|
Post by zendancer on Jun 27, 2011 23:50:52 GMT -5
Meditation itself is fine. As long as you don't take it to some religious level where meditation is 'the way' and all that crap. I would consider ATA to be meditation. I would consider a walk to be meditation. It's not really about meditating your way to enlightenment, it's more about taking the time to just chill out and relax. Let the thoughts dissipate instead of encouraging them. I agree. ATA is meditation (although some forms of meditation are not ATA), and mental silence is its own reward. The Buddha taught meditation for an imminently practical reason. Most people have frenetic minds and no psychological space. Unable to differentiate between thoughts and reality, they believe their ideas, become attached to their opinions/judgements/expectations/etc, and suffer a great deal as a consequence. Meditation, if one does not get attached to it, creates a great deal of mental spaciousness. As Heretic pointed out, it also delivers some great health benefits. Tolle once jokingly said that if someone ever asked him about his greatest achievement, he would be tempted to reply, "freedom from the compulsion of incessant thought." I feel the same way. Sustained silence is a wonderful gift, and it doesn't usually occur (Tolle is an exception to the rule) without some serious ATA. Just sayin....
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jun 28, 2011 0:34:57 GMT -5
Just a side note about meditation. Although Zen teaches beginners to count the breath or follow the breath as introductory forms of meditation, "shikan taza" is considered by most Zen folks to be the essential practice of the sect. Shikan taza is not taught to beginners because it is too difficult to pursue until the mind has quietened somewhat. It is sitting with full alertness, in total silence, with no content, and no object of focus. It has been likened to sitting in a jungle at night in total darkness surrounded by wild animals. The senses are maxed out and breathing is so shallow as to be almost imperceptible (to reduce proprioceptive feedback from the body and enhance hearing). It is often called "just sitting" in the Zen Soto tradition, but it is not nearly as relaxed as that phrase might suggest. This form of meditation is intense, and it often leads to absolute samadhi (the falling off of body and mind), so those people who are curious about samadhi might wish to experiment with it. ATA usually focuses upon what can be seen, heard, of felt, but shikan taza is pure attending without a focus.
Tibetan Buddhism often teaches beginners to use a mantra, and mantras can be highly effective with some people. I know one woman who was totally transformed over a three year period as a result of using a mantra. Like Zen breath counting, some Tibetans use mantras to acquire a certain amount of mental silence and then move on to "harder" practices, such as cultivating loving kindness or visualising complex forms related to esoteric Buddhism. (Personally, I never saw the point in putting anything into the mind; I was more interested in leaving mindstuff behind. LOL) To each his own, I spose.
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Jun 28, 2011 9:44:54 GMT -5
Just a side note about meditation. Although Zen teaches beginners to count the breath or follow the breath as introductory forms of meditation, "shikan taza" is considered by most Zen folks to be the essential practice of the sect. Shikan taza is not taught to beginners because it is too difficult to pursue until the mind has quietened somewhat. It is sitting with full alertness, in total silence, with no content, and no object of focus. It has been likened to sitting in a jungle at night in total darkness surrounded by wild animals. The senses are maxed out and breathing is so shallow as to be almost imperceptible (to reduce proprioceptive feedback from the body and enhance hearing). It is often called "just sitting" in the Zen Soto tradition, but it is not nearly as relaxed as that phrase might suggest. This form of meditation is intense, and it often leads to absolute samadhi (the falling off of body and mind), so those people who are curious about samadhi might wish to experiment with it. ATA usually focuses upon what can be seen, heard, of felt, but shikan taza is pure attending without a focus. Is this Shikan taza business the same as ATA, but focusing on everything at once? I know you said that there isn't any focus, but it seems to me that when I try to focus on nothing it's like focusing on everything. Maybe I'm not doing it right? I'd be very interested in learning this, just because I had one night where I sat in the road for hours and my senses went hyper-sensitive. A sound would go off and my head would just snap to the direction and I'd be on full alert. It was intense, and unusually 'fun' (strange enough to make me want to do it again).
|
|
|
Post by heretic on Jun 28, 2011 10:15:29 GMT -5
zendancer I love both of these posts. Thanks for taking the time to share them. I'm really not sure if the mantra puts anything into my mind. I was taught the mantra is a sound, and I actually hear it more than I think it after a few minutes. I have been surprised by some of the things which have bubbled up during meditation. Thoughts of old pains and suffering which had somehow taken up residence in the mind/body. I'll metaphorically pocket them until after the meditation has completed itself, and then take the time to hold them up to the light of awareness. Then I embrace them for what they hung around to teach me, with gratitude, and simply let them go. I always feel lighter when I do so, and usually conclude with a, "Thank you.," followed by an, "On we go." The event which really makes me laugh about meditation is this one. I first started out on the path back in 1993. I was convinced at that point that I had to find a meditation teacher, and spent the next four years doing so. I was using a self taught practice using -Om- as the mantra, and frankly, didn't really feel like anything had been accomplished. Then one day I arrived home after being on the road for a week, and that week's local paper was open and folded to a page on the dining room table. The article was about an accredited meditation teacher in our area who was going to begin taking students. To make a long story short, I enrolled, learned to meditate, and have been doing so ever since. I brought this tale to this point for a reason. She knew how long I had been looking for a meditation teacher, we had discussed that when we first met. At the end of our conversation I looked straight into her eyes and said, "You know, I manifested you with the power of intention." The look she gave me when I said that was priceless, and the laughter we shared when it dawned on her what I was saying was worth the four year search. We still laugh about it to this day! It must have been a fully-present intention, because her and her husband live less than a mile away from me.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 28, 2011 11:57:25 GMT -5
Is this Shikan taza business the same as ATA, but focusing on everything at once? I know you said that there isn't any focus, but it seems to me that when I try to focus on nothing it's like focusing on everything. Maybe I'm not doing it right? I'd be very interested in learning this, just because I had one night where I sat in the road for hours and my senses went hyper-sensitive. A sound would go off and my head would just snap to the direction and I'd be on full alert. It was intense, and unusually 'fun' (strange enough to make me want to do it again). As I see it, focus is a constriction of attention, and as this focus becomes more narrow, attention is naturally pulled into mental images and thoughts and away from sense perception. In my analogy, it's the movement from standing on the bank of the river, to jumping in the river. A relaxed attention feels open and isn't identifying, concluding, thinking. It's important for this attention to 'notice' because noticing is being conscious. This includes noticing bodily sensations, sense perception, feelings, thoughts. Be that open space where everything that comes along is noticed, but nothing is 'managed'. There's a critical point where noticing generally becomes a constricted focus of awareness itself on conscious thought, instead of a background mental function. It's like looking through a pair of 'mind binoculars', and the actual functioning of this focus is to block out everything that is not being focused on. The hearing of a sound is complete by itself. This is the awareness of a sound. There isn't something else in the sound itself but the awareness of this sound. Everything else about the sound is derived through a process of cognitive reflection. The response to this sound, if one is needed, comes from deeper levels of mind. It allows you to know that the sound is coming from a freight train and that it might be good to get off the tracks. Hehe. However, this process happens by itself within that relaxed attention and is also noticed. Imagine the process of hearing the sound and responding to it as beginning with awareness and ending with conscious thought rather than beginning with conscious thought and ending with action. This is the delusion; that 'you' are a critical part of that process of analysis and action. You might also try to imagine that you are remaining as only this open awareness, attending to everything, but picture the body NOT responding to the sound by moving off the tracks. Of course it will happen because you are aware of all of it. The only way you might not respond is if you as awareness have seriously constricted the focus of attention on that pretty rock under the tracks and fail to notice what else is going on. This is why removing your personal self from the process leads to a more efficient response to every situation. Now you're fully conscious rather than caught in a constriction, and nothing can escape your attention. You ARE that attention. I'm trying to focus (HA!) on the moment when the relaxed, open attention to sound becomes a constricted focus on what this sound means, and point out that there is no need for a person to constrict his attention to a narrow focus in order to respond to the sound. This is what it really means to say there is no person. There isn't somebody who is assigned the task of taking that sound and processing it in a constricted focus of mind so that the person can figure out what to do. This figure outer is, itself, just an idea; just another thought. The mind focuses attention and responds, but you, as the noticer, never move into that focus, and so you never 'become' the constriction and lose your attention to what's actually present. Mind focuses, body responds, you stay where you are and notice all of it. You are not required to participate in any of the doing. This can be very subtle, like for example noticing a tension in your stomach. This needs to be noticed because lots of folks get seriously nauseated because of an unconscious tension there and the constriction of breathing, and never notice that it's happening. All they notice is nausea and weakness and head for the medicine cabinet to solve the mysterious problem. (Same for headaches ) The point here is that once you notice the tension and constricted breathing, nothing needs to be done, and it's important that you not get involved. Noticing tension is enough to release the tension. Noticing that your breathing is constricted is enough to start breathing. Mind/body takes care of that all by itself. Don't fall in the river and get caught up in all sorts of stories and problem making and judgment and solutions. Just notice and stay put; notice something else and stay put. The more this happens, the more you'll notice that you're respected opinion on the matter is not needed; that you are not doing anything.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2011 12:40:15 GMT -5
I feel like I am just a rookie in all these different topics, but I’ve had a teeny bit of history with meditation.
Focus during meditation is exactly like the magnifying glass. It enables attention to narrow it’s scope so greater detail in the object of attention can be perceived. For example, breathing. There’s just breathing. When the focus is broad, breathing is happening everywhere (some even experience the in and out breaths happening through every cell in their body -- haven’t had that particular experience myself.) The sensations of the breath coming in and out the nostrils, the movement of the belly, the rising and falling of the chest, etc. All that stuff within the focus of just breathing. When the scope is narrowed to, say, the nostril area, then there is more noticing of the detail of those sensations. The coolness, the shimmering sensation near the opening of the nostrils, the slight sense of air moving over the skin on the upper lip....Narrowing even more to a single point near the nostrils on the upper lip, noticing the very subtle changes in location and variability in intensity of the air sensations, etc.
There’s an infinity of sensations at every moment. Mindfulness is simply being aware, without focus, of that infinitude. In the paragraph above, there’s an infinity of sensation within each scope of focus. It seems to me ATA is applying a bit of focus to one area, for example, hearing.
This concept that enigma brings up that greater focus eventually enters concepts/mental imagery is interesting. Still a slave to the impulses of my mind, i see that happen at all different levels of focus, including without. I do a lot of involuntary river swimming. In some ways the practice of meditation has just made it easier to get back on the bank.
One of the most helpful meditation instructions I got was to GENTLY return the attention to whatever. Hey, whoa, swimming again, time to get out of the water...not: sh*t this always happens, I am so pathetic.... It’s that “gently” part that is pointing to this sense of I and the reactivity.
But since finding myself in the nondual-conceptual-river, I’ve wondered if this practice is not active enough. Being gentle with how one reacts may be good but in some ways it seems like more whipped cream on a road apple.
|
|
|
Post by heretic on Jun 28, 2011 13:03:51 GMT -5
By gently returning to the mantra, I'm taking a neutral attitude towards the thoughts. When I realize I'm not hearing the mantra, and their are no thoughts, I gently return to it, also. Effortlessness.
|
|
|
Post by heretic on Jun 28, 2011 13:13:34 GMT -5
There is a similar meditative state when I am putting during a round of golf, too. I engage it by thinking the word- feathers (mantra) while sizing up the putt. I wish to feel the subtle weight of the putter head swinging back and forth in the practice stroke, with gentle hands (like holding a small bird), and simply let the ball get in the way during the actual stroke. It's fun watching it 'pour' into the hole. Effortless. My friends hate it when I'm in the 'zone.'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2011 13:19:02 GMT -5
By gently returning to the mantra, I'm taking a neutral attitude towards the thoughts. When I realize I'm not hearing the mantra, and their are no thoughts, I gently return to it, also. Effortlessness. yes that's the same gentleness i'm talking about. all this seductive direct path business has me thinking, ungently, that there needs to be some sort of root canal that extracts the phenomena that causes the initial distraction. but then methinks it's just what is don't fight it. but then i hear folks saying this what is is a lot better than that what is. so then i say wtf.
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Jun 28, 2011 13:20:35 GMT -5
Maybe this is unclear, but 'focus on nothing' is the same to me as 'nothing in focus.' I didn't mean focus on everything as in put it under a microscope--I mean, how do you focus on everything anyway? The only way to see everything is to leave it alone entirely.
Have you ever heard of hunter's vision? The hunter will unfocus their eyes until everything comes into view and it's much easier to pick up on movement. I was wondering if that Shikan taza thing is the same thing, but with all senses rather than just vision.
If not, that's cool. What do I do instead? It's difficult for me to really get what people are saying when they say so much... I'm a bit slow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2011 13:37:40 GMT -5
Maybe this is unclear, but 'focus on nothing' is the same to me as 'nothing in focus.' I didn't mean focus on everything as in put it under a microscope--I mean, how do you focus on everything anyway? The only way to see everything is to leave it alone entirely. Have you ever heard of hunter's vision? The hunter will unfocus their eyes until everything comes into view and it's much easier to pick up on movement. I was wondering if that Shikan taza thing is the same thing, but with all senses rather than just vision. If not, that's cool. What do I do instead? It's difficult for me to really get what people are saying when they say so much... I'm a bit slow. hey mamza, the focus-on-everything and hunter's vision are what i understand as mindfulness. i'm curious to hear more about just sitting too -- from ZD's explanation, it's a lot more active than i had understood. But not in a focused way, in an energetic/alertness way. maybe you're right, it's the difference between mindfulness and hunter's vision, or like you're patented road-sitting technique, where the hunter is actually in a state of readiness.
|
|
|
Post by heretic on Jun 28, 2011 14:09:45 GMT -5
Maybe this is unclear, but 'focus on nothing' is the same to me as 'nothing in focus.' I didn't mean focus on everything as in put it under a microscope--I mean, how do you focus on everything anyway? The only way to see everything is to leave it alone entirely. Have you ever heard of hunter's vision? The hunter will unfocus their eyes until everything comes into view and it's much easier to pick up on movement. I was wondering if that Shikan taza thing is the same thing, but with all senses rather than just vision. If not, that's cool. What do I do instead? It's difficult for me to really get what people are saying when they say so much... I'm a bit slow. I have a lot of friends who hunt where I live (I'm not a hunter, it's not a stern choice. I simply grew up in a metropolitan area...). But we have discussed meditation, and more than once they have mentioned hunter's vision in response to my description. They feel everything they do is unfocused in the field (interesting analogy), and their movements upon sighting something are syrupy slow, as though unctuous. When I read how people describe ATA on this site, I relate it to the conversations I've had about hunter's vision. Which is kinda like trucker's vision, too, when driving in Chicago-Land, or on the East Coast. (L.A., not so much. Whatta parking lot that place is!)
|
|
|
Post by heretic on Jun 28, 2011 14:25:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 28, 2011 14:36:25 GMT -5
I feel like I am just a rookie in all these different topics, but I’ve had a teeny bit of history with meditation. Focus during meditation is exactly like the magnifying glass. It enables attention to narrow it’s scope so greater detail in the object of attention can be perceived. For example, breathing. There’s just breathing. When the focus is broad, breathing is happening everywhere (some even experience the in and out breaths happening through every cell in their body -- haven’t had that particular experience myself.) The sensations of the breath coming in and out the nostrils, the movement of the belly, the rising and falling of the chest, etc. All that stuff within the focus of just breathing. When the scope is narrowed to, say, the nostril area, then there is more noticing of the detail of those sensations. The coolness, the shimmering sensation near the opening of the nostrils, the slight sense of air moving over the skin on the upper lip....Narrowing even more to a single point near the nostrils on the upper lip, noticing the very subtle changes in location and variability in intensity of the air sensations, etc. There’s an infinity of sensations at every moment. Mindfulness is simply being aware, without focus, of that infinitude. In the paragraph above, there’s an infinity of sensation within each scope of focus. It seems to me ATA is applying a bit of focus to one area, for example, hearing. This concept that enigma brings up that greater focus eventually enters concepts/mental imagery is interesting. Still a slave to the impulses of my mind, i see that happen at all different levels of focus, including without. I do a lot of involuntary river swimming. In some ways the practice of meditation has just made it easier to get back on the bank. One of the most helpful meditation instructions I got was to GENTLY return the attention to whatever. Hey, whoa, swimming again, time to get out of the water...not: sh*t this always happens, I am so pathetic.... It’s that “gently” part that is pointing to this sense of I and the reactivity. But since finding myself in the nondual-conceptual-river, I’ve wondered if this practice is not active enough. Being gentle with how one reacts may be good but in some ways it seems like more whipped cream on a road apple. I see how 'focus' can be a confusing thingy. A focus on the breathing in meditation, for example, may be to get out of the thinking by focusing attention on something that's actually happening now, which is useful. Obviously, what happens next could be thoughts about the breathing, and noticing those thoughts is what is being referred to by 'gently bring attention back'. You're not actually being asked to 'do' something with the attention, just to notice where it went. The attention comes back by itself in the noticing, right? So it's not only gentle, it's effortless, as is the noticing. Whatever you might perceive as effort in all of that is actually the falling into the river. Still, the focus of attention is a focusing practice designed to change the constricting focus rather than end the constriction. Maybe a good example that everyone has experienced is the trick of watching for your next thought. As long as the focus is on watching, there is no next thought because attention of mind is on the thought of watching, which can be useful in calming the mind, but this is, itself, a constricted focus of attention on mind that eliminates the awareness of anything else. It is, itself, a thought; the thought to watch for thoughts. If the focus on watching for the next thought is intense enough, a purple dinosaur might walk through the living room and you wouldn't notice, so are you on the bank or are you in the river? When i say 'come empty', ideally i mean empty of all focus on anything. Remaining as the awareness itself in which everything comes and goes without need for a focus. To perceive what 'tree' actually is, no focus of attention is actually required because it's actually '_______'. This focus is only needed in order to know what it is called and various other knowledge about it. This knowledge, if needed, will happen by itself and is not the result of your focus on it. If the tree is rapidly approaching your car (hehe) mind will identify the situation and body will turn the steering wheel to avoid a 'close encounter'. Only then will the fundamental attention that is presence itself likely fall into a constricted focus for a time. This is fine, but the point is that the constricted focus was not the cause of the response, just an effect. The ideal meditation is emptiness itself.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 28, 2011 14:47:47 GMT -5
By gently returning to the mantra, I'm taking a neutral attitude towards the thoughts. When I realize I'm not hearing the mantra, and their are no thoughts, I gently return to it, also. Effortlessness. yes that's the same gentleness i'm talking about. all this seductive direct path business has me thinking, ungently, that there needs to be some sort of root canal that extracts the phenomena that causes the initial distraction. but then methinks it's just what is don't fight it. but then i hear folks saying this what is is a lot better than that what is. so then i say wtf. So when you see that suffering is 'what is', do you go, "WooHoo! I found What Is!" Hehe. Maybe 'what is' refers to what ACTUALLY is rather than what we think it is. Or not.....who knows?
|
|