Hi Terry,
Rodney Smith, the leader of our local sangha, today gave a talk on samadhi (concentration). If I understand him correctly, he thinks that, although moderate concentration is essential for productive practice, deep concentration is not useful. He says that deep concentration allows one to see subtler and subtler aspects of form (vibrations, rupa kalapas, etc.), but that one cannot experience the formless by examining ever subtler aspects of form. He warned that the ability to see subtle aspects of form can be seductive.
I also find that concentration practices can be seductive and inane at some point. But to be fair, I think
all practices taken to an extreme and/or in isolation have this weakness. The strength that comes from that same weakness is in becoming exhausted in that practice. One may wake up and say, "where has this practice gotten me? Am I satisfied or dissatisfied, restless or not restless, longing/not longing" and so forth. That experience clearly isolates a dissatisfied feeling, whereas previously the practice may have been dealing with many feelings which are basically "to want" (e.g., wanting to learn a new practice, wanting to attain some state or freedom, wanting to avoid something, wanting to gain a community, etc).
Thus, desire is seen and deflated. Now, unsatisfactoriness can be studied. What is the unsatisfactoriness that caused my desire (to practice)?
The very same practice that occupied the feeling of "wanting" can be used again, yet now it will be used to look at unsatisfactoriness. If another practice is taken up, that too is fine, however, practice-jumping can be a way to stay in "wanting" and avoiding the urges which underly wanting. I am bringing this up generally; I do not have any thought that you specifically would jump around in practices.
The sadness/malaise I referred to a week ago is general, not specific with regard to my brother's death.
Is this feeling on the cushion and/or in daily life? What does the feeling want?
For me, the attention that senses subtle vibrations is penetrating, and it contains the intention of sensing vibrations (and I sometimes wonder whether the vibrations are really there or whether I in part create them with my intention ... if they are really there, why do I need a different quality of attention to see them?).
Did you intend the word "intention" or "attention" in the above "create them with my intention"?
Regarding my "ordinary" practice of late -- it's less fascinating than the (seemingly) deeply insightful, dramatic practice -- and I have to apply more self-discipline to do the practice (I usually feel like just lying in bed and have to get over some activation barrier in order to sit) -- but it's usually pretty satisfying.
What insights have come from a dramatic practice, and what do those insights say to "ordinary" practice?
_____
Alternate nostril breathing: if it is not worth doing, I wouldn't do it. Like drinking water is only good when one is thirsty, otherwise drinking it is felt to be boring or is actually wasteful or harmful. I like yoga when my own energy (including thinking) needs balancing. I love, for example, inversions, but when those are too much, I enjoy nadi shodhana. It is a light physical practice, that's all.
Katy, I haven't read enough of your posts to learn what your strongest practice influences are; it seems that perhaps you don't come primarily from the Theravadan tradition, since our vocabularies are somewhat different (i.e. your use of the term "concentration practice"). I am wondering what "just sitting" means to you. When just sitting, one must apply some kind of effort, else one's mind will wander, right?
I have taken up many practices since reading Hesse's Siddhartha at age 15. Sometimes, sitting is just sitting. When this happens it is the mental faculty taking up afferent sensations without creating new events. Awareness abides in or very near to afferent sensations (reducing a time gap between awareness and sensing). I am new to this, but I find that here the mental faculty has become satisfied with the senses and ceases to separate itself from the mental faculty-as-afferent-register/participant (thus concentration). Awareness itself may also go dormant here, it seems, and thus arises to find itself getting a glimpse of cessation. That momentary death of awareness seems to offer insight, too. [edit: here I am getting to a point where I have the impression that the mental faculty will enter various states when I train the mental faculty that can give rise to/be invested in narratives to stay close/in the senses as they afferently register; this is how various meditative events have occurred to "me", when I just train the narrative mind to stay close/at what is triggering the sense-faculty. It is like wordless noting in that it requires the narrative mind to just keep pace with as many afferent inputs as it can. Somehow, in this (which I have done now intently for about 9 months), mediative "states" have occurred on their own and I would say it is because narratives have ceased, the I-aspect of mental faculty becomes 'observer' or also ceases.
Does that indicate where my practices influences are at present?
[edit: the specific method I've applied since last spring has been to train attention to place itself on afferent sensations continuously. Thus, over time, the narrative-making capacity of the mind is crowded out by the assignment of its attention to incoming sensations. Affectively, I add friendliness to the effort when it subsides and I add friendliness to the effort at the outset: so seeing sunset, seeing commuter traffic, seeing the kitchen area...all seen with friendly receptivity (I stayed away form harmful or challenging sense-objects, though would apply the technique at work (where lighting was not great, for example, carpets outgased...)). After about 8 weeks of this intent effort single-point concentration occurred spontaneously, and some other aspects of the mind showed themselves. Thus I was able to see that if I take care of my mind that would make narratives and apply conditions by continually replacing the mind on the senses (and by giving the mind pleasant experiences like sunsets and sunrises and water views, and sitting outside from time to time), then the mind itself will deliver the meditative stages about which are written.
Truly, that attention which conditions and forms an "I" must be returned continuously to and subsumed into another task - like attending to afferent sensations, in order for other mental states and the unconditioned to arise. To the extent the mental energy which is attracted to condition an "I" is redirected to another, antithetical object/theme is the extent to which the mind may become unconditioned and reveal (extra)ordinary unconditioning. There is no "I" that can experience this uncovering. I am away for a few weeks and wish you well with your practice.I'd like to add that I have countless habits that are apparent, but unchanged as yet by practice, even exacerbated!]
edit: format and syntax, spelling
