Meditation Progression

[Robin]

I'm curious to hear about some people's understanding of progression in meditation.

 

As an analogy, I'm an amateur computer programmer. I have spent a lot of time teaching myself from various sources. I also recently took a MOOC (massive open online course) in programming. The course was very well designed with a clear structure and progression from complete basics to more complex material.

 

This was very useful for a couple of reasons. One is that in “submitting” to an externally imposed structure, I was encouraged to look at material that might either not have occurred to me to look at, or been too difficult or to easy.

 

So an external structure can help to reduce the “Swiss cheese” phenomenon, which is a major pitfall in self-education. It also builds on basic skills with clear sense of direction and development.

 

I have not come across many meditation teachers or traditions where this kind of clear progression is used or emphasised. It’s often been something of a “buffet” of various techniques which I can try and use as I see fit, with no clear signposts as to when and how to develop my practice.

 

While I really value this kind of experimentation and empirical research, and believe that it is actually indispensable for empowerment and maturity as a practitioner, nonetheless I also believe that external structures for progression are extremely important.

 

It would perhaps be foolish and conceited of me to imagine that I can educate myself in any subject better than teachers who have learned it thoroughly with the support of a tradition, and who have designed a curriculum based on years of experience of teaching and practicing.

 

I’m also aware that practice often is circular, and so called “beginner’s” practices can also be used further down the road as “advanced” practices. I’ve been told d that a certain very simple Dzogchen practice is all that is needed for complete enlightenment, but that many people aren’t happy with simplicity, and so there are more complex practices to satisfy them.

 

I feel that at my particular stage of my meditation journey, it would be good to undertake some kind of meditation equivalent of a MOOC with a really good “spiritual university,” to make sure my foundation is solid and help me on my way.

 

I’d particularly like to hear any thoughts on this from a Theravada, Mahayana, Bon, Hindu or Taoist perspective.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

I've found a clear depiction of the states and stages one goes through from Theravada, particularly the 'Pragmatic (or Hardcore) Dharma' variant. 

 

Anyway... the stages of shamatha practice are:

• Improving calm and concentration until you reach -
• Access concentration (http://downtoearthdharmablog.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/access-concentration-pragmatic-approach.html)
• Rapture and joy starting to develop alongside better concentration until -
• The jhanas: 1-8.
  • *The form jhanas
    - The 1st jhana - consists of (subtle) thinking, (subtle) examining, rapture (physical bliss) and joy (mental bliss). The rapture and joy come from pacifying the hindrances.
    - The 2nd jhana - with the fading of all thought and examination comes unification of mind, which causes deeper rapture and joy.
    - The 3rd jhana - as above, but with rapture dropped, so has deeper joy.
    - The 4th jhana - with joy dropped too, there's deep unification of mind and equanimity, profoundly still.
    
    *The formless jhanas
    - Infinite space - like the 4th jhana, but letting go of all sense of location so it feels like space extending boundlessly in all directions.
    - Infinite consciousness - like the above, but tune out of the space and into the awareness of the space.
    - Nothingness - like the above, but you sort of 'ignore' everything so you get focused on the perception of utter blankness. Try to imagine a void, and you'll see that blankness is itself a mental image. This jhana is sort of like that.
    - Neither perception nor non-perception - tune out of the experience of attending to that nothingness, so experience becomes very refined. There's something there, vividly so, but it's like a wisp of smoke. 

The stages of vipassana are more complicated - you move through a set of states until getting to the first level of awakening, and repeat for further levels. Here's one description of the progress of insight: http://contemplativefitnessbook.com/book-two-theory/the-progress-of-insight-map/

 

Much more detail on all this is in http://static.squarespace.com/static/5037f52d84ae1e87f694cfda/t/5055915f84aedaeee9181119/1347785055665/

 

Generally the practice itself doesn't need to be changed much, it's more that you change and approach the same practice differently.

 

Hope this helps.

[wilfred]

was going to post something similar, another reference showing the stages/progression via the Theravada system:

 

http://www.paaukforestmonastery.org/books/teaching_training.pdf

 

(skip to p.57 for some maps/diagrams showing the order of progression)

 

also worth noting the range of meditation objects used in this training path, particularly four elements. four elements is supposed to be a very important foundation (mandatory here, doing it early is the fastest route of progression) and from my experience very effective at cultivating direct perception - a faculty that is critical in the later stages (vipassana).

[Robin]

Thanks for the info guys.

 

If anyone is fairly knowledgeable about mindfulness practices, is there any recommendation as to when to practice awareness of breathing vs when to practice body scanning? Is one considered to be more "advanced" than the other, as in, for example, once the awareness of breathing is strong and clear, it's better to do the body scanning? Also where/when does cultivation of metta begin/fit in to this? For example, is it a good idea to keep two practices going at once (as in metta for one session a day, body scan for another)?

 

I know I could easily just experiment with all this, and indeed I have/am, but I want to know if there is a body of collective experience/knowledge which suggests that certain combinations/sequences of the various mindfulness practices have been found to be more effective/efficient than others.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Mindfulness of breathing is particularly useful as a shamatha practice (for cultivating concentration/calm), while body scanning is a vipassana practice (for insight). (This division is a little artificial, but it's a useful heuristic, especially early on). Metta is a great shamatha practice too, but it's also something you can work on during your day, off the cushion, to cultivate the heart.

 

I would suggest to focus on shamatha until you're confident you've got access concentration. Try mindfulness of breathing for a while, try metta for a while, try doing a session of each for a while. You kinda have to feel your way a bit.

 

Once you've got access concentration sorted, then start to add body scanning. It's up to you whether you want 50/50 shamatha/vipassana or some other ratio. Key to vipassana is momentum. Try to keep up body scanning off the cushion too, as much as possible.

 

With body scanning, it's important to emphasise moment to moment awareness. Try to see how the sensations are constantly flickering, on the order of fractions of a second. (Hence the need for access concentration!) How fast is stuff arising and passing? That's how you really see impermanence.

[Robin]

I'd like to understand better the distinction between shamantha and vipassana practices.

 

I'm also curious where other types of meditation fit in, such as "resting in pure awareness," or working with an agenda (deliberately bringing up feelings and thoughts related to a particular issue the we want to resolve at a core level, and then letting the charge dissipate, either through simply "hosting", or using the breath to release the energy or some other technique).

 

I guess there's a whole load of more "energetic" practices which overlap with "meditation," and/or are considered by their proponents to be meditation.

 

Perhaps all the more reason to find a reliable guide...

[Seeker of Wisdom]

 

I'd like to understand better the distinction between shamantha and vipassana practices.

 

Shamatha is about cultivating a strong, balanced, calm, focused mind. The basic mechanics of it is you take an object such as the breath, gently put your attention on it to the exclusion of everything else, and, whenever you notice you're off the object, you gently bring yourself back to it. Through this practice, the mind learns to settle one-pointedly without much effort, without being restless or sleepy. This is meant to take you to access concentration and the jhanas.

 

Here's a decent guide to doing the practice: http://www.wildmind.org/mindfulness

 

Vipassana is about cultivating the kind of insight/wisdom you need to awaken - directly perceiving the Three Characteristics (impermanence, dukkha, anatta) in your experience. There are various approaches to it, such as body scanning or noting practice. Rather than focusing single-pointedly on one object, you pay attention to whatever comes up in the present objectively, in as much detail as possible. For example, you may have an itch on your face - is that one sensation, or a cloud of very rapidly arising and passing (i.e. impermanent!) mini sensations?

 

Shamatha is like calibrating your instrument so you can perfectly measure anything. Vipassana is like running the experiment. Shamatha is like getting a bright, steady torch. Vipassana is like reading the markings on the cave wall.

 

You might find it helpful to read Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha if you haven't already. Part 1, Chapters 2, 3 & 4 will explain the above a bit more.  

 

 

I'm also curious where other types of meditation fit in

 

Hence why the shamatha/vipassana way of mapping meditation is a bit artificial, and just one way of doing it. It's a very useful concept for Theravada, and often for other Buddhist systems. It may not map so well onto practices from other traditions, and with different goals. Dividing spiritual practices into different classes is like dividing the planet up into continents. Are Europe and Asia separate continents, or Eurasia? It depends what you're trying to do - so long as you don't confuse Istanbul for Kenya, you're doing something right.

[RigdzinTrinley]

In the tradition I'm thought in its (I guess) almost impossible without a teacher (and that relationship has to deepen into a guru disciple relationship)

 

Otherwise it doesn't work

 

I follow a dzogchen lineage by the way

 

Many people say dzogchen practice is very simple - yes if you have realisation it is very simple

 

If you can see your guru as the Buddha and everything he or she does as enlightenment manifest yes its simple

 

If you can't there is a progressive path that is very well designed to "undo" samsaric perception

 

Then again that path is almost impossible to travel without a lineage master (its more fun with one anyway )

 

I sometimes feel that in the west the therevada teachings are much more suitable and will yield faster results and maybe certain aspects of the Tibetan tradition to complement them, but the pure tantric path will take some more generations to travel west completely (my humble opinion)

 

The tantric path is very fast to but I guess it takes more preparation to start working - ones the thing runs - it runs and no one can stop it (you'll get thoroughly cooked, if you like it or not)

 

Because it takes more time of study to actually get it going and all those sadhana retreats to complete (who has time for that)

 

I at one point just moved to India to really study and practice I saw no way to do it in europe in the intensity my being needs

 

Was a great idea so far I worked hard for many years and now I do have a good relationship with my lamas and get all the teachings they think I need ad all the clarification I think I need

 

But to do that in Europe - as a sort of hobby

 

I'm not sure about that... Whereas the therevada methods yes perfect no doubt

 

Tantra from books? Without a lot of time to study and practice and be with your teacher to receive the lineage transmission

 

Difficult I really think that its difficult to do and really go deep bit not impossible

 

Just more of a headache

Edited January 24, 2016 by RigdzinTrinley

[Robin]

Thanks RigdzinTrinley,

 

That's a very interesting and helpful perspective. I'm hearing you say both paths are very effective and valuable, but that depending on various factors one may be more suitable than another at a given time in one's life.