How deep should sitting/emptiness meditation get?

[thelerner]

I was reminded lately that years ago I'd sit and allow my consciousness to cease. Nothing too grand about that, maybe I'd be somewhere closer to sleep then nirvana realms. Don't know. I read Advashanti a couple years ago and since then I've keep my sitting meditations quiet, close to thoughtless but not allowing myself to lose consciousness. Keeping my awareness with an internal focus or just going duhhh what's going to happen next.

 

Maybe I should do both at times? What are the thoughts out there?

[dawei]

If you allow yourself to lose consciousness, does that mean you simply have a 'blackout' at some point?

 

If it is so deep that you can't know it occurred, then how can you know it occurred other than you don't know what occurred but you think something occurred, which is nothing occurred?

 

I have had that happen once. I often compare it to falling asleep as that split second before you fall asleep you are completely unaware of being awake or asleep. My guess is that we're in both states simultaneously as much as we ever can be.

 

I can see both sides of this and their purpose would appear to differ. Interesting thread.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Trance is a state of reduced thought with reduced awareness. The waking state is a state of active thought with moderate awareness. Deep meditation - samadhi, or, even deeper, jhana - is a state of reduced thought with great awareness. Samadhi is a highly refined state, more vivid, calm and non-conceptual than normal waking consciousness.

 

Many people think that they can't develop samadhi because they can't empty their minds and maintain very good focus. They're approaching it from the wrong angle. Distraction and dullness are not failures. They are strong habits which are worn away with practice to gradually subtler forms.

 

A helpful way to think about this is that stilled thought isn't the GOAL, but the natural RESULT of three qualities: relaxation, stability and vividness.

 

If it ever seems that your mind is completely still, focus a bit more closely and you may find a vast amount of cognition too brief or subtle for you to have noticed before.

 

The purpose of cultivating samadhi is to develop a very stable, clear and vivid mind. Such a mind can be used to penetrate beyond concepts to reality as it actually is - to flow with Tao.

 

As for how deep is deep enough, that level of samadhi, access concentration, is when you could easily sit with absolutely no distraction and enormous vividness for at least 4 hours. This is marked by a surge of bliss, physical pliancy and lightness, and feeling like you could count the atoms of your house.

 

Once you've achieved access concentration, there is no need to sit practising samadhi any more. Many masters have warned people to not get attached to samadhi, blocking out the world and normal mental functioning as though thoughts are bad.

 

This stuff is outlined very well by Alan Wallace in The Attention Revolution.

[Cheshire Cat]

I was reminded lately that years ago I'd sit and allow my consciousness to cease. Nothing too grand about that, maybe I'd be somewhere closer to sleep then nirvana realms. Don't know. I read Advashanti a couple years ago and since then I've keep my sitting meditations quiet, close to thoughtless but not allowing myself to lose consciousness. Keeping my awareness with an internal focus or just going duhhh what's going to happen next.

 

Maybe I should do both at times? What are the thoughts out there?

 

DOn't like the internal focus and trance-like states are a side-path.

Keep it simple bro

 

Imho, suzuki's instructions on zazen are inspiring.

Edited November 21, 2013 by DAO rain TAO

[Tarmander]

I remember when I used to do mantra meditation (not strictly taoist) I would have thoughts that would slowly get quieter and quieter until I was in this lull zone. I think that is what dawai meant...you aren't asleep, there is consciousness there, but it is barely there. Almost like you are asleep but aware of it in a small way. Maybe trance is a good word I'm not sure.

 

Sometimes that was the whole meditation...but once in a while it explodes in your head and your awareness goes from a 1.8 to an 11 and everything seems super real with no thought and all that jazz. I remember I used to think that the whole point of going into that trance was to have that increased awareness afterwards.

[BaguaKicksAss]

As for how deep is deep enough, that level of samadhi, access concentration, is when you could easily sit with absolutely no distraction and enormous vividness for at least 4 hours. This is marked by a surge of bliss, physical pliancy and lightness, and feeling like you could count the atoms of your house.

 

Once you've achieved access concentration, there is no need to sit practising samadhi any more. Many masters have warned people to not get attached to samadhi, blocking out the world and normal mental functioning as though thoughts are bad.

 

Thank you for this; I think perhaps I have been expecting too much of myself. I have been disappointed that I do not reach this state very often lately (though the could sit for 4 hours part of your description doesn't apply to me at all, more like an hour or two realistically). Reaching this seems more random when it does come about, and only about once per week if I meditate daily for an hour, at times has been more like once per month, and when I did 2 hours of meditation per day it was more common. I use meditation as parts of other practice, not of something in of itself that often lately though.

 

Btw, this is the best description of what I have always just called an "altered meditative state" (for lack of knowing any proper terms) ever

 

feeling like you could count the atoms of your house

 

Nailed it .

[BaguaKicksAss]

The trance state stuff is really useful I find, unless you need to remember every minute of the experience afterwards . Though with experience it seems to get a bit easier.

 

I personally prefer the above one. I'm not entirely sure which is more useful; it seems each are useful for different things.

 

I use both for various magical and qigong practices. (I mean when I'm lucky enough to get the one I was going after that day lol)

[ChiDragon]

If the practitioner would have considered the regulation of breathing as a factor in meditation, will that make any difference.....???

Edited November 21, 2013 by ChiDragon

[Aetherous]

The Yoga Sutras say that the path of meditation involves the ceasing of the fluctuations of the mind; sleep (lacking conscious awareness) is described as one of the fluctuations of mind...so it's something to be let go of in exactly the same way you let go of other thoughts that arise. Think of sleep like a totally blank thought cloud that comes over you...remember that it's not your natural state.

In my very limited experience, there are waves of consciousness...sometimes after a dip in consciousness where you were basically in a sleep state, all of a sudden there's a high burst of blank awareness and brightness of mind...and then after that, thoughts develop again. Typically thoughts like "whoa that was kind of intense" at least for me. I view it like a minor kundalini awakening. So basically, notice if you get more alertness immediately after the sleep state, just before thoughts come. That's the gap...similar to the gap between thoughts.

[Jetsun]

I was reminded lately that years ago I'd sit and allow my consciousness to cease. Nothing too grand about that, maybe I'd be somewhere closer to sleep then nirvana realms. Don't know. I read Advashanti a couple years ago and since then I've keep my sitting meditations quiet, close to thoughtless but not allowing myself to lose consciousness. Keeping my awareness with an internal focus or just going duhhh what's going to happen next.

 

Maybe I should do both at times? What are the thoughts out there?

 

If you are following Adyashanti's method I would re-read his book "True meditation" or if you don't have it read the relevant sections of his free book http://www.adyashanti.org/library/The_Way_of_Liberation_Ebook.pdf , his method is good you basically just allow everything to be as it is, but if you can get some sort of personal instruction it is better because you get shown to include the perfect stillness which surrounds all of your experience in your meditation, while the beginner often ignores it even though it is right under your nose and fixates on something

[Brian]

Trance is a state of reduced thought with reduced awareness. The waking state is a state of active thought with moderate awareness. Deep meditation - samadhi, or, even deeper, jhana - is a state of reduced thought with great awareness. Samadhi is a highly refined state, more vivid, calm and non-conceptual than normal waking consciousness.

 

Many people think that they can't develop samadhi because they can't empty their minds and maintain very good focus. They're approaching it from the wrong angle. Distraction and dullness are not failures. They are strong habits which are worn away with practice to gradually subtler forms.

 

A helpful way to think about this is that stilled thought isn't the GOAL, but the natural RESULT of three qualities: relaxation, stability and vividness.

 

If it ever seems that your mind is completely still, focus a bit more closely and you may find a vast amount of cognition too brief or subtle for you to have noticed before.

 

The purpose of cultivating samadhi is to develop a very stable, clear and vivid mind. Such a mind can be used to penetrate beyond concepts to reality as it actually is - to flow with Tao.

 

As for how deep is deep enough, that level of samadhi, access concentration, is when you could easily sit with absolutely no distraction and enormous vividness for at least 4 hours. This is marked by a surge of bliss, physical pliancy and lightness, and feeling like you could count the atoms of your house.

 

Once you've achieved access concentration, there is no need to sit practising samadhi any more. Many masters have warned people to not get attached to samadhi, blocking out the world and normal mental functioning as though thoughts are bad.

 

This stuff is outlined very well by Alan Wallace in The Attention Revolution.

 

Strong parallels here with the shifted state developed through long-term stillness-movement practice, too, for those who also read my attempted description in the thread about practice in daily life. In it, the sitting practice is not discarded but the practice itself expands to include every moment.

[Marblehead]

I don't want to say too much in this thread but I feel I should make this comment:

 

If you lose awareness then you are no longer in the conscious state of wu wei and it is my opinion that this is what empty-minded meditation is all about.

[JohnC]

It seems to me that they train different qualities of awareness.

 

The focus is training your ability to maintain focus and peirce the illusion of something (bringing insight), while the broad awareness is training your ability to be equanimous. Equanimous as defined by your ability to feel something without making meaning out of it, which creates problems (aka suffering).

 

It's like different modes, tight focus in and broadly viewing everything.

 

-----

 

Realizing I didn't answer.

 

I think it's best to let whatever happens happen, and there isn't any bad thing when meditating. When I go deepest sometimes I'll lose total track of time, and sometimes I'll have very vivid moment by moment experiences.

 

What I imagine your defining as losing consciousness, I would call going deep and meditating as you need.

 

It's been my experience that when I sit my body will go for what it needs, and if you need sleep, you'll snooze. If your rested then you'll go deep and start to unwind.

 

I actually think any kind of efforting gets in the way of deep meditation.

 

John

Edited November 22, 2013 by JohnC

[JohnC]

Trance is a state of reduced thought with reduced awareness. The waking state is a state of active thought with moderate awareness. Deep meditation - samadhi, or, even deeper, jhana - is a state of reduced thought with great awareness. Samadhi is a highly refined state, more vivid, calm and non-conceptual than normal waking consciousness.

 

Many people think that they can't develop samadhi because they can't empty their minds and maintain very good focus. They're approaching it from the wrong angle. Distraction and dullness are not failures. They are strong habits which are worn away with practice to gradually subtler forms.

 

A helpful way to think about this is that stilled thought isn't the GOAL, but the natural RESULT of three qualities: relaxation, stability and vividness.

 

If it ever seems that your mind is completely still, focus a bit more closely and you may find a vast amount of cognition too brief or subtle for you to have noticed before.

 

The purpose of cultivating samadhi is to develop a very stable, clear and vivid mind. Such a mind can be used to penetrate beyond concepts to reality as it actually is - to flow with Tao.

 

As for how deep is deep enough, that level of samadhi, access concentration, is when you could easily sit with absolutely no distraction and enormous vividness for at least 4 hours. This is marked by a surge of bliss, physical pliancy and lightness, and feeling like you could count the atoms of your house.

 

Once you've achieved access concentration, there is no need to sit practising samadhi any more. Many masters have warned people to not get attached to samadhi, blocking out the world and normal mental functioning as though thoughts are bad.

 

This stuff is outlined very well by Alan Wallace in The Attention Revolution.

 

Great post and gave me insight into what is Tibetan Buddhism right?

 

John

[exorcist_1699]

I was reminded lately that years ago I'd sit and allow my consciousness to cease. Nothing too grand about that, maybe I'd be somewhere closer to sleep then nirvana realms. Don't know. I read Advashanti a couple years ago and since then I've keep my sitting meditations quiet, close to thoughtless but not allowing myself to lose consciousness. Keeping my awareness with an internal focus or just going duhhh what's going to happen next.

 

Maybe I should do both at times? What are the thoughts out there?

I wonder any preexisting, presided concept , say "not allowing myself to lose consciousness" is good, or any concept of expecting something , great or strange, be happening is good; in such way , right before you start, you already failed for you have used a "post-heavenly " ( or yin-typed) mind to prevent the possible emergence of a meta-Mind ( Taoists call it 'Yuan Shen', Buddhists call it 'Buddha Heart')...

It is only after the pseudo one 'lost', the real One arises...

Edited November 22, 2013 by exorcist_1699

[exorcist_1699]

 

 

 

Many masters have warned people to not get attached to samadhi, blocking out the world and normal mental functioning as though thoughts are bad.

 

..........................

 

If you attach to something , anywhere or any level of your mind , then you already are not or unable to enter the state of " Samadhi " , so how can you claim " get attached to Samadhi" ? Isn't Samadhi something free of any attachment?

 

Forgive me to say that such a warning is contradictory , or even ridiculous, I wonder why so many incompetent "masters" are said to be living in the West ..

Edited November 22, 2013 by exorcist_1699

[Spotless]

Staying conscious depends on many factors. Awareness of breathing, regulating it, the position of your awareness within your space , your posture and staying out of the lure of trance are some of the main components.

 

As your energy begins to move and you settle-in the lighter blocks and compressions in your space begin to clear and you feel increasingly lighter but you may also experience an increasing anxiousness. Many women will begin to go out of their bodies or fall asleep or stop meditating at about 20 minutes because "pain" compressions / pictures start to vibrate high enough to reach resonance - if held long enough they pop and clear the area and you retrieve energy - if not you go unconscious, leave your body or stop and leave your meditation.

The identical thing happens to men but usually about 40 minutes into it.

You can also circumvent this by going into trance but this will remove almost all of the benefits of meditation and can result in happy but relatively unfruitful meditation sessions.

(I would rather not engage in an argument about "trance")

 

Staying centered in the center of your head is where most of us start and it is arguably the best, however, actively moving your attention to other areas can be very helpful for a wide variety of reasons. This is certainly true for individuals that tend to live in their heads.

 

If you begin to fade breathing is one of the best method to pull up and out of a dive. If it is a real tough time short fast aggressive breathing NOT directed toward the base of your spine but into your awareness can work but most of the time simple increased breathing or alternated nose breathing.

 

Sitting in a chair is also a good position for meditation with feet flat on the floor and spine straight. You can also direct energies with your hands at times or slap yourself lightly with both hands or calmly stroke your head and face.

 

As the vibration in your space brings to resonance core compressions you will have a hard time staying awake but usually only for 5 to 15 minutes. I have typically found the greatest difficulty in the first hour, beyond that I am increasingly aware and Very upright by the 3 or 4th hour and beyond with my back straight and chin tucked.

 

Recently a year or so ago I worked in my LDT, then lately in my higher heart center - this is not the 4th chakra or the MDT but slightly to the right of center at about the same height as the actual heart (but on the other side slightly). I was in these areas because that is where I needed to work for some balancing. I say "work" but it is no effort, just holding my attention in an area until it becomes comfortable and the energy flows with me there. Initially my awareness there might feel numb or like I cannot actually be in it but only just outside.

 

Since I started meditating I have never had much of a problem with falling asleep or getting remotely bored.

My meditation was intense and frequent and "by the book" for the first few years. I did not begin doing many of the things I mentioned until later. My meditation is rarely less than one hour and 18 hours is the most I have done in a single sitting.

I mention this to give you some background on my meditation.

 

I started with Hatha Yoga and very quickly moved to Raja Yoga, I Had a radical headspace change when I was about 22 that has not left me. About 4 years ago a whole series of new changes began. Meditation is now a more occasional tool and immensely transformational. Qi Gong is a remarkable adjunct to meditation - it stretches and distributes your energy which otherwise tends to favor your personality/ego/sleep/illusion.

 

I think for the lack of a better word the title of this post uses the word "should" - it is always relative.

Edited November 22, 2013 by Spotless

[Jetsun]

The purpose of Adyashanti's meditation is to stop ALL manipulation of your experience. Which is why he doesn't prescribe a best way to sit or breathe or do because then you have some ideal you are striving for which takes you away from just allowing. You allow everything to be as it is and you allow everything that is impermanent to be impermanent. You stop thinking and assuming you know what you should be experiencing. Do you really know what you should be experiencing in this moment right now? If not then a "bad" meditation may be just as useful as a "good" one.

 

What is ego except the part which thinks it knows best and tries to manipulate things into the way it thinks should be. When that part is relaxed all sorts of things can happen, but they happen out of control of manipulation which is why it can be scary or difficult. This way isn't something he cooked up, its from a long Zen lineage and makes a lot of sense when put into practice.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

If you attach to something , anywhere or any level of your mind, then you already are not or unable to enter the state of "Samadhi", so how can you claim "get attached to Samadhi"? Isn't Samadhi something free of any attachment?

With samadhi, attachments to sense pleasures are greatly pacified. You can still be subject to attachment to mental pleasures: the bliss, luminosity and non-conceptuality of samadhi. Also, with samadhi there is still attachment to views.

 

Combine the attachment to views and attachment to samadhi, and this explains all the people who experience samadhi and latch onto their own expansive awareness as Self.

 

Samadhi is just the beginning - getting a serviceable mind.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

What is ego except the part which thinks it knows best and tries to manipulate things into the way it thinks should be... This way isn't something he cooked up, its from a long Zen lineage and makes a lot of sense when put into practice.

If a decision has been made to not manipulate anything, that is still a kind of manipulation with a goal in mind. This whole pop-Zen thing is a catch-22: "I will release the ego's attempt to control things to get a result by attempting to not control things to get the result of liberation".

 

Why are you trying to let go? Whatever your answer was, it was some form of grasping. See the problem? Release has to come from removing the delusions which are constricting you, and this takes effort.

 

Zen is a path with serious discipline, as well as just allowing. Anapana sati is a major practice in Zen, and, while koans are primarily aimed at triggering satori, koan practice demands intense concentration.

 

We need to provisionally do things to get particular results, until the delusions powering our attachment and aversion are dissolved at the root. Release is not something we DO, we develop samadhi so we can develop penetrating insight so that release HAPPENS.

[Jetsun]

If a decision has been made to not manipulate anything, that is still a kind of manipulation with a goal in mind. This whole pop-Zen thing is a catch-22: "I will release the ego's attempt to control things to get a result by attempting to not control things to get the result of liberation".

 

Why are you trying to let go? Whatever your answer was, it was some form of grasping. See the problem? Release has to come from removing the delusions which are constricting you, and this takes effort.

 

Zen is a path with serious discipline, as well as just allowing. Anapana sati is a major practice in Zen, and, while koans are primarily aimed at triggering satori, koan practice demands intense concentration.

 

We need to provisionally do things to get particular results, until the delusions powering our attachment and aversion are dissolved at the root. Release is not something we DO, we develop samadhi so we can develop penetrating insight so that release HAPPENS.

 

That is the whole dynamic the meditation works through, trying to get anywhere to get any result. The point of that particular meditation is to realise the consciousness or presence which already isn't trying to do anything and rest in that consciousness naturally, so it isn't even something that you decide to do, you are looking to find what is already present, already happening, already what you are.

 

It requiring serious effort and serious discipline to gain breakthroughs may just be a belief, a belief which may be a barrier to realisation. Maybe there is a presence within you which is already at peace, already not striving to achieve and if you abide there all the delusions fall away naturally. But meditation isn't the only method in that path, there is also self inquiry, so there is doing in this path and it isn't like as some neo-vedantan's who say to do anything is useless.

 

Koans are usually realised when the intense concentration is given up and you let go, not by the concentration itself and different Zen traditions teach in different ways. Usually in Zen the intense concentration and discipline is meant to bring you to a point of exhaustion and giving up so you let go and it is through the letting go that the realisations happen. I am not arguing against concentration methods rather trying to add some clarity to the method Adyashanti teaches as thelearner said that was the basis of what he was practising.

 

If you want to practice concentration etc that is fine, but I think it is false to say we NEED to do those things and see no evidence that it is some sort of requirement for a stable progress, I personally only did them for a short time and don't feel the need any more, and if you listen to Adyashanti's many recordings from his retreats they do question and answer sessions from participants and it is clear that many are attaining realisations and breakthroughs from his method without going the whole one pointed focus route first. His talks on his website are full of dozens,maybe hundreds of people getting realisations through his teachings, some of them in a very short space of time like days or weeks, whereas I read about a guy on Tricicyle magazine the other day who had meditated for over 40 years and had no breakthroughs yet.

[thelerner]

My meditation is rarely less than one hour and 18 hours is the most I have done in a single sitting.

I mention this to give you some background on my meditation.

It was a long ago, so I might be totally wrong in my recollection here, but many years ago on the bums I wrote I usually meditate for 30 minutes and TaoMeow (?) wrote back something like '30 minutes isn't meditation, its relaxation. Real meditation doesn't happen til the 3 hour mark.'

 

I'm not sure if that was the exact quote or person who said it, but I remember thinking there was something to that. What do you guys think about that? Is longer better? Ladies? gentlemen?

[Seeker of Wisdom]

...Real meditation doesn't happen til the 3 hour mark.'...What do you guys think about that? Is longer better? Ladies? gentlemen?

If you are training to run a marathon, one mile isn't long enough - but, you might not be able to run really far on a regular basis when you start out. Running a mile every day isn't enough for marathon training, but it does make you fitter. That's when you run distances that are long enough.

 

It's better to commit yourself to a manageable time every day, and increase it as you progress; than to try to do several hours every day, burn out, and be irregular in your practice. And there's still the option to do a mega session one day if you feel up for it.

 

Stretch yourself, but don't try to touch the moon.

[Jetsun]

It was a long ago, so I might be totally wrong in my recollection here, but many years ago on the bums I wrote I usually meditate for 30 minutes and TaoMeow (?) wrote back something like '30 minutes isn't meditation, its relaxation. Real meditation doesn't happen til the 3 hour mark.'

 

I'm not sure if that was the exact quote or person who said it, but I remember thinking there was something to that. What do you guys think about that? Is longer better? Ladies? gentlemen?

Depends on the sort of meditation you are doing, if you have some sort of goal or brain state or level of Qi you want to achieve then it may take a certain amount of time or cycles of your nervous system to go there. But if you want to just allow what is or be aware of awareness then that can be done very quickly, potentially instantly, but often it takes some time to settle down and relax. I think I remember Alan Wallace say that traditionally the sessions in his lineage were about 23 minutes or so. Mingur Rinpoche says you are better off doing lots of small sessions during the day rather than one long one, at least at the beginning. I have heard Stillness Movement hits a sweet spot after 45 minutes (correct me if im wrong) Mo Pai apparently takes 3-4 hours to get deep enough trance. So it depends on what method or path you are walking.

Edited November 24, 2013 by Jetsun

[BaguaKicksAss]

It was a long ago, so I might be totally wrong in my recollection here, but many years ago on the bums I wrote I usually meditate for 30 minutes and TaoMeow (?) wrote back something like '30 minutes isn't meditation, its relaxation. Real meditation doesn't happen til the 3 hour mark.'

 

I'm not sure if that was the exact quote or person who said it, but I remember thinking there was something to that. What do you guys think about that? Is longer better? Ladies? gentlemen?

 

I think I've only meditated once or twice in my life!