Why Meditate?

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Meditation, e.g. meditation postures, developing a regular sitting practice, skillfully relating to difficulties and hindrances, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by tiltbillings »

mikenz66 wrote:
retrofuturist wrote: Frankly, such a Right Effort-geared analysis, combined with an honest appraisal of the constituent components of "dark night" (such as that provided by Mike) show the practitioner precisely how to progress through the phenomenon in question.
And, of course, lucky for us, an honest appraisal of progress is greatly aided by the collective experience and advice of ancient and modern teachers and practitioners of the Bhuddha-Dhamma.
Indeed.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Tilt,
tiltbillings wrote:So, the Theravada is not Buddha-Dhamma. Wow!. You are probably on ther wrong forum.
Buddha-dhamma is a subset of Theravada, and no known Buddha-dhamma is excluded from it.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by tiltbillings »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Tilt,
tiltbillings wrote:So, the Theravada is not Buddha-Dhamma. Wow!. You are probably on ther wrong forum.
Buddha-dhamma is a subset of Theravada, and no known Buddha-dhamma is excluded from it.

Metta,
Retro. :)
A subset? That's an interesting opinion, which make no sense, in my opinion. The Theravada (defined in terms of the Pali Canon and it commentaries) is, I would say, an expression of the Buddha-Dhamma. You have your opinion as to what is the Buddha Dhamma, and it seems Ron has his.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Tilt,

Sure, and to clarify mine... there's Dhamma which is the natural law, independent of the person understanding it and interpreting it.

When an identifier is attached to it, it signifies whose perspective on that natural law is being discussed. In the Buddha's day, other's had their own take on the Dhamma and way of relating it to others, and in the last two and a half millennia, others have had different ways of relating it too.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by tiltbillings »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Tilt,

Sure, and to clarify mine... there's Dhamma which is the natural law, independent of the person understanding it and interpreting it.

When an identifier is attached to it, it signifies whose perspective on that natural law is being discussed. In the Buddha's day, other's had their own take on the Dhamma and way of relating it to others, and in the last two and a half millennia, others have had different ways of relating it too.

Metta,
Retro. :)
Okay, but it still makes no sense to me to to refer to the Buddha-Dhamma subset of the Theravada. Also Dhamma in Buddha Dhamma carries multiple meanings.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Ron Crouch
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 4:32 pm

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by Ron Crouch »

This really got into some counting-angels-on-a-pin territory pretty fast.

I'd like to address a couple of points that were raised that might be useful in terms of practice rather than which "ism" one identifies with.

The first is the use of the term "dark night". I know, I know. It's a Christian term. In some quarters it's a pretty bad thing to use anything Christian, and I get that. However, this is actually a pretty commonly used term among people who have been through it. I picked it up from my teacher, and thought he came up with it until another teacher corrected me and told me that the senior teachers at IMS had been using it behind closed doors for years, and that is where it slipped into the common lexicon among buddhist practitioners. Perhaps it's an American thing. So if most people here prefer we could stick with the term used in the Vissudimagga: "dukkha nanas".

But that is more angels on the pin. Here is the practice issue: what are these things? For those who are interested in the direct reference (and from the conversations here I think a lot of folks are), you can read about them in the Vissudimagga directly at http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... on2011.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

However, the description of them doesn't start until the section labeled: "Purification By Knowledge and Vision of the Way" which begins, very ominously, on page 666. It is placed in the section of "Understanding" as opposed to "Morality" or "Concentration", and that speaks to another point raised here, which is this: why are these bad experiences part of the path if this is a path that leads one to let go of bad experiences? This is retro's point, I believe, when he raises the right effort issue.

What these are is a direct experience of the first noble truth, that is why it is in the "Understanding" section and not in the "Morality" section (where right effort is found). You need this first in order to let go of suffering. You can find info about that in the section on "The Three Kinds of Full Understanding", but I'll give the cliff notes here: first you understanding by "knowing" something (i.e. tasting it directly), second you understand it by "investigating" it (watching it arise and disappear many times), and lastly you understand it by letting go of it (no longer automatically seeing it as "me" or "mine"). When you go through the nanas you get a direct taste of each of the three noble truths: impermanence in the arising and passing, suffering in the dukkha nanas, and non-self in equanimity. The progress made through the nanas is essentially the process of letting go. You simply don't move to the next one until you have learned how to let go of the one you are in.

So, directly facing suffering and letting it go is a core part of what one does in insight practice. It's my personal opinion that it is also a core part of what folks are doing in other traditions too (hence the references to Christian terms and so on).
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by mikenz66 »

Thanks Ron. This discussion has seemed a little strange to me. I've never had these dark night experiences, but I've done enough retreats to know that strange things can happen, and often do happen just when things seem to be going very smoothly. And I've talked with a number of people who have had such experiences, some experienced practitioners with good guidance, and one who managed to get to that state under his own steam (he's now a monk, and much happier).

As you say, the Commentaries also record these experiences of ancient practitioners, and I've given a number of sutta examples. The many encounters of practitioners with Mara include many more:
Then Mara the Evil One, wanting to arouse fear, horripilation, & terror in her, wanting to make her fall away from concentration, approached her & addressed her in verse:
That which is to be attained by seers —
the place so very hard to reach —
women can't —
with their two-inch discernment —
attain.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Thus, the idea that the Path will just flow smoothly, and that those experiencing such difficulties are not doing it right seems extremely unlikely to me.

:anjali:
Mike
Mark1234
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 8:17 pm

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by Mark1234 »

Hi,

I am new to this forum and I have not read all the responses, only some - but I did get the general flavour of what was said.

Why meditate?

Meditation is an end in itself. It is not a means to an end.

Meditation should not be thought of as an ego driven activity. It is not about striving and achieving. It is about letting go.

* I am not an unenlightened person who has to do something in the future in order to become an enlightened person

* The unconditioned is not a reward for good behaviour or hard work; it is not an attainment

* The unconditioned is completely natural. It is unconditioned, which means it is not an artifact. It is not the product of some kind of exotic conditioning.

When we meditate therefore we are taking refuge in the Buddha. To be more precise, we are in fact taking refuge in the Buddho which is to say, the Buddha's way of seeing. That is the essence. The truth of the way it is. To be present in the present moment.

Don't expect magic. Don't think that the skies will open and choirs of Devata's will sing or that there will be unending bliss, but there is freedom from suffering. The unconditioned is ordinary, so ordinary, it is over-looked.

In fact the unconditioned is only the beginning, not the end. Learn to make it your refuge and whatever happens in life, we can cope and live mindfully without creating any suffering for ourself or others.

Now there are the Jhanna's but these are also anicca, dhukka, anatta. There is no refuge in the Samadhi.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Mark,

Welcome to the Forum.

Thank you for your post, which makes many good points. However, I'm a little puzzled by this statement:
Mark1234 wrote: In fact the unconditioned is only the beginning, not the end. Learn to make it your refuge and whatever happens in life, we can cope and live mindfully without creating any suffering for ourself or others.
and how it relates to statements in the Suttas such as:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... tml#beyond" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"What lies on the other side of Unbinding [nibbana]?"

"You've gone too far, friend Visakha. You can't keep holding on up to the limit of questions. For the holy life gains a footing in Unbinding, culminates in Unbinding, has Unbinding as its final end. If you wish, go to the Blessed One and ask him the meaning of these things. Whatever he says, that's how you should remember it."
:anjali:
Mike
befriend
Posts: 2283
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:39 am

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by befriend »

in the book a path with heart by jack kornfield i think wrote it, he talks about the dark night of the soul. i think weve all had little dark nights of the soul in our practices, would it not be scarey to the ego to see the true nature of reality? is it not scarey to see for split second there is no self. buddha was confronted with an army of demons from mara, that doesnt sound too pleasant.
Take care of mindfulness and mindfulness will take care of you.
User avatar
manas
Posts: 2678
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by manas »

.
Last edited by manas on Mon May 21, 2012 8:02 am, edited 2 times in total.
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
User avatar
Travis
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 3:22 pm

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by Travis »

Ron Crouch wrote:@mikenz66- regarding the question of whether the path inevitably leads to a dark night, the answer is, unfortunately, "it depends." 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.
It seems to me that the "dukkha nanas" make a good case for practicing samatha-vipassana, so maybe the essay should be titled "Why Practice Dry Insight?" The drive that is the concluding "Why" in the essay seems like it would be sufficient to get through the complacency trap of jhana, and in a worse case scenario stuck in bliss>stuck in "dark night."
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Manas,
manas wrote: Here is where I must question what you said above, Ron. I started out practising with an impure motivation. But if I had not made a start at all, I do not think I would have eventually arrived to the increased conviction and the (modest, yet improved) understanding I now have...
That's a very good point. It seems to me that most people starting on the path have much understanding of what it really involves. But that is inevitable in any sort of development.

In the Suttas we see that the Buddha taught as a gradual process, in line with the development of the students, beginning with dana and sila --- not the four noble truths and deep meditation. So perhaps it's not so much a case of "not starting" as "starting in the most appropriate way".

:anjali:
Mike
Ron Crouch
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 4:32 pm

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by Ron Crouch »

@ manas - there are a lot of people with that same experience. Good for them and good for you. It's a silver lining. 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.

That might seem like radical advice but you can find it from lots of other teachers out there. In fact, there is a whole thread on one of those quotes here: http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=77&t=4362" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One teacher described it this way (paraphrasing): "You're either on the ride or off the ride. On the ride means ups and downs, terrible states and stages, and you have to finish. Off the ride means you are just going through the motions and trying to be a nice person."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Ron,
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.
Does this "important information" also involve a thorough grounding in the teachings of the Buddha?

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. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Post Reply