| | Both approaches - narrow and broad - have been used in the Buddhist tradition. What you describe in the opening paragraph sounds like the technique introduced by Chogyam Trungpa and would therefore belong to the ordinary meditation practices in the comprehensive Mahamudra framework, where - in accordance with the view of Mahamudra - only a small amount of artificiality is to be used to cultivate attention. The idea is to develop an open mindfulness and a precise-yet-inclusive awareness, and basically that belongs to the four foundations of mindfulness.
Here's a link to a Kagyu presentation of four foundations of mindfulness for anyone interested http://bit.ly/xnTDr
On the other hand, theravada/vipassana meditation is not based on the view of the "ultimate natural state", so that techniques are presented, taught, and practiced in a notably different way. Even the notion of "extremely strong concentration" is understood and taught differently when it comes to the question of narrow vs. broad focus of attention. Just for example, Alan Wallace works with hardcore shamatha all the time, but most of the techniques he teaches are based on broad, natural, open states of awareness (an exemplary sequence for shamatha as taught by Wallace: body awareness > breath mindfulness > settling the mind in its natural state > awareness of awareness).
So, yes, there is a difference in views, methods, and techniques, and a spectrum from narrow to sweeping to fluid to open/panoramic awareness, so - if you build your deliberation on techniques - give it a try and see for yourself what works best for you.
Further comments would be useful by those who have substantial experience in the 100 percent focus on breath, and we have quite a few of such practitioners here. |