Different insight meditation techniques (e.g. Noting, body scanning) have the meditator paying attention to the rise and fall of sensation. This however can be done in many different ways. Some examples:

* One can just note or notice sensation rising and falling with no particular outlook towards anything: “rising... Falling... itching... Annoyed... Rising... Falling...”

* Or one can have some outlook towards impermanence and maybe cause and effect: “rising... Gone, falling... Gone, itching... Desire to itch... annoyed (ah! A chain of cause and effect), annoyance is gone... Etc.”

* One can bring a more intellectual, verbal approach, analyzing experience to see the impermanence in each sensation: “Slow vibration in arm, rising, falling, speeding up, now slowing down, even the frequency is changing...”

* Maybe on the other hand of the spectrum, one can try and experience the sensation more fully, almost like trying to become absorbed in the sensation, to feel it from the inside. This is usually completely non-verbal and very focused on a single sensation to the exclusion of all others.

* One can bask in the rising and falling of sensations all over the body or all over the mind and just fall into the stream or rising and falling.

So what kind of attitude do you feel is the most helpful when engaging in insight meditation? How deep should one go? Does being verbal help or impede progress? What kind of focus works? What should one be looking for?

Thanks!
Eran.

Hi,

I think there will be differences from person to person in terms of efficacy, which may be a reason why there are so many traditions to sample these days. So with that in mind, my answer to the queries provided ("So what kind of attitude do you feel is the most helpful when engaging in insight meditation? How deep should one go? Does being verbal help or impede progress? What kind of focus works? What should one be looking for?"):

Whatever delivers the goods (the "goods" being something that furthers one towards one's goal, be it "insight" or whatever).

That is to say that a person could try all of the methods (and more) you list, and that person will likely be able to intuit (or carefully analyze) whether a technique or method or "attitude" seems to be doing something worth while. I generally think this approach of sampling is a good one, as one never actually knows what will work from moment to moment (even in a single sitting), nor know whether they're really doing a technique "appropriately" given the context (whatever the context may be; various insight-cycles for example). Some people can use sheer will power to make massive progress, some may favor a very technical intellectual approach, some may focus on "soft" aspects such as intent and "heart" and the like, whereas others may focus on "hard" aspects such as the "correct" ways to use Vipassana or "Who am I?" and on and on it goes.

I think it's worth while to note that time (in terms of duration of meditation/practice/inquiry) has hardly anything to do with one's ability to make progress. Dudes that end up meditating for 30 years with no progress have done so because they never found what worked for them, which is understandable, because finding those methods/techniques could be tough. But with that in mind, I suspect the reason for lack of progress is in most cases due to not being open to new approaches (being dogmatically rigid to one's tradition), and thus never even having known the technique that would "click" with their personal idiosyncrasies (such as education background, emotional personality, etc). Unfortunately, the ridiculous notion of "karma" often cops the blame for this outcome.

In conclusion, I think an open attitude with a goodly dose of common sense (useful for avoiding obvious folly in terms of teachings and techniques) and some acute awareness to what's going on as one sits is an effective approach. Being one's own "master" in the sense of figuring out one's best tools for the job, and never settling down too rigidly with one approach or another. After all, only you are privy to knowing your own identity; how could someone else know what's best for something only you experience (your self/Self)?

Regards,
Trent

As a follow-up to what I wrote about the function of time / progress, here's something worth considering in terms of analyzing what one is doing in the midst of one's sits: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3a/OODA.Boyd.svg

Fun stuff!

Hey Trent,

Thanks for your reply! I've tried a few different approaches so far mostly by trying different types of practice. I've toyed around with different approaches to the same practice as well but not as deeply. I guess my problem comes from the long (temporally speaking) feedback loop. It seems like it takes a lot of time before one realizes how well a certain practice or approach works, especially when talking about daily practice. Either that, or none of what I've tried so far works. Can one really expect some kind of noticeable effect in a handful of sittings outside of retreat context? And what kind of effect are we talking about here? The beginning of the first nanas or something more basic than that? (I guess I'm trying to figure out the Act part in OODA, how to test a hypothesis once you've put one into play)

Hello Eran,




You're welcome; you'll be billed one week from each of my replies.



The speed of progress relies heavily on how quickly you can execute the loop (efficiency) and the quality of your analysis/decisions (effectiveness). So, when you say that the loop is currently quite long in terms of the cycle's duration, the question that immediately comes to mind is "where's the bottleneck in the loop?" I presume, from what you wrote-- quoted above-- that you're having trouble at the "observe" step. The observe step, in the context of meditation, relies heavily on a few factors: one's concentration strength, one's knowledge of the cycles/stages, and one's memory of one's own meditative experiences.

One's concentration strength -- the more of this you have, the easier it is to observe your experience and distinguish one experience from another. For instance: "This looks like the dark night, because of (x), whereas 3rd nana usually is more like (x). Knowledge of the cycles/stages -- this is useful because, upon observing one's situation, one can recall what the recommended strategy is for that territory. For instance: "I'm pretty sure I'm in the dark night, and MCTB says (x) is a good approach." Memory of one's own meditative experiences -- this is useful because you may have already encountered this situation before, and you can thus apply the strategy that got you past that issue previously. For instance: "Last time I was in the dark night, I did (x), and got through it quickly."

Note that the feedback loop is a relatively intuitive/common sense tool you'll employ naturally as you become more acclimated to the various territories, techniques and so forth. I suspect that everyone who's achieved any attainment in meditation has used them in some way. Similarly, the more natural it becomes, the easier it becomes, and the better you get at it. Also note that you can think about these loops on multiple levels. For instance, you may use this process heavily during your sits, in a very fast style to blaze through the insight cycles. And after that sit, you may walk around the house and think about a bigger feedback cycle, with the time frame being the past month of meditation rather than the whatever-minute blocks during your sit. Finally, all of this analysis -- whether micro or macro-- when done correctly, aids each of the others (and thus aids your practice and progress).



In terms of "what kind of effect," it really depends on what situation you're asking. I meditated about an hour a day (sometimes 2-3 hours on weekends), while also thinking about these matters every available waking moment available (not a whole lot, had a 9-5 corporate job and a difficult relationship at the time) for approximately 10 months to get from "normal" to arhatship. In retrospect, it seems to me that it probably could have been done faster than that. In terms of single sits, the insight cycles (and sub-cycles) can arise very rapidly and thus the feedback cycle can also be very rapid. I can recall days a year or so ago, as an early anagami, where I was changing techniques from vipassana to "who am I" inquiry to heart-based intention every 2-3 minutes (sometimes faster, sometimes slower). I would use a technique and then watch and see if anything changed. If I observed what seemed (based on prior experience) to be beneficial, I'd keep going. If nothing seemed to be happening or it seemed detrimental, I would swap to a different technique. That is, in essence, the loop-- it does not have to be complicated in practice.

There are other natural questions that arise when one is engaged in this, as well. For instance, if I was using vipassana and it worked, I would also ponder "what part of this worked, why did it work better than last time, what is the situation it is working in and why" and so forth. If it stopped working, the same line of thought occurred. This is a large part of the "orient" step. The "decide" step is based on the prior two, and might just be as simple as "well, hell...what I'm doing now doesn't seem to be working...I'll try (x) instead." Or perhaps slightly more sophisticated, as in "well...based on my 'observations' and 'orientations,' it seems that tweaking my approach (this way) will yield better results."

Was this the right approach to take? Seems to have worked for me, but I have no idea if it would work for someone else. I stress again: I have no idea what will work for you, that's the whole purpose behind careful analysis and using one's own experience as a feedback loop.

I think the rest of your questions-- not quoted above-- were answered throughout this post. Let me know if not, and I'll address them directly.

Trent

Thanks again, Trent. Check's in the mail, BTW.

I managed to use the experiment and iterate process quite well when doing samatha. I think the reason that worked well was that I could see and feel the changes in the experience of meditation quite quickly. This meant I could figure out more or less where I am on that path, do small experiments with different approaches and evaluate their results quite quickly thereby making progress relatively quick and most importantly measurable.

The reason I was asking the questions I started this thread with is that as far as insight practice goes, it appears I've made no progress at all that I can see. I can dis-embed (to use Kenneth's terminology here) from body experience and mind experience at the intellectual level (at least to some degree) but looking at Daniel's description of Mind and Body:



makes me think I'm looking for a more felt sense of that dis-embedding, not just an intellectual exercise. Being at this spot in my practice, there seems to be a big gap between where I am and the next step on the path and I've not found much good technical description of the ground between those two points (say, first sitting through first insight to first nana). I think my next step would be diving into the Progress of Insight or a similar tome to see what I've been missing.

Hi hi,

Could you provide a link to what "dis-embedding" is, or define that in some way?

What is your goal with insight practice, or perhaps meditation in general?

How much "heart" do you put into achieving that goal, as in: how badly do you want it, feel you want it, etc?

Answers to the bottom two may help shed some light on the apparent stagnation, if you wish to respond.

Trent

The following is from http://kennethfolkdharma.wetpaint.com/



He then goes on to instruct the meditator to objectify body sensations, feeling tone, mind states, etc. saying that "If you can name them, you aren't embedded there."

does that help?



My goal right now is stream entry (or in shorter term, A&P). Mostly I think I am looking for a sense of freedom and a more solid place on which to stand when dealing with the world. There is also a sense of curiosity as to what's there and into the inner workings of the mind.



That's hard to say as I tend to be a harsh critic of myself, especially when it comes to practices such as meditation. I can tell you that the amount of effort and faith I have in the practice change over time and in direct relation to how the practice is opening up to me. In the days I was focusing on samatha and seeing progress, it was easy to meditate a couple hours a day and I was very gung-ho about meditation in general. These days, it is more of an effort. I try to sit at least 40m a day, some days that's easier than others. Right now, I think a lot of what's keeping me motivated is feeling that I want to be "ready" for my first meditation retreat in May and to make the most of it, I want to find a methodology that works. I'm also itching to try a longer retreat as soon as I can after that first 5 day retreat is over.

I don't know if I could power power through the practice in the way that you described but I definitely am putting some heart and effort into it.

Does that clear things up?


EDITED: fixed formatting.

Hello,

The whole "dis-embedding" idea is interesting, but seems wrought with oddities; perhaps simply due to my unfamiliarity with Kenneth's newer schemes. So I can't really say much about that, and thus I also cannot say anything about the few paragraphs (in your reply before last) in which it used as a basis for communication. Rephrase if you would like and we can take another stab at it.

Nice to hear that you have some clear goals, as those are incredibly important in a lot of subtle ways. You might want to re-think your expectations regarding retreats. It's not that you will not (or cannot, or may not) benefit from it greatly; you certainly might. But you may (and I stress: may) be using it as an "excuse" to not make progress otherwise (or until that time or after that time). As time is eternal and practically immaterial in terms of insight (of any variety) into the self/Self, it is good to notice that any waiting only begets more waiting, and any change can only happen *now*. Consider taking a careful look at whether or not you have successfully given yourself permission to become freed / feeling good / etc, as that may be related. Pay careful consideration to your sincerity in that matter, by the way, as that may very well yield insight into any stagnation you may be experiencing. Sincerity is crucial in these matters-- if your will is not sincere, it will have little to no impact upon the behavior / self / whatever being questioned / modified / whatever.

Regards,
Trent

Hi Trent,

Thanks for still listening to my rant



The way I understand it, "embedded" in this sense is similar to being attached or identified with experience. I am embedded in my experience of emotions to the extent that I see emotion as mine or as who I am at this moment. Dis-embedding is the difference between "I am angry," and "Anger is arising." It seems like a good way to look at noting practice.

I just looked back at why I brought this up in the first place...



So without using embedded terminology. I feel that while practicing I can observe some phenomenon arising and passing, I know intellectually that these experiences are temporary and are not me or mine but I do not feel that. If I look deeper, there is definitely something in there (there being my mind) that is experiencing this as "my impatience," "I'm hearing," or "I thought of ..." I guess, the Watcher is still very much there and very much unconvinced and possibly unimpressed by all of this.

Am I over-intellectualizing all of this? Do I just need to have faith in the process and let it unfold as it does? One of the main reasons I liked MCTB was the rational approach it has towards practice ("if you follow these instruction, here's what's gonna happen..."). I find it difficult to have faith without good evidence to support it and I'm right now struggling to find that evidence.




This is a lot to think of. I'll have to take a good long look at my relationship with practice. I'd like to think that I am sincere but it's possible that some parts of me are still holding out.

Eran.

Hi Eran,
I think the Mind and Body shift is the most difficult one to break through. It's where most people get stuck. As long as you are trying to intellectualise or reflect about it you will get no where as that is locking in the very quality (thought) that you are trying to step back from. In my experience it takes a very strong effort to look right into the heart of your experience in this exact moment. Try to see between your thoughts as if your life depended on it. How do you know that you are thinking? If you know that there are thoughts then how is it that you are having one thought and then another? Is there a continuum from one to the next - a life-long slowly changing single thought - or is there a break where one ends and a moment before the next one begins? Find the break! The quote from Daniel is good. You will know it when you encounter it. From that point on, the watcher or witness capability makes the 'disembedding' much easier. And don't forget the 3 characteristics - disembedding shows that you are holding on to something, the 3 characteristics give you a reason for letting go: "I'm holding a frying pan. It's Hot!"

While MCTB may be much more rationally presented than most spirituality, the context is still what it is (spirituality). That is to say that spirituality, in general, deals with things that are not very rational (often completely ignoring sensibility altogether). Are the matters discussed logical? Sometimes. Intuitive and/or emotional? Very much so. That said, if you are a very rational, sensible person, you may have some difficulty in making progress given the current materials available (I have never seen a purely rational "spiritual" insight guide; MCTB is by far the closest I have encountered). It may be the case that you simply recognize the validity of your intelligence and find it difficult to ignore the oppositions raised when trying to use the models provided. I would not want to put words in your mouth, though. If this be the case, you may want to consider poking around the Actual Freedom Trust website, as the contents therein are rational and sensible (thus may appeal to you) and lead to something quite interesting (though not the same thing as what the "insight meditation" would lead to which prompted your question about "what attitude" to bare upon it).

Regards,
Trent

Yes, it's been a struggle reconciling my views of the world with what Buddhism tells me is true. I look at a chair and I see a solid, unchanging, object that is very much a chair. I think there's two things that can help me with that, one is developing my ability to let go (of control, of preconceptions, etc.) and thus make it easier for things to just be and show their nature to me (or not). two is studying more deeply to understand where some of these concepts come from and what they really mean. for example, Thich Nhat Hanh's use of interbeing makes more sense to me than the concept non-self.

I'll take a look at the AF site, it came up several times in the past couple of weeks so I guess it deserves some exploration. However, I'm not sure I need another whole new philosophy...

BTW, your previous posts have inspired me to take a different approach to practice. I'm not sure how this will play out but I'm starting to see that I can change my approach to be more inclusive, more open, less doubtful. Thank you for that!

Eran.

Hi Chuck,



It's good to know I'm not stuck on something everyone else finds easy... ;)

I started looking for that gap between thoughts on a few sits. Initially it seemed that wherever I was looking, even if there was quiet there before the act of looking changed that. I switched from actively looking which is naturally followed by trying to understand, explain and describe to just experiencing (or trying to). I'm finding that there are more and more subtle levels of thought so that even when it seems that there are no thoughts around, there might be something there (like a visual idea of what the breath feels like). There's the feeling of trying to stop my thoughts, which is usually accompanied by holding my breath and feels like focusing on the front of the head. This feeling is different from the "just relax and let it be" feeling which is more open to whatever experience is at the moment.

Anyways, just thought I'd share what I found so far. Thank you for your advice, I'll keep looking!
Eran.