that you're like a wildlife observer. You can't make a date with the wildlife to come by a particular place at a particular time. You have to go to a place where the wildlife tends to pass by — such as a watering hole — and then sit there: very alert, so that you can hear them coming, but also very still, so that you don't scare them away. The breath in the present moment is the mind's watering hole — where the movements of the mind most clearly show themselves — so you're at the right spot. Now all you have to do is learn how to master the skill of staying both still and alert.

 

- Thanissaro Bhikku, With Each and Every Breath

 

Best of wishes to you in your practice.

Edited May 5, 2013 by DragonScholar

[Maddie]

If I can offer a suggestion, you could try dropping the mantra entirely and just focusing on the sensations of the breath - you could try doing this both at a particular point on your body (maybe the dantien or the end of the nostrils) and also trying to focus on the entire body (i.e. field of bodily sensations) as you breath in and as you breath out.

 

For dealing with boredom I also found this advice to be useful:

 

 

Best of wishes to you in your practice.

Thanks that's brilliant!

 

* I love the part about being bored meant that you missed the steps in its formation!

Edited May 5, 2013 by dmattwads

[Tibetan_Ice]

I want to make sure I understand the types of meditation, what they are and what they are not. So the two (or three depending on how you classify it) types of meditation I have been doing are mantra (Zhunti mantra specifically) and mindfulness (both Samantha and Vispassana.

 

Now as far as Mantra goes it seems rather straight forward. You chant your mantra while trying to stay focused to yourself saying it and not letting your mind wander, and when it does bring it back to the mantra.

 

As far as I understand Samantha its pretty much the same as I just described but no mantra, at least no verbal mantra. The manner in which I do it is to think "Buh" on the inhale and "Duh" on the exahale. Again just focusing on that and when the mind wanders bringing it back to that one point of focus. I actually find this one to be the most difficult and least favorite because my mind desperately wants to be engaged in something lol.

 

My understanding of Vispassana is that you welcome what ever arises and simply observe it with out becoming involved in it.

 

So do I seem to have a correct understanding of the types of meditation? If anyone has any pointers and/or advice about any of these I'd be happy to hear it.

 

Hi D,

 

Thinking the mantra on the in-breath and out-breath is a form of mantra repetition. It is good for beginners. After a few years of doing that, you will realize that to go further, you have to quit stirring up the mind with mantra and see what happens..

 

In a way I shudder to think that you are reading and following Bill Bodhri's website. Although he addresses very very many topics and has gathered teachings and knowledge from very many sources, there is no way that he could have practical experience in all of them. He is like the KMart of the spiritual world. That is ok if you are a beginner, or even, maybe not. You could waste allot of time and money.. His website seems to be a commercial enterprise designed to sell books and DVD's. I find it distasteful and too much "Jack of all trades, Master of none".. if you know what I mean. (this is my opinion and I'm sure other people here have an equal and opposite opinion.. I do not wish to spar on this one.. )

 

I have to ask you, what are you trying to accomplish? Are you trying to become enlightened? Are you a cultivator and want to have lots of chi? What are your spiritual aspirations? Are you window shopping for something? What exactly?

 

Here is part of "The Attention Revolution", a book which I recommend that you buy and read.

 

TEN STAGES OF ATTENTIONAL DEVELOPMENT

As a framework for the gradual development of attention, I have chosen the most complete and detailed description I have found in any contemplative literature—the ten stages described by the eighth-century Indian Buddhist contemplative Kamalashila in his classic work Stages of Meditation. In a historic debate in Tibet, Kamalashila argued that the thorough purification of the mind requires training in three things: ethics, attention, and contemplative insight. Flashes of insight are valuable, but after the fleeting bliss of such meditative experiences, the dirty laundry of the mind still awaits cleaning. For that, contemplative insight must be supported by a high degree of attentional balance, and this requires systematic training. This path is detailed with landmarks. By using Kamalashila’s outline, we can know where we are, what we should be doing, and what to look for.

The ten stages of attentional development are:

1. Directed attention

2. Continuous attention

3. Resurgent attention

4. Close attention

5. Tamed attention

6. Pacified attention

7. Fully pacified attention

8. Single-pointed attention

9. Attentional balance

10. Shamatha

These ten stages are sequential. The stages start with a mind that cannot focus for more than a few seconds and culminates in a state of sublime stability and vividness that can be sustained for hours. One progresses through each stage by rooting out progressively more subtle forms of the two obstacles: mental agitation and dullness. The successful accomplishment of each stage is determined by specific criteria and is accompanied by a clear sign.

THREE TECHNIQUES To guide meditators along these ten stages, I have chosen from Buddhist teachings three techniques that I have found effective for people in the modern world. These three techniques are the basis for the three divisions of this book. For the first four stages, you should practice whatever method you find easiest. By stage five, the mind is relatively stable, and you can move on to subtler techniques.

For achieving the first four stages, I recommend the practice of mindfulness of breathing, variations of which can be found in Zen, Vipassana, and Tibetan Buddhism.

Mindfulness of breathing means settling your awareness on the sensations involved in breathing, continually returning your attention there whenever your mind wanders.

Beginning with the fifth stage, I recommend a method called settling the mind in its natural state. In this technique, you direct your attention to mental experiences, all the events—thoughts, mental images, and emotions—that arise in the domain of the mind. This method is drawn from the Dzogchen, or “Great Perfection” lineage, but is found in other Buddhist traditions as well. With the instructions for the eighth attentional stage onward, we move on to the still subtler practice of maintaining awareness of awareness itself. The technique is called shamatha without an object.

Here the practice is not so much one of developing attentional stability and vividness as it is of discovering the stillness and luminosity inherent in awareness itself.

The training in mindfulness of breathing may be helpful to anyone, including those seeking to prevent or treat attention deficit/hyperactivity disorders. Many people find the second practice, that of settling the mind in its natural state, to be more challenging, but some meditators take to it naturally. Likewise, the practice of awareness of awareness is subtler still, but it may be optimal from the beginning for those who are strongly drawn to it. You may use any one of the three methods to progress along all ten stages of attentional development, or you may follow the sequence described in this book. How fast you progress will depend on the level of your commitment and the degree to which your lifestyle and environment support such practice.

...

The Practice

Be at ease. Be still. Be vigilant. These three qualities of the body are to be maintained throughout all meditation sessions. Once you have settled your body with these three qualities, take three slow, gentle, deep breaths, breathing in and out through the nostrils. Let your awareness permeate your entire body as you do so, noting any sensations that arise in relation to the respiration. Luxuriate in these breaths, as if you were receiving a gentle massage from within. Now settle your respiration in its natural flow. Continue breathing through your nostrils, noting the sensations of the respiration wherever they arise within your body.

Observe the entire course of each in- and out-breath, noting whether it is long or short, deep or shallow, slow or fast. Don’t impose any rhythm on your breathing. Attend closely to the respiration, but without willfully influencing it in any way. Don’t even prefer one kind of a breath over another, and don’t assume that rhythmic breathing is necessarily better than irregular breathing. Let the body breathe as if you were fast asleep, but mindfully vigilant. Thoughts are bound to arise involuntarily, and your attention may also be pulled away by noises and other stimuli from your environment.

When you note that you have become distracted, instead of tightening up and forcing your attention back to the breath, simply let go of these thoughts and distractions. Especially with each out-breath, relax your body, release extraneous thoughts, and happily let your attention settle back into the body. When you see that your mind has wandered, don’t get upset. Just be happy that you’ve noticed the distraction, and gently return to the breath.

Again and again, counteract the agitation and turbulence of the mind by relaxing more deeply, not by contracting your body or mind. If any tension builds up in your shoulders, face, or eyes, release it. With each exhalation, release involuntary thoughts as if they were dry leaves blown away by a soft breeze. Relax deeply through the entire course of the exhalation, and continue to relax as the next breath flows in effortlessly like the tide. Breathe so effortlessly that you feel as if your body were being breathed by your environment. Continue practicing for one twenty-four-minute period, then mindfully emerge from meditation and reengage with the world around you.

REFLECTIONS ON THE PRACTICE

The above, guided meditation on mindfulness of breathing is based on the Buddha’s primary discourse on this topic. Here is an excerpt from the Buddha’s explanation: Breathing in long, one knows, “I breathe in long.” Breathing out long, one knows, “I breathe out long.” Breathing in short, one knows, “I breathe in short.” Breathing out short, one knows, “I breathe out short.” One trains thus: “I shall breathe in, experiencing the whole body. I shall breathe out, experiencing the whole body. I shall breathe in, soothing the domain of the body. I shall breathe out, soothing the composite of the body.”4 As I noted above, in this practice you don’t try to regulate the breath in any way; you simply note the duration of each in- and out-breath.

In most Theravada commentaries on this discourse, the phrase “experiencing the whole body” is interpreted as referring to the whole body of the breath, that is, the full course of each inhalation and exhalation. Certainly this is a goal of this practice, but there is also value in observing the sensations of the breath throughout the whole body as well. This is a “field approach” to training the attention. Instead of pinpointing the attention on a mental image, a prayer, a mantra, or a specific region of the body, open your awareness to the entire field of sensations throughout the body, especially those related to respiration. The emphasis here is on mental and physical relaxation. If you constrict your mind and your body, shamatha training will aggravate the tension you already have. By settling your awareness in the body, you diffuse the knots in the body and mind. Tightness unravels of its own accord, and this soothes the network of the body.

Mindfulness of breathing is universally emphasized for those who are especially prone to compulsive thinking. As the fifth-century Buddhist master Asanga comments, “If involuntary thoughts particularly dominate your behavior, then focus the mind in mindfulness of the exhalation and inhalation of the breath.” 5 Since nearly everyone living in the modern world is coping with an overload of thinking, remembering, and planning, this may be just what the doctor ordered: a general prescription for soothing and healing overworked bodies and minds. Although Buddhism generally encourages cross-legged meditation, the Buddha encouraged his followers to practice in any of four postures: walking, standing, sitting, and lying down.6 Any of these positions is perfectly suitable.

Not everyone living in the modern world has the same type of mind or nervous system. If you tend toward excitation, you may find lying down especially helpful for releasing the tightness and restlessness of your body and mind. But if you are more prone to laxity, you may simply fall asleep whenever you lie down, so it may be necessary for you to be upright when meditating. Lying down can also be very useful for meditation if you’re physically tired but not yet ready for bed. In this case, you may not be able to rouse yourself to sit upright in a posture of vigilance, but the prospect of lying down for a while may be inviting.

Surrender to your body’s need to rest, and use the supine position to calm the mind as well. This likely will be much more refreshing and soothing than watching television or reading a newspaper. The supine posture may be your only option if you are ill, injured, or frail. It may be especially useful for meditation by those in hospitals, senior care facilities, and hospices. Mindfulness of breathing is great for preparing your mind for mental training, but it can also help you fall asleep. If you suffer from insomnia, the above method can help release tension in your body and mind when you go to bed at night. And if you wake up in the middle of the night and have a hard time falling back asleep, mindfulness of breathing can help you disengage from the thoughts that flood the mind. According to recent studies, about 80 percent of Americans are chronically sleep deprived. So even if all this practice does is help you catch up on your sleep, that’s worth a good deal.

Wallace Ph.D., B. Alan (2006-04-10). The Attention Revolution: Unlocking the Power of the Focused Mind: v.ution (p. 17). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.

Also, Alan Wallace has 30 podcasts of his last retreat at this link:

http://archive.org/details/IntroductionToDzogchenRetreatWithAlanWallace2012

They are free. There is no charge. You have guided meditations, from beginner to advanced, and all the talks and explanations that you could ever want.

TI

[Maddie]

 

Hi D,

 

Thinking the mantra on the in-breath and out-breath is a form of mantra repetition. It is good for beginners. After a few years of doing that, you will realize that to go further, you have to quit stirring up the mind with mantra and see what happens..

 

In a way I shudder to think that you are reading and following Bill Bodhri's website. Although he addresses very very many topics and has gathered teachings and knowledge from very many sources, there is no way that he could have practical experience in all of them. He is like the KMart of the spiritual world. That is ok if you are a beginner, or even, maybe not. You could waste allot of time and money.. His website seems to be a commercial enterprise designed to sell books and DVD's. I find it distasteful and too much "Jack of all trades, Master of none".. if you know what I mean. (this is my opinion and I'm sure other people here have an equal and opposite opinion.. I do not wish to spar on this one.. )

 

I have to ask you, what are you trying to accomplish? Are you trying to become enlightened? Are you a cultivator and want to have lots of chi? What are your spiritual aspirations? Are you window shopping for something? What exactly?

 

Here is part of "The Attention Revolution", a book which I recommend that you buy and read.

 

 

Also, Alan Wallace has 30 podcasts of his last retreat at this link:

http://archive.org/details/IntroductionToDzogchenRetreatWithAlanWallace2012

They are free. There is no charge. You have guided meditations, from beginner to advanced, and all the talks and explanations that you could ever want.

TI

 

Hey Ice, thanks for the info on the book. As far as my goal, yes it is enlightenment, at the very least an optimal situation next life in order to achieve enlightenment asap.

[Simple_Jack]

I want to make sure I understand the types of meditation, what they are and what they are not. So the two (or three depending on how you classify it) types of meditation I have been doing are mantra (Zhunti mantra specifically) and mindfulness (both Samantha and Vispassana.

 

Now as far as Mantra goes it seems rather straight forward. You chant your mantra while trying to stay focused to yourself saying it and not letting your mind wander, and when it does bring it back to the mantra.

 

As far as I understand Samantha its pretty much the same as I just described but no mantra, at least no verbal mantra. The manner in which I do it is to think "Buh" on the inhale and "Duh" on the exahale. Again just focusing on that and when the mind wanders bringing it back to that one point of focus. I actually find this one to be the most difficult and least favorite because my mind desperately wants to be engaged in something lol.

 

My understanding of Vispassana is that you welcome what ever arises and simply observe it with out becoming involved in it.

 

So do I seem to have a correct understanding of the types of meditation? If anyone has any pointers and/or advice about any of these I'd be happy to hear it.

 

I'm sure people replying on here have good intentions, but there is a lot of conflicting advice being given. Especially, since you're following a particular approach of a Theravada tradition. I agree with the bold part of the text, unless of course, a particular approach just isn't working for you. From dharmawheel:

 

 

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=12567&view=unread#unread

Jnana: The similes given for the stages of settling the mind pertain to all different types of people, and in many of the Tibetan practice traditions that use those particular similes there is also explicit acknowledgement that not everyone progresses step by step through all of the same stages. For example, it's entirely possible that some people experience less discursive thoughts than others.

 

As for your particular question, it's usually most productive to follow one approach and not attempt to mix and match based on replies on an internet discussion forum. It's also very helpful to have some direct contact with an experienced teacher from the tradition that you are attempting to practice. This way your questions can be addressed in context, and approaches can be explored that are tailored specifically to you.

 

But generally speaking, the development of śamatha involves more than just eliminating thoughts. There are also subtle bodily and mental feelings (vedanā) of well-being and pleasure that arise with the progression of mental calm. These stages are described in the Śrāvakabhūmi and further explained in the Tibetan Lamrim texts. If you are actually experiencing bodily or mental tension it might be helpful to explore that feeling of tension with an open, non-judgemental awareness. It's possible that by bring sufficient awareness to the feeling the tension will begin to dissolve.

 

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=12470

Jnana: Just to add to what has already been said, mindfulness is a mental factor that accompanies all sorts of conscious states. Mindfulness and attention can be further developed through mental training and meditation, but without some degree of mindfulness and memory even ordinary daily cognitive functioning would be impaired.

 

As already mentioned, explanations will differ from tradition to tradition. But generally speaking, we learn the dharma through a developmental process. This process proceeds from first hearing the dharma, which develops discernment derived from hearing (śrutamayī prajñā). Then we learn to reflect upon the teachings that we've heard, which develops discernment derived from reflection (cintāmayī prajñā). And then we learn to further develop discernment through meditation, which is discernment derived from meditative development (bhāvanāmayī prajñā).

 

In all of these stages mindfulness functions together with other mental factors such as directed thought (vitarka) and analysis (vicāra). In this way we gradually learn how to develop calm abiding (śamathabhāvanā) and clear seeing (vipaśyanābhāvanā), usually by alternating between the two, until the two are united together.

 

That's the general perspective of the gradual approach. There are also Buddhist traditions that emphasize a more direct and sudden approach, where one is introduced to or directed to recognize the nature of the mind directly, and then instructed on how to sustain that recognition through mindfulness. These traditions generally require direct communication and ongoing training with a teacher in the tradition....

.

Again, explanations will vary somewhat from tradition to tradition. Analytical meditation (chegom) is generally considered to be conceptual, but vipaśyanā (lhaktong) can either be conceptual or nonconceptual. As long as one is investigating or looking for the characteristics of a particular phenomenon this is conceptual vipaśyanā -- regardless of whether or not discursive thought and analysis are present. When analysis progresses to where there is the recognition of emptiness, and śamatha and vipaśyanā are inseparably united, then this is nonconceptual vipaśyanā.

 

In Mahāmudrā and Dzogchen traditions the explanations and terms used can be somewhat different.

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=4461&start=40

Malcolm: Here, when we say non-conceptual, we do not mean a mind in which there is an absence of thought.

 

When consciousness is freed from signs and characteristics, this is called the realization of emptiness. An non-conceptual mind may still indeed be trapped by signs and characteristics.

[RongzomFan]

This jnana guy is not a source for anything. He argued with Malcolm many times, because he doesn't understand even basic things.

 

Probably to this day, he doesn't understand the basis of Dzogchen upadesha is the 5PL. Or that Vajrayana was taught by the Mahasiddhas.

Edited May 5, 2013 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2011/10/zen-exploration-of-bahiya-sutta.html

 

 

Xabir is ridiculous. What does this mean?

 

"The logical progression is therefore:

 

- Advaita Vedanta

- Pali Buddhism

- Mahayana Buddhism

- Mahamudra, Dzogchen

 

If we skip Pali and Mahayana Buddhism and jump directly to Mahamudra or Dzogchen, the risk is to interpret Mahamudra or Dzogchen as a Buddhist version of pop-neo-advaita, equating emptiness and rigpa with awareness.

 

This is very common nowadays and some Western lamas seem to encourage this trend to water-down the Dzogchen teachings, as always in order to appeal to a larger public. Business is business."

 

This is just utter nonsense on so many levels. And Xabir doesn't even have Dzogchen transmission. LMAO.

[Simple_Jack]

This jnana guy is not a source for anything. He argued with Malcolm many times, because he doesn't understand even basic things.

 

Probably to this day, he doesn't understand the basis of Dzogchen upadesha is the 5PL. Or that Vajrayana was taught by the Mahasiddhas.

 

Somewhat, agree. I'd rather talk to a khenpo or an authorized teacher any day. He's more of a Mahamudra and Pali canon guy, anyway.

 

Xabir is ridiculous. What does this mean?

 

"The logical progression is therefore:

 

- Advaita Vedanta

- Pali Buddhism

- Mahayana Buddhism

- Mahamudra, Dzogchen

 

If we skip Pali and Mahayana Buddhism and jump directly to Mahamudra or Dzogchen, the risk is to interpret Mahamudra or Dzogchen as a Buddhist version of pop-neo-advaita, equating emptiness and rigpa with awareness.

 

This is very common nowadays and some Western lamas seem to encourage this trend to water-down the Dzogchen teachings, as always in order to appeal to a larger public. Business is business."

 

This is just utter nonsense on so many levels. And Xabir doesn't even have Dzogchen transmission. LMAO.

 

Not written by xabir, but yeah Mahamudra and Dzogchen are complete teachings unto themselves. I don't necessarily agree with the guy, but I do think that being grounded in the Theravada teachings would definitely help facilitate understanding in Mahayana.

[Maddie]

Something I've really been confused about lately. Is it possible to reach enlightenment as a lay Buddhist? I mean if your not celibate at least. If the notion of reaching enlightenment is to be free of desire, then how can you desire a spouse and still attain enlightenment?

[RongzomFan]

Something I've really been confused about lately. Is it possible to reach enlightenment as a lay Buddhist? I mean if your not celibate at least. If the notion of reaching enlightenment is to be free of desire, then how can you desire a spouse and still attain enlightenment?

 

The Mahasiddhas, the founders of Vajrayana, were lay. The Mahasiddhas were Buddhas.

 

Most lamas are lay and have children. There is a countless list of people who realized Buddhahood and were lay.

 

How else are you going practice sexual yoga?

[Maddie]

The Mahasiddhas, the founders of Vajrayana, were lay. The Mahasiddhas were Buddhas.

 

Most lamas are lay and have children. There is a countless list of people who realized Buddhahood and were lay.

 

How else are you going practice sexual yoga?

 

Then what about the issue of desire? I'm confused by it.

[RongzomFan]

What does desire have to do with working with the channels in the body? Buddhahood is all about working with the channels in the body.

[Maddie]

What does desire have to do with working with the channels in the body? Buddhahood is all about working with the channels in the body.

Well the basic foundation of Buddhism the 4 noble truths says that suffering comes from desire.