Umos wrote:My doubting about whether I practice the correct way of Sayadaw Mahasi practice is much weaker now. I think there was some tunnel vision and semantics that had arisen in the mind. I see that I should focus more on the detachment and objective observation and less on the labeling of phenomena as "neutral". I am reading Ajahn Chah's "A still forest pool" now. Is this fairly compatible with the Sayadaw Mahasi tradition Ive been doing so far or will confusion arise in the mind?
Q: What about other methods of practice? These days there seem to be so many teachers and so many different systems of meditation that it is confusing.
Answer (Ajhan Chah): It is like going into town. One can approach from the north,from the southeast, from many roads. Often these systems just differ outwardly. Whether you walk one way or another, fast or slow, if you are mindful, it is all the same. There is one essential point that all good practice must eventually come to--not clinging. In the end, all meditation systems must be let go of. Neither can one cling to the teacher. If a system leads to relinquishment, to not clinging, then it is correct practice. You may wish to travel, to visit other teachers and try other systems.Some of you have already done so. This is a natural desire. You will find out that a thousand questions asked and knowledge of many systems will not bring you to the truth. Eventually you will get bored. You will see that only by stopping and examining your own mind can you find our what the Buddha talked about. No need to go searching outside yourself. Eventually you must return to face your own true nature. Here is where you can understand the Dhamma.
If the words "I", "me", or "you" are used, they are for the use of convenience related purposes. None of these exist, of course.