Visualisation - any good?

[Apech]

Are we going to discuss mizners confusion of jhana and mahamudra/dzogchen?  Here or in another thread?

[liminal_luke]

Part of the debate may stem from disparate definitions of the term "meditation."  Adam Mizner says that meditation is Jhanna; everything else is mind training or some such.  By this definition visualization may not be useful; I wouldn't know.  I prefer a more expansive definition that covers everything from sitting in a deliberately quiet way to mindfully doing the dishes.  While this definition arguably lacks precision, it's democratic and refreshingly lowbrow.  

Edited January 4, 2023 by liminal_luke

[Apech]

1 minute ago, liminal_luke said:

Part of the debate may stem from disparate definitions of the term "meditation."  Adam Mizner says that meditation is Jhanna; everything else is mind training or some such.  It may well be that by this definition visualization isn't useful.  I prefer a more expansive definition that covers everything from sitting in a deliberately quiet way to mindfully doing the dishes.  While this definition arguably lacks precision, it's democratic and refreshingly lowbrow.  

mindfulness is bunk - there I said it.

[liminal_luke]

9 minutes ago, Apech said:

mindfulness is bunk - there I said it.

 

It's true that mindfulness doesn't lead to any of the exalted meditative states many Bums aspire to.  Still, it beats mindlessness.  Don't ask me how I know.

[forestofclarity]

30 minutes ago, Apech said:

Are we going to discuss mizners confusion of jhana and mahamudra/dzogchen?  Here or in another thread?

 

Where did that happen? 

[doc benway]

4 hours ago, freeform said:

Yeah that’s interesting, thanks.

 

My experience of meditative absorption is samadhi or on (very) rare occasions Jhanna…

 

In my experience these cannot be practices… they also can’t be achieved through mechanical means… there’s no practice that leads to samadhi (probably a controversial statement).

 

I agree that statement is true, not particularly controversial in the dzogchen community. I consider it as a blessing, divine if you will. I also think there’s truth in the converse - everything we have done in this and prior lives led to this samadhi, nothing was ever out of place or we might not be here; more precisely, we have never been so much as a hair’s breadth from our nature.

 

Quote

 

Any and all contrivances stop access to these states. Even the tiniest ‘fly in the ointment’ of the mind - any subtle unconscious striving or attempt to achieve anything at all will simply lead to mental ‘sense-consciousness’ type experience.
 

Visualisation would be like an angry hippo in the ointment from this perspective 😅

 

i agree with you and there is also this in my tradition - once we gain some familiarity and stability in meditation, the instruction is to begin to allow the flies to be in the ointment and if your meditation is not disturbed the practice is correct, even hippos - it’s called integration. The teaching says ‘when the flame is small it is good to protect it, when larger it is good to test it, and when blazing it is the hippos that feed it and help the connection and stability to deepen and broaden.

 

Quote

All ‘practices’ can do is prepare the ground for absorption to arise of its own accord (if I’m lucky). Creating a body and mind that is fit for these profound states to arise.

 

Yes and they can also be used to strengthen when we’re ready. We begin by intentionally engaging in virtuous activity (mantras, prayers, circumambulation), then neutral activity (eating, sleeping, dreaming, crapping, sexing), and finally non-virtuous activity (this can be very controversial - nuff said for here).

 

Quote

 

This assisting you’re talking about sounds much like these preparatory practices if I understand correctly.

 

 

Yes initially but everything is integrated eventually….

[Miffymog]

8 hours ago, freeform said:

...

I feel it has some truth to it - as the results of imagination will manifest at the level of mind/imagination (sense-consciousness) - and not on a physical or spiritual… And that’s not necessarily a bad thing - sense consciousness is clearly useful… 

 

Not always true. In Yi Quan imagination/visualisation is quite a fundamental aspect of the practice.

 

Imagining a gentle force acting against you does produce a physical response.

[Miffymog]

8 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

Part of the debate may stem from disparate definitions of the term "meditation."  Adam Mizner says that meditation is Jhanna; everything else is mind training or some such.  By this definition visualization may not be useful; I wouldn't know.  I prefer a more expansive definition that covers everything from sitting in a deliberately quiet way to mindfully doing the dishes.  While this definition arguably lacks precision, it's democratic and refreshingly lowbrow.  

 

This for me under lines the debate.

[Apech]

10 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

 

It's true that mindfulness doesn't lead to any of the exalted meditative states many Bums aspire to.  Still, it beats mindlessness.  Don't ask me how I know.

 

https://eu-browse.startpage.com/av/anon-image?piurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ikea.com%2Fpt%2Fen%2Fimages%2Fproducts%2Frengoera-integrated-dishwasher-ikea-300__0846416_pe779071_s5.jpg%3Ff%3Ds&sp=1672828400T6364ea44cf73032519758e30612242ec234fd3eb86d3090c87f768a9ec7f7229

[Apech]

9 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

 

Where did that happen? 

 

In the same interview.

[Vajra Fist]

10 hours ago, Apech said:

mindfulness is bunk - there I said it.

 

So many sweeping statements here! 

 

Mindfulness - while doing the dishes, cooking a meal - represents the extension of an object of shamatha in your daily life. It is a practice commonly used in zen monasteries. Chop wood, carry water. Do not become attached to transcendent states. Embody them.

 

Other traditions, like in Pa Auk, instruct monastics to maintain awareness of the breath while off the cushion. That is also an extension of practice, and also a form of mindfulness.

 

I think you're probably referring to the perception that mindfulness of your daily activities can replace sitting practice, which is most probably a misperception. But, like visualisation, it has its place. 

 

 

 

[Vajra Fist]

15 hours ago, freeform said:

I know for a fact that visualisation cannot play a part in genuine Neidan, Qi cultivation or meditative absorption… it’s just a mechanistic impossibility

 

I accept that visualisation or any form of contrivance might be an impediment to jhana. But what if jhana isn't the goal?

 

For instance Goenka, and to a certain extent Mahasi, teach meditation in such a way that jhana doesn't arise. And yet, there have been, reportedly, many people who have entered the stream through those methods. 

[awaken]

The mandala is the inner view of the second stage of Yangsheng, which is naturally produced

rather than for visualization

 

曼陀羅是二階段陽生的內景，那是自然產生的

而不是用來視覺化觀想的
 

In the second stage of yangsheng, various shapes, characters, and seals will be produced

 

二階段陽生會有各種形狀，文字，印章產生

 

When you really reach the second stage of yangsheng, when these inner scenes really appear in front of you, you will know that those imaginations turned into reality are unrealistic fantasies

 

當你真正到達二階段陽生，當這些內景真正出現在你面前時，你才會知道那些事覺化的想像都是不切實際的幻想

 

Some people visualize the sun, but I have seen the sun countless times in my meditations

 

有些人會觀想太陽，但是我的靜坐中已經出現無數次太陽了

 

Not only the sun, the stars, the moon have appeared

 

不只太陽，星星，月亮都出現過

 

Not to mention the northern lights that have been circling in front of my eyes for more than 20 years

 

更別說在我眼前繞了二十幾年的北極光

 

Instead of discussing whether visualization is useful here, why don't you practice like me and practice to the second stage of yangsheng, so that these phenomena will naturally appear?

 

各位與其在這裡討論觀想有沒有用處，為什麼不跟我一樣，練到二階段陽生，讓這些現象自然出現呢？

Edited January 4, 2023 by awaken

[blue eyed snake]

12 hours ago, Apech said:

mindfulness is bunk - there I said it.

 

mindfulness is not bunk, but it's not meditation.

like the singing of mantra, it's not meditation but it's not bunk either.

 

No idea were there place is in the spiritual practice or what theoretical ideas underpin it.

 

When first I fell ill i have had a period of about half a year that I was not able to sleep, the singing of mantra saved me from becoming psychotic. 

 

Mindfulness is a very useful technique for curbing the ever chattering monkey-mind, just like the singing of mantra.

I would not call that bunk.

 

when it is sold as a mediation technique, that way of selling it earns the name of bunk.

[blue eyed snake]

13 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

Part of the debate may stem from disparate definitions of the term "meditation."  Adam Mizner says that meditation is Jhanna; everything else is mind training or some such.  By this definition visualization may not be useful; I wouldn't know.  I prefer a more expansive definition that covers everything from sitting in a deliberately quiet way to mindfully doing the dishes.  While this definition arguably lacks precision, it's democratic and refreshingly lowbrow.  

 

yes, not defining what we talk about is often reason for squabble

 

I have no idea what Jhanna and samadhi are for instance and do not want to plow through buddhistic texts to find an answer.

 

I've long called my sitting sessions meditation, then, somehow the sense of me fell away after some time of sitting. The recognition dawned on me that maybe that is what is meant with the word meditation. So now I call the sitting sessions preliminaries, when that falling happens, it's meditation.

just my personal take on it.

 

anybody here that can explain the terms samadhi and jhana here in simple English words?

[blue eyed snake]

15 hours ago, dwai said:

Another type is in qigong/taichi - visualizing a taichi ball while doing the forms.

 

oh yup, forgotten about that.

 

[Barnaby]

13 hours ago, freeform said:

I felt that in Damo’s interview with the Vajrayana fellow he was saying that there’s a key element missing (Qi) in Vajrayana practice… and it’s this missing element that is making the visualisation aspect impotent.

 

Mitchell is presenting this exchange as a "scoop". He seems to be moving into journalism. If so, he'd do well to observe one of that discipline's traditional precepts: triangulation.

 

This is from Hershoff's LinkedIn page:

 

Mindfulness takes you to a new place. We teach an accurate and powerful map to your inner landscape for empowering your Warrior, Ruler, Creator, Lover and Guru. A combination of visualization, color, sacred sound, 5-Element movements for true mindbody transformation; Based on ancient Tibetan and Indian energy healing and meditation sources, integrated with Western psychology and neuroscience. Author, speaker, holistic doctor and visionary, Asa is founder of the Human Code, a system of personal transformation and psychological change that encapsulations the knowledge and methods of self-growth that he has discovered and synthesized over the last 40 years of search and discovery.

 

Now to me, this reads more like your average spiritual bricoleur than a tradition-based Vajrayana practitioner.

 

As we know, Qi is a Chinese concept rooted in ancient Chinese tradition. How could it possibly be the "missing link" for a tradition that developed in medieval India?

 

Similarly, how is saying "Nei Dan is kind of like Tummo" anything more than a priori justification and lazy thinking? 

 

Hershoff appears to have hitched his wagon to Mitchell at a recent Vajrayana conference in Bhutan, to which they had both been invited as keynote speakers (expenses paid?). He speaks with the zeal of the convert, at one point declaring how his life has changed since he "found Damo".

 

Hershoff strikes me as an unreliable witness. There is no way that I'm taking his uncorroborated testimony as gospel on anything.

 

I shall now be bowing out of this subject. I have more pressing concerns than generating buzz for someone else's marketing op 

 

[Shadow_self]

32 minutes ago, Barnaby said:

As we know, Qi is a Chinese concept rooted in ancient Chinese tradition. How could it possibly be the "missing link" for a tradition that developed in medieval India?

 

 

Because the objective energetic network doesnt fluctuate by geography. The area of focus and development in the network might be different, the network is the same

 

Qi isn't some "concept". It indeed has a substance quality.

 

It may have a broad usage....but in terms of actually building the stuff, its literally feels like liquid electromagnetism moving inside you

[awaken]

Qi is a concept developed only in modern China. The concept of ancient China is not Qi, but relative yin and yang, water and fire

 

氣是近代中國才發展出來的概念，古代中國的概念不是氣，而是相對的陰陽，水火

 

 

If you have paid attention to ancient literature, you will know this very clearly

 

各位如果有在關注古代文獻，就會很清楚的知道這一點

 

 

（益）生曰○（祥），心○（使）○（氣）曰○（強），勿（物）○（壯）則老，是胃（謂）不道。

 

益生曰祥，心使氣曰強，物壯則老，是謂不道。

 

Greed for birth is a bad omen, using the mind to control Qi is called violence, and things that are too strong will grow old, which is the so-called non-Dao.

 

The only sentence Lao Tzu unearthed from Chu bamboo slips in Guodian mentioned "Qi"

 

郭店楚簡出土的老子唯一講到「氣」的一句話

 

 

 

Edited January 4, 2023 by awaken

[nyerstudent]

In my experience "visualization" can be a loaded term meaning different things in different practices. So debating it can be entangled in these definitions, compounded by translation nuances. For example, a few variations I've seen:

 

1). There are practices where you visualize something in front of you. You construct an image in your minds eye. 

 

2) Or you can visualize chi running through a channel, or collecting in a dan tian, which implies moving energy with intention. 

 

3) Or visualize a sun behind or on top of you. Obviously, this does not appear in your minds eye, but are setting an intention. 

 

"Mechanistically" I believe these are all distinct, to some extent. Do others agree / disagree? Thanks for the discussion.  

[Shadow_self]

1 hour ago, Barnaby said:

Similarly, how is saying "Nei Dan is kind of like Tummo" anything more than a priori justification and lazy thinking? 

 

Actually thats not quite correct. They do indeed have similarities, they also have differences

 

You want to know what the big secret? Here is one for you

 

It is EXTREMELY DIFFICULT to access spiritual matrix via the physical body. It is too far removed from the physical form. Id nearly go as far as to say for all but a few, it is impossible

 

So talking about chakras etc, is of little use

 

You want to know what the other secret is? The energetic matrix is the key to doing so.

 

A lot internal work shuns it when it is from a religious background, because it quite literally opens you up to the world of ghosts and whatnot. And I can say that without any reservation this is true. Bur that is on reason why the world is rife with impotent methods, it is deliberately removed

 

It is the bridge between form and formless

 

That is also why you are told Neidan is extremely limited without Neigong. 

 

In fact, one of the ingredients of the elixir requires a high level of neigong attainment.

 

But the Tibetans seem to have left that out (actually in reality they know this, and some of the methods for building qi are contained within the Lukhang temple murals, but that goes unnoticed to most) .

 

It never made its way here, and likely it never will, because people are content with thinking Vajrayana in its current western presentation is fine

 

Quote

Hershoff appears to have hitched his wagon to Mitchell at a recent Vajrayana conference in Bhutan, to which they had both been invited as keynote speakers (expenses paid?). He speaks with the zeal of the convert, at one point declaring how his life has changed since he "found Damo".

 

 

I would return you to @freeform very apt comparison

 

a real slap vs an imaginary slap

Edited January 4, 2023 by Shadow_self

[freeform]

17 minutes ago, nyerstudent said:

"Mechanistically" I believe these are all distinct, to some extent. Do others agree / disagree? Thanks for the discussion.  

Yeah they’re certainly distinct within the scope of visualisation.

 

From the point of something like Neigong, they’re all still a stimulation of the mind - so engaging in any three of them would ‘scatter the qi’ - or rather just cause a bunch of it to rise to the head - making it impossible for it to fully sink and begin consolidating into something denser and more powerful…

 

There’s also visualisations that kinda help explain a concept…

 

Like the concept of Sung will sometimes be explained by the image of pine tree branches moving softly but in a springy fashion when the wind blows through.

 

Or the elasticated connection that builds through the body as a well tuned guqin string that can carry a harmonious vibration…

Edited January 4, 2023 by freeform

[Shadow_self]

51 minutes ago, nyerstudent said:

In my experience "visualization" can be a loaded term meaning different things in different practices. So debating it can be entangled in these definitions, compounded by translation nuances. For example, a few variations I've seen:

 

1). There are practices where you visualize something in front of you. You construct an image in your minds eye. 

 

2) Or you can visualize chi running through a channel, or collecting in a dan tian, which implies moving energy with intention. 

 

3) Or visualize a sun behind or on top of you. Obviously, this does not appear in your minds eye, but are setting an intention. 

 

"Mechanistically" I believe these are all distinct, to some extent. Do others agree / disagree? Thanks for the discussion.  

 

This is where the issue lies for me

 

Because this method of moving and gathering and storing qi, its done via a mixture of stepping back with the mind, and various physical methods (which includes breathing).

 

All that hand waving you see in qigong has a purpose

 

The idea that qi is lead by the mind is one that confuses so many people

 

Like @freeform just said, thinking about it causes it to rise, so then by default that means there must be another mechanic

 

Well to use an example, we could take a ball

 

If you want to pick the ball up you grip it tightly and pick it up...you have intended

 

To have it fall (sink) you just let it go and if you pay attention, you'll notice it falls

 

So when you want to sink the qi, you let go, use attention (or passive awareness) and we can also use our hands to help it along

 

You dont need to picture winds or colours or balls or any of that, these are problematic. 

 

The below video is a great example of it

 

 

Edited January 4, 2023 by Shadow_self

[nyerstudent]

52 minutes ago, freeform said:

From the point of something like Neigong, they’re all still a stimulation of the mind - so engaging in any three of them would ‘scatter the qi’ - or rather just cause a bunch of it to rise to the head - making it impossible for it to fully sink and begin consolidating into something denser and more powerful…

 

Thanks! I cannot really comment on Neigong, but that makes sense.

 

In the shengong that I practice, it is very much a component. I cannot comment if in isolation it'd have the affect of making qi "rise to the head", but as part of the entire practice, it has many beneficial effects on mind, body, health, intuitive abilities, and so on. The system is (deliberately) light on "mechanistic details", but the goals are different than what you describe ("sinking and consolidating") -- more about absorption (loaded term, but I mean it in the simplest sense).  

[forestofclarity]

2 hours ago, blue eyed snake said:

anybody here that can explain the terms samadhi and jhana here in simple English words?

 

Classically, there are two states of concentration: dharana, in which the mind is brought to bear on an object, and samadhi or dhyana, wherein the mind is "absorbed" into the object. 

 

Jhana is basically the Buddhist equivalent of absorption (i.e. dhyana), but has 4-8 levels depending on the teaching. It appears Adam would call the prior state samatha (aka shamatha, i.e. tranquility). He rightly identifies that the mind should not be forced on the object, but brought to rest on the object.

 

The first jhana typically has 5 factors: applied thought, sustained thought, one-pointedness, joy and happiness. What these terms mean is subject to much debate depending on the specific Theravada teacher and tradition, and whether they stick with the Suttas (recordings of the oral teachings of the Buddha) or use commentaries such as the Visudhimagga.

 

Of course, people may tell you its very simple and the true, original, inner door, secret, esoteric view is the view of their particular school (and actually, this often applies across the board in various spiritual traditions). 

 

So Adam is not really being as controversial as he sounds, given that he is rooted in the Theravada Visudhimagga tradition, but with a Thai forest take (this is very key, and actually strikes me as a bit Tantric/Yogic and is also quite controversial in Theravada circles). Based on what I've read in his book, in daily life you would practice only vipassana. On the cushion you would start with shallower forms of shamatha and proceed to deeper forms, and then in the causes and conditions align jhana would arise. Vipassana plays a part, but I am not fully clear on how he teaches this on the cushion. In addition, metta is very key to his teaching, as it should be, along with sila. However, I am not a student of his and these are just my brief impressions. 

 

In modern day, some would use the word "meditation" to cover the entire length and breadth of practice.

 

The interesting thing is that at some point, the fundamental appearance of the mind shifts or changes from one's ordinary mind to another state altogether wherein the senses, thinking, your persona, etc. completely vanish which is variously interpreted in different traditions over the world. 

 

 

Edited January 4, 2023 by forestofemptiness