Re: Why Meditate?
Posted: Sat May 19, 2012 5:08 am
Ron & Mike,
Excellent posts!
with Metta
Ben
Excellent posts!
with Metta
Ben
A Buddhist discussion forum on the Dhamma of TheravÄda Buddhism
https://www.dhammawheel.com/
Hi retro - man, I love you - you write the most interesting and provoking stuff!retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Ron,
Does this "important information" also involve a thorough grounding in the teachings of the Buddha?Ron Crouch wrote:There are just as many people though who don't have such a nice experience of it. And many really feel like they were suckered into something without being given all the important information up front. I don't worry about you. I worry about them. I see them all the time in my teaching practice.
I see risks in following a "meditation technique" which is designed to induce certain experiences, but in which the knowledge of the Dhamma that provides the context to these experiences is "outsourced" to a teacher. That "outsourcing" might be functional in a retreat situation or when there's regular ongoing contact with a teacher, but outside of that, the only person who is with the practitioner 24/7, is the practitioner themselves. If they understand the Dhamma, from the variety of different perspectives and angles from which the Buddha saw fit to teach it, perhaps they would be more equipped to manage the transition?
Possibly then, it's not a case of deterring those who are not hard-core, manly and committed enough to get to the end, but in encouraging the gradual instruction of the kind Mike mentioned above first, so they have a solid grounding in the fundamentals of the Dhamma before attempting practices which might otherwise induce "dark nights"? (such fundamentals including, Right Effort, mudita and other quite elementary things that seem very useful in the specified situation). There's a great many lay people who have benefited over the centuries from the wisdom of the Buddha... it seems a shame to deter the current generation from mental cultivation, on account of such things.
Metta,
Retro.
I think it's clear something has gone wrong. The eightfold path starts with right view, everything else is developed simultaneously, and if you're not doing that, you're supposed to ask someone skilled in the area you're lacking in to help you. People need to be able to concentrate in order to gain proper insight. If people had true insight into dukkha, then they wouldn't create more dukkha for themselves by worrying about it, it's all impermanent, and believe it or not, and I heard this from a pali scholar so it's not personal knowledge unfortunately, but impermanence doesn't translate quite properly into english. Anicca and Anatta have a certain amount of positive connotation to them in the pali, they're supposed to be a little liberating just from hearing about them. I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST SERIOUS POINTS BUDDHIST PRACTICE FACES RIGHT NOW, PEOPLE NEED TO LEARN TO BE CALM AND COLLECTED/CONCENTRATED WHILE THEY'RE MEDITATING.Ron Crouch wrote:
The issue rests on the kind of meditation a person is doing. In classical buddhism there is a distinction made between "wet" and "dry" insight, which is the difference between the insight knowledges (nanas) experienced directly after deep concentration ("wet" = jhana) or without deep concentration ("dry" = no jhana). If you are doing it wet, then the dukkha nanas (dark night stages) seem like a breeze, a mild bit of turbulence in an otherwise smooth flight. If you are doing it dry however, then the dukkha nanas can really rock your world - and not in a good way. In the old texts and commentaries they divide it up into these two types as if they were all or nothing, but in truth almost everyone mixes it up and so the ambiguous answer of "it depends." Essentially, it depends on how deep your concentration is and how well you use it to move through the insight stages. So, while everyone will go through the insights into suffering in one form or another, how you experience it depends a lot on your concentration. Stronger concentration equals less difficulty.
Hope that helps.
"
polarbuddha101 wrote:
I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST SERIOUS POINTS BUDDHIST PRACTICE FACES RIGHT NOW, PEOPLE NEED TO LEARN TO BE CALM AND COLLECTED/CONCENTRATED WHILE THEY'RE MEDITATING.
I'm no expert, but anybody with common sense can see my point. Samadhi and Sati go hand in hand and vipassana is a quality that means clear seeing it's not a vehicle for liberation from what I've read so far and there are certainly some Bhikkhus who would agree with me. Thus, using simple common sense, I deem the Bhikkhus deeming samadhi/samatha and sati/vipassana to be something developed in tandem. Let's not create unnecessary dichotomies where it's best if there were none.
No need to shout...polarbuddha101 wrote: I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST SERIOUS POINTS BUDDHIST PRACTICE FACES RIGHT NOW, PEOPLE NEED TO LEARN TO BE CALM AND COLLECTED/CONCENTRATED WHILE THEY'RE MEDITATING.
And I do not know of anyone who teaches Buddhist meditation that would say differently.polarbuddha101 wrote:Thus, using simple common sense, I deem the Bhikkhus deeming samadhi/samatha and sati/vipassana to be something developed in tandem. Let's not create unnecessary dichotomies where it's best if there were none.
Well said. I'm not sure if you're familiar with Nanavira Thera...Ron wrote:The goal is to ground the practice in one's own reality, not in any ideal, even if the ideal comes from a great teacher or a great sutta. In short, people need to get real. They need to get way more practical about this stuff and how it directly impacts them.
Indeed it's true that various sources of information and help available can either be applied directly as a means of understanding one's experience, or serve as distractions and grounds for speculation. It is pretty self-evident which use of knowledge is superior.Nanavira Thera wrote:Only in a vertical view, straight down into the abyss of his own personal existence, is a man capable of apprehending the perilous insecurity of his situation; and only a man who does apprehend this is prepared to listen to the Buddha's Teaching. But human kind, it seems, cannot bear very much reality: men, for the most part, draw back in alarm and dismay from this vertiginous direct view of being and seek refuge in distractions.
Ron Crouch wrote:Lastly, just let me say - "manly" - really?
Not for any of those lower beings who are female, eh?Retrofuturist said: it's not a case of deterring those who are not hard-core, manly and committed enough to get to the end
Do believe everything you read? There is classically a division between the "wet" and the "dry" approach, but the reality is that in actual practice the division is more apparent than real. What is called vipassana meditation cultivates and requires considerable samatha qualities. This is not from reading, but from working with a number of teachers of "vipassana meditation." I think we need to be careful here in assuming that the classical wet/dry descriptions are hard and fast.polarbuddha101 wrote:Tilt, I'm glad you feel that way but I've read things that seem to indicate otherwise. So it's just what I've gathered indirectly. If there isn't this problem then awesome.
No, I certainly don't believe everything I read, but I do take it into consideration. Anyways, like I said, awesome!tiltbillings wrote:Do believe everything you read? There is classically a division between the "wet" and the "dry" approach, but the reality is that in actual practice the division is more apparent than real. What is called vipassana meditation cultivates and requires considerable samatha qualities. This is not from reading, but from working with a number of teachers of "vipassana meditation." I think we need to be careful here in assuming that the classical wet/dry descriptions are hard and fast.polarbuddha101 wrote:Tilt, I'm glad you feel that way but I've read things that seem to indicate otherwise. So it's just what I've gathered indirectly. If there isn't this problem then awesome.
A nice description of the dark night of the soul. It actually takes a fair amount of practice/work to confront the abyss, which is really what bhavana is about.retrofuturist wrote:Well said. I'm not sure if you're familiar with Nanavira Thera...Nanavira Thera wrote:Only in a vertical view, straight down into the abyss of his own personal existence, is a man capable of apprehending the perilous insecurity of his situation; and only a man who does apprehend this is prepared to listen to the Buddha's Teaching. But human kind, it seems, cannot bear very much reality: men, for the most part, draw back in alarm and dismay from this vertiginous direct view of being and seek refuge in distractions.