Hi Geoff,
thank you again for all the information. They are a real help
Ñāṇa wrote:
Well, this is where the comparisons between traditions can create confusion. (And why one should learn one tradition!)
Yes, this would be optimal. But I can't seem to make up my mind
I like the Theravada system very much but I also miss some aspects of the Tibetan tradition I think are important for me, such as dream yoga and the exact phenomenological model of the winds in the body (chakra-nadi system, kundalini, etc).
In brief, mindfulness and full awareness are to be employed during all nine stages in the Indo-Tibetan system. But in the Indo-Tibetan system there are subjects listed under samatha meditation, such as observation of the five aggregates, twelve sensory spheres, and eighteen elements, which are considered as subjects for developing vipassanā in the Theravāda system. (For example, I know of one Tibetan lama who's lived in the West for many years, who considers Theravāda vipassanā meditation to be samatha meditation according to his tradition.)
Yes, this seems to be a part of my confusion. For in practice they don't seem to be as easily discernable as in theory. An example, years ago I was practicing in the Tibetan system (Tarab Tulku Rinpoche) a technique called "dealing with emotions". It is a simple technique and I have read about something similar in the Theravada system some time ago so it should be possible to compare the systems terminology regarding the phenomenoloy of the experience.
Basically, after a short time of relaxation and concentration, one purposefully arises a specific emotion (I choose fear), let it influence mind and body and observes and analyses the processes. Now, is this vipassana or samatha? There are certainly aspects of vipassana, such as discernment and recognition. During the whole session fear and it's mental and physical patterns were running through the system. I think if one had done a blood test the corresponding hormons would have been there. But there was also an increase of concentration and calm due to the increase of distance to the processes. The concentration was not on one object such as breath, but on observation itself. The more this concentration deepend on the observation the more I noticed effects I usually get when concentrating on an object: spaciousness, temporal dissolution, equanimity, amusement, then objects I am only aware of when concentration has increased to a certain level (I am not sure but they might be some kind of nimitta) that stabilized and a part of the concentration was holding one for some time until a new one appeared and I moved the concentration to the new one. There was calm, but not the calm and equanimity of a calm ocean but the calm and equanimity of a plane above a tzunami, monitoring and analysing it.
If I understand you correctly, in the Theravada system this observation of the five aggregates is vipassana and in the Tibetan system samatha. But, frankly, I recognized aspects of both - such as stability of concentration on an (nimitta?) object and increase of discernment and recognition. Is it possible to develop stability of concentration on one object (samatha) simultaniously with momentary concentration that observes the five aggregates? So that there are two different kinds of concentration simultaneously there? Like two hands?