Hi Retro,
I have been wondering about these character classes in Theravada for I don't see them as useful or correct regarding meditation practice so far. What I do find on the other hand is that practice and access of the object of sati depends on my current state. For example, when I am agitated and wake and "nervous", extrovert, it is more easy to be mindful of consciousness than feelings or the body. When I am tired and mentally slow it is more easy to observe the body (breath etc) than thoughts or feelings. When my mind is wake and keen and "introvert" dhamma becomes accessible. It seems to me more a matter of what object frame is dominant at the given moment than an actual "character class" of persons that can access this or that frame more easily.
retrofuturist wrote:
In the introduction to Soma Thera's commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta there is talk, based on the traditional commentarial expositions about choosing one frame of reference as your "preliminary object of contemplation"
All the four different objects of mindfulness: body, feeling, consciousness and mental objects, have to be understood before one reaches sanctitude. According to character, temperament and cognizing slant, one can make however only one of these the preliminary object of contemplation. It is often the case that owing to a lack of proper understanding of oneself one has to try all objects before one gets to know what suits one best for the preliminary work. The choice is made more difficult by the fact that most of us have no clear-cut natures and are a mixture of a little of every possible human characteristic. In these circumstances there is no alternative to the method of trial and error. But the earnest ones will find their way with persistence and sustained effort.
By character there are two types determined by the excess of sensuous qualities of craving, or of the asensuous qualities of abstract beliefs that make up their personality. The craving type is generally extrovert; the other is generally introvert. According to temperament there are those whose mental functioning is slow, those who are languid mentally and those who are mentally keen, the nervous type. But here it must be understood that the terms languid and nervous have no necessary connection with calm and excitement. The nervous often keep cool when the languid fluster. The nervous type is sensitive, but strong and vigorous and keen. The nervous think forcefully and clearly. The languid are sluggish, inert, and weak, unclear, discursive, and often mixed-up in thought. Cognizing slant is either intuitive or intellective.
According to character and temperament the body-object is recommended for the languid extravert and the feeling-object for the nervous extrovert. For the languid introvert the consciousness-object is recommended, and for the nervous introvert, mental objects.
According to cognizing slant and temperament the body-object is pointed out for the mentally slow who belong to the intuitive kind which makes concentration its vehicle for progress, and for the mentally keen of this kind the feeling-object. For the mentally slow who belong to the intellective kind which makes insight its vehicle the consciousness-object is recommended, and to the mentally keen of this kind the mental object.
Further, contemplation on the body destroys the delusion of beauty; that on feeling destroys the delusion of pleasure; contemplation on consciousness dispels the delusion of permanence; and that on mental objects, the delusion of the soul.
For example to start with the satipatthana sutta (the long breath) I need to slow down my mind first. To relax body and thoughts, emotions, feelings etc, to make them slow, weak, languid. Only then the more subtle aspects of the body become accessible. Obviously, one does not need to relax body and thoughts to practice sati on the feelings. On the contrary. It is more easy to discern whatever arises as pleasant, unpleasant or neutral when the mind is in any extrovert state and so on. When relaxing my mind, making it weak, for sleep or daydreaming, etc, it is most easy to practice the consciousness-objects while observing the mental object requires quite some sharpness of mind.
So I would say it is more a matter of understanding oneself first, which frame of reference is more accessible than the others at any given time to decide for an object of sati.
I know this is not as teachers like Soma Thera seem to teach it but it works for me.