Okay, Robert. You have several comments and questions here whose answers are related to one another. To understand what is being communicated in the material that you have read requires being able to recognize various arising phenomena (sensations,
dhyana factors
et cetera) which will help you put the pieces of the experience together into a recognizable whole communication of which you can make sense.
Each of these subtle activities (concentration/tranquility and insight practice, otherwise known as
samatha and
vipassana) is related to one another, and therefore your mind must be pliant enough to be able to observe (and view) them as one WHOLE process during tranquility meditation and insight contemplation. In other words, in being willing to switch between the two on the fly so to speak, you will need to be on the lookout for
insight about how to recognize what for you will be a valid object for
tranquility so that you may utilize it during your meditation. I cannot make that choice for you; it has to be something that your mind/body sphere reacts and relates to, something that demonstrates meaning (such as a pleasant sensation) within your individual experience of it.
Let's begin with your comment here:
Robert McLune:
But I'm not sure how to pick a different object. The problem is, the choice of object, and what one does with it, seems to depend on exactly what kind of practice one is doing. But exactly what is important in choosing, and what by contrast is just personal preference and not significant, is not clear.
Assuming that your ultimate goal is the attainment of a
dhyana state, such that you are able to return to it time and time again with ease and at will during subsequent meditation sessions, it will be important for you to recognize a phenomenon (preferably physical in nature so that it is easily recognizable) that allows the mind to drop into a pleasant state of concentrated awareness, devoid of distraction, yet mildly pleasant and enjoyable. You might want to label that phenomenon as a
nimitta or sign, telling you that you are on the right track to enter into
dhyana.
That
nimitta may manifest as any one of several phenomena. It may manifest as a sensation of mild pressure in the center of the forehead (similar to the sensation of a balloon being inflated in the center of your head and pressing against the cranium), allowing you to establish mindfulness on it and heralding the achievement of concentration. It may manifest (as it did in my childhood) as a very pleasant tingling sensation at the top of the head (where a skull cap might be placed), which allows the mind to slip into a very pleasant state that is both physically enjoyable and slightly trance-like (that is, until you bring mindfulness to bear to cancel out the trance-like factor while retaining the pleasant concentration state). (
Note: My
nimitta always have something to do with the head region as that seems to be where I associate concentration being placed. Others may differ.)
Or the
nimitta may manifest as a whole body sensation that becomes recognizable for the development of absorption concentration. An example of this kind of manifestation is given in the suttas as translated from Thanissaro Bhikkhu's book
The Mind Like Fire Unbound beginning at
Habits & practice. Pay careful attention where it begins: "Just as an adept bathman or bathman's apprentice would pour bath powder into a brass basin and knead it together, sprinkling it again & again with water, ..." all the way to the end of that section where it ends at
Doctrines of the self.
I've even heard of people feeling a tingling in their hands and using that as their
nimitta. If one is paying attention to the rise and fall of the abdomen, there may be some sensation that arises there on which to focus. So, it all depends upon the individual and what stirs in their imagination / physical experience to qualify as a
nimitta that they can then take and use to develop
dhyana. You will just have to experiment to find out what you respond to.
Let's clarify the significance of your comment here:
Robert McLune:
At several points in their book, Rasmussen/Snyder make a clear distinction between their (Pau Auk) approach and the Mahasi approach. For example, in their approach, if pain arises while sitting one is supposed to get the mind back to the breath as soon as one notices it has shifted, whereas in Mahasi noting -- as they describe it -- one can temporarily make the pain itself become the meditation object for a while.
The difference in instruction here is, as you note, a difference in approach between what is definitely two separate activities of mind in the practice of calm (with the ultimate intention to achieve a tranquil mind) and insight (with the ultimate intention to achieve insight about the object and one's response to that object). In this example that you have singled out, there are definitely two distinct activities and not one WHOLE activity as I described above. In this case, if your intent is to find a pathway to calm the mind in order to enter into d
hyana meditation, then to follow the instruction in the Mahasi style might be counter productive. Therefore, you want to disregard the Mahasi style instruction and just focus upon the Rasmussen/Snyder instruction.
Which brings us to the heart of your question in your comment below:
Robert McLune:
OK, my point isn't the pros and cons, whys and wherefores of Mahasi-style noting vs Pau Auk anapanasati. My point is, details matter.
So, to the nasal blockage. Rasmussen/Snyder go into some detail about the use of the anapana spot as the meditation object. As one advances, it's not just the spot in general one focuses on, but a specific tiny point within the spot. Eventually the practice leads to the merging of something called nimitta with the anapana spot. They're going to a lot of effort to provide the reader with precision in their instruction, and I'm not knowledgeable enough to know which aspects of their instructions are important, and which are just optional aspects. I doubt very much that there's anything significant in that specific spot below my nose, and Rasmussen/Snyder don't suggest there is. But as a non-expert, I can't tell what if anything *is* significant. *Some* of it must be (otherwise there would be no scope for the clear comparison with Mahasi noting).
If you've been paying attention, I've already responded to this question in my reply above about the development of the
nimitta and its relation to
dhyana. The anapana spot may or may not be significant for you. You would just have to experiment with the meditation technique in order to find out. I would say give it at least two weeks to a month of practicing the technique before you come to any conclusions about it. If you are not able to experience any significant sensation / sign (
nimitta) that allows the mind to achieve a pleasant state of abiding, then you'll need to search (or wait) for a different object to arise.
Does this begin to help you make any sense of what you have read?