Hello Siro,
Siro Samadhi:
In my practices I have never really conceptualized things in terms of Jhana. I have always tended to lean more towards the frame work of the Yoga Sutras and other related texts. In my practice it has always been about focusing on the object and absorbing into it as much as possible. The way I understood it was cultivating this will result in increasingly deep penetrating ability of consciousness, and overall the ability to process more and more information about the object in any given moment. I had always rationalized that the various Siddhis come from being able to focus strongly and manipulate very subtle aspects of reality.
Yes, you are correct in your assumption that once you have a framework in mind ("I have always tended to lean more towards the frame work of the Yoga Sutras..."), that the mind will naturally gravitate toward that framework and this is how you will experience the outcome of such intention. Whatever you hold in the mind to accomplish can be accomplished. This sort of puts the phrase "self fulfilling prophesy" in perspective in terms of its application to meditation. Whatever you perceive or expect to happen,
can and will happen.
Siro Samadhi:
Daniel, would you say this sort of conceptualization be equivalent to aiming directly for the fourth Jhana? Is that possible? I just focus on my object and as my practice goes on, I try to bypass everything that isn't my object (bliss, joy, etc), because those quickly grow so strong that they kick me out of meditation if I don't bypass them.
Of course it is possible. I do it all the time. And so, apparently, do you. As was mentioned above, whatever you set your mind on course to accomplish,
can be accomplished.
When I was gathering my footing in the practice of
dhyana several years ago, it occurred to me that it would be more efficient if I could go from the first
dhyana directly to the fourth
dhyana and thus by-pass the second and third, since the fourth level was where I found the most satisfaction and ground for gaining insight about any object I took to observe.
It took me a few years of this experience (being able to by-pass the two inner stages of
dhyana – what I had at first learned to do according to the instructions I was following) before I was able to realize that this actually
was possible. It seemed strange to think of
not having to go through the second and third
dhyanas and yet still arrive at the fourth. I spent a few years wondering whether or not I was deluding myself about what I was doing and whether I was experiencing
dhyana at all during these sits, until I finally realized that this actually was possible.
Yet, there is a difference between what could be termed as being
vipassana dhyana and
samatha dhyana. It all really depends upon how you set up the mind and incline it to view and achieve these two states. I have come to describe the kind of
vipassana dhyana that I achieve as being
samadhi (or
appana samadhi) when I write about it. That is because it is the perfect state for observing an object (or contemplating a subject) and gaining insight about it. It is a state of pure concentration; or at least that is how I experience it.
Samatha dhyana requires me to change intention and go deeper into the calm and tranquility. This is the perfect state for achieving the fifth through the ninth
dhyanas, because (at least to my way of thinking about it) the mind needs to be still and focused on tranquility for these states to arise appropriately.
Siro Samadhi:
Do the different aims, and the way people conceptualize their meditations influence the factors that they most readily cultivate? Logically it would seem so, but I am still seeking some sort of outside opinion.
Yes, they do. And you have the experience to back up that assessment.