Insight on body feeling

Jeffrey

Most of my thinking is sort in day dreams and I don't worry too much about it. <This is in meditation.

I once had anxiety and I learned to let go of the thoughts and just feel my body. But I wonder if I need the thoughts in order to have insight and expose and conquer wrong view. Between my meds and the feelings in my body I have quite a thorny bramble of craving towards feeling relief.

So the question is if we let go of anxious thoughts are they in the subconscious causing havoc? Do I need to question my body and ask what the problem is? I used to think that just going back to the breath. I am doubting that now. After all part of study is contemplating along with hearing and meditation.

Jeffrey

found this^^^

MaryAnne

moooooooji. I him.

fivebells

Jeffrey said:

So the question is if we let go of anxious thoughts are they in the subconscious causing havoc? Do I need to question my body and ask what the problem is? I used to think that just going back to the breath. I am doubting that now. After all part of study is contemplating along with hearing and meditation.

Love Mooji, too. Thank you for introducing me to him. Haven't watched this, yet.

The ability to tranquilize one's self with breath meditation is crucial, and it is great that you have that skill. I do think that once that is in place, it can be used as a tool for further contemplation which can greatly accelerate progress along the path. If the anxiety were being repressed, it would come out in this contemplation. However, I think the fact that you are asking this question suggests that it is not.

Jeffrey

@fivebells, watch the video if you can manage. It fits my situation like a glove so you could know about what I am going through in my body feeling.

how

@Jeffrey
This may not apply to you for not only is it Zen (not your practise) but you often speak of a difficult mental condition that I am certainly not qualified to address..
But in my practise....

We do not seek any specific (eg. tranquil) conditions within formal meditation. To use the breath to tranquilize oneself is the polar opposite of Zen. Allowing equanimity to unfold in Zen depends on being able to face & accept the arising and departing of all phenomena without trying to manipulate any of it.. The underlying purpose in those Zen meditation forms that specifically attend to the breath is to only remain in potential contact with all of our sense gates by not sinking into an endless or exclusive loop with our own mentality.
Your teacher though will be the best authority on whether any of this applies to your practise.

Each practise has it's own checks and balances.

Jeffrey

@how, that is similar to what Mooji said. He pointed out that the feeling of boundaries and congestedness we feel are due to identifying with the feeling as ours (essentially). The real awareness behind the feeling doesn't need to get rid of anything. So it's not just 'observe the feeling' rather it is knowing that the feeling is just passing through.

fivebells

Hi, Jeffrey, I watched the video, and I like it. He is telling her to adopt a different mental fabrication, namely, to absorb herself in the perception of space. This is a skillful suggestion. It can be used for suppression/repression if your concentration is powerful enough, but it's unlikely. However, it is not the end of suffering. When he says to find the thing which is not passing, he is pointing to awakening, but that thing is not space. The attention to space is a fabrication in its own right, and needs to be abandoned as well. So yes, there is still room for thought to yield insight from the position Mooji outlines in this video. However, if you have mastered this meditation to the extent that anxiety and craving for relief from body feelings cause you no stress at all, that is already a very refined achievement. The suffering left in the contemplation of space is a very refined form of suffering, though it needs to be abandoned too.

The Buddha said:

"Furthermore, with the complete transcending of perceptions of [physical] form, with the disappearance of perceptions of resistance, and not heeding perceptions of diversity, [perceiving,] 'Infinite space,' Sariputta entered & remained in the dimension of the infinitude of space. Whatever qualities there are in the dimension of the infinitude of space — the perception of the dimension of the infinitude of space, singleness of mind, contact, feeling, perception, intention, consciousness, desire, decision, persistence, mindfulness, equanimity, & attention — he ferreted them out one after another. Known to him they arose, known to him they remained, known to him they subsided. He discerned, 'So this is how these qualities, not having been, come into play. Having been, they vanish.' He remained unattracted & unrepelled with regard to those qualities, independent, detached, released, dissociated, with an awareness rid of barriers. He discerned that 'There is a further escape,' and pursuing it there really was for him.

The other criticism I have of this video is that I think there's a good chance he didn't really help that woman. That is quite an advanced perspective, and terribly difficult to adopt in the throes of anxiety. It would be interesting to hear what she thought about it. But if it's working for you, that is terrific, and it shows that your practice is effective for you.

Jeffrey

I think it is just being present without trying to make the blocked feeling go away.. As he says "we are space". This is distinct from the space jhana.

At least what Mooji is talking about. This can be seen as obvious because we do not become the space jhana, rather we experience it. Mooji is advaita vedanta and he believes we ARE space. That is incompatible with your notion of space because a person cannot BECOME a jhana or chakra or anything like that.

I think it's both beginning and advanced because it is the one to bring us enlightenment. Why not start practicing it now rather than later? My teacher teaches formless meditation and again. if I have to say this a thousand times, space from some teachers does not refer to the jhana or the space chakra or any of these things; it refers to the nature of mind.

I'm not saying you are wrong as I really do not know. I am just saying that the space of an advaita vedantist (or dentist ) is not the space jhana of the Pali Canon.

Take this with a grain of salt and humility. I am not saying you are wrong I am just concerned that there is a miscommunication of what space means or even just a simple disagreement.

karmablues

Jeffrey said:

Most of my thinking is sort in day dreams and I don't worry too much about it. This is in meditation.

I once had anxiety and I learned to let go of the thoughts and just feel my body. But I wonder if I need the thoughts in order to have insight and expose and conquer wrong view. Between my meds and the feelings in my body I have quite a thorny bramble of craving towards feeling relief.

So the question is if we let go of anxious thoughts are they in the subconscious causing havoc? Do I need to question my body and ask what the problem is? I used to think that just going back to the breath. I am doubting that now. After all part of study is contemplating along with hearing and meditation.

Studying the nature of thoughts will lead to insight. Thoughts will arise and pass away in accordance with their nature. When we let go of thoughts, that means we don't attach to them. However, letting go of thoughts doesn't mean you've stopped thinking. Unless we are in deep concentration, new thoughts will constantly reappear as it is the nature of the mind to think.

By letting go of anxious thoughts this should help reduce the effect they have on you because you don't allow those thoughts to create a chain of anxious thoughts where one anxious thought leads to another after another after another which causes more and more anxiety to build up. So I think you are doing the right thing by letting go of these thoughts. Also, it is only through letting go that you can see their true nature otherwise you become absorbed in them which will also cause identification with those thoughts as being yours. Perhaps the aim would be to develop mindfulness and concentration to a sufficient degree so that you won't even grasp onto anxious thoughts when they arise and thus the effort to let go of them will not even be needed.

Regarding your breathing meditation, my understanding is that for a person who wants to develop concentration then s/he should keep coming back to the breath ie. so that the mind becomes focused on a single meditation object, in this case being the breath. On how much concentration is needed different teachers say different things. Some teachers say it is possible to start contemplation with just a little concentration established, while others say to do so only after at least access concentration has been attained (so that the hindrances have been quelled). Others say that one should just observe all phenomena with bare awareness (ie. saying it's ok to jump from one object of meditation to another) and this will in and of itself lead to momentary concentration. With momentary concentration, awareness is accompanied by a sufficient degree of clear comprehension allowing insight to arise without the need for directed contemplation.

Like "how" suggests, it is probably best to consult with your teacher what is most suitable for you.

lobster

The other criticism I have of this video is that I think there's a good chance he didn't really help that woman. That is quite an advanced perspective, and terribly difficult to adopt in the throes of anxiety. It would be interesting to hear what she thought about it. But if it's working for you, that is terrific, and it shows that your practice is effective for you.

Telling a whole satsangria the truth, which Mooji does and applying it into the subjective is not an easy task.

@Jeffery on the subject level, you must trust your meds/doctor and teacher as mentioned. Everything Mooji says in this video is true. It is coming from the loving, enlightened perspective. Advanced. What I am going to suggest are subjective tools to reprogram the plasticity of the mind/body complex to make it more open and spacious to the 'acceptance' of the Absolute:

Many people feel hypnosis/trance and mind relaxation and reprogramming is a partial solution. It is. It works. It is a basis of a journey that needs quick fixes as well as minutes or decades of practice or none at all . . .

You hear voices and day dream. Introduce the voices, words and aspirations you want to hear.

Go into trance.
Feel loved. Feel Love. Feel calm. Feel at ease. Find peace.
etc. Make your own loops or find the ones that reprogram and voice your requirements.

The subjective experience is plastic and can live in a better lie, whilst the Absolute moves through as always . . .

Don't get caught in the words, being or expression of the Absolute, because the subjective constriction is part of the temporary tightening around being . . .

:wave:

fivebells

Jeffrey said:

At least what Mooji is talking about. This can be seen as obvious because we do not become the space jhana, rather we experience it. Mooji is advaita vedanta and he believes we ARE space.

I'm not saying you are wrong as I really do not know. I am just saying that the space of an advaita vedantist (or dentist ) is not the space jhana of the Pali Canon.

Whether we say this is jhana or not, in terms of dependent origination, this is very explicitly a becoming. He's advocating identification with space because it leads to cessation (nirodha-dhatu) which feels good, which leads to clinging to identification with space. The same thing goes for awareness, which he uses in-place-of/in-addition-to space in the "Anxiety & Nervousness" excerpt you recently linked. (Love that talk, by the way. I found it when you introduced Mooji earlier in the year.)

It's not my notion of space, it's his (or more to the point, the notion which the practitioner of this meditation is constructing in order to do the meditation.) That there's a notion at all means there's more work to do. This is not to say it's a bad practice, on the contrary it's quite a skillful one. I am only addressing your question in the OP of whether thoughts can be of further use to you in developing your insight. They can, in that if having come to a still point in this space/awareness meditation, you do as Sariputta did and look at the qualities of that mind state — the perceptions, fabrications, feelings, intentions, attention, etc. — then you will discern that there is a further escape.

Jeffrey said:

I think it's both beginning and advanced because it is the one to bring us enlightenment. Why not start practicing it now rather than later?

For the question of whether to do this meditation or not, if it's working for you, that's all that matters. I have my doubts about the number of people for whom it could be immediately effective because I was only able to do it after a long process of establishing foundational practices and theoretical understanding, and it is, after all, 5th and 6th jhana we're talking about here, or at least close cognates of them. First jhana via metta seems like a better recommendation for most people. But I'm not knocking the practice as such, I use it and it's effective.

Jeffrey

The whole point is that space is not a becoming. As mooji says we ARE space. Always. In advaita vedanta and a lot of Buddhism (shentong), there is a true self and that true self is changeless though with a motion. It is satisfactory because there is no grasping with the true self. And it is not non-self because it is the true reliable refuge. It never comes nor goes. There is no time. Ungrasped infinity. This is shentong view of Buddhism. It is a lot like cittamatra (mind only) but has further developed and is consistent with the madyamaka from nagarjuna.

Drop a stone in a bucket. The ripples are karma as our intentions shape the mandala of our awareness. Karma is related to intention. Unless energy is constantly fed to the bucket the waves eventually die out. The tendency towards calming and silence is the natural state of the mind and then within that there are ripples.

fivebells

That was not the point of the question you raised in the OP, which is what I'm addressing. Ontological properties of space don't enter into the matter of how to relate to it in meditation. From the perspective of personal experience, it comes and goes depending on whether the mind is attending to it. Whether the mind's attention to it constitutes a becoming depends not on not on any independent, permanent property of space ("never comes or goes"), but on whether the factors shaping that attention fit into the categories of dependent origination.

Jeffrey

No I put videos that helped me and I am explaining advaita vedanta which is what the teacher in the video practices. Space does not come and go in these traditions. Space is non-dual so there is no coming and going. It is always here. Space is here even daydreaming or asleep. It's the unconditioned mind of openness, clarity, and sensitivity. Awareness diffuses out to lose the object and then it focuses again. One pointed concentration in these traditions is not concentrating on an object because the nature of mind is always to diffuse and focus.

Space is the mind rather than an object.

fivebells

There was no video in the OP. Sorry for talking past you, though.

Jeffrey

No video but I started the thread and I commented the video fit my problem. Is not that on topic to talk about a misunderstanding of advaita vedanta as having space as an object? I feel like I am trolling my own thread.

fivebells

You're right, it's your thread. Sorry, just trying to help. Enjoy your thread.

Jeffrey

I appreciated the comments I just thought you had an error in understanding space, as understood by some sanghas. So thanks for your input.

fivebells

No, I understand the ontological claims very clearly. I think the basis for the conflict is that I think they don't matter for (Buddhist) insight meditation and you think they do.

Jeffrey

Hmmm I'll have to think about whether the material about Openness Clarity and Sensitivity OCS helps me in meditation. Openness is spaciousness so I am commenting on this as ontological. The OCS does provide insight into the three marks and that is a recurrent theme in my coursebook. I also think OCS gives confidence because you are assured that OCS will always be there throughout life.

Jeffrey

Here's a quote from a talk I transcribed:

Then you remember dzogchen is actually upadesha. It’s not trying to present some sort of theory of the nature of reality. It’s trying to talk about experience in more detail for the meditator who is getting proper instruction on how to let go of grasping.

So I think this OCS might also be a pointing out instruction.

Jeffrey

And in those kind of pointing out instructions it is quite helpful to refer to the primordial ground itself as being the ultimate reality of the truth. It’s a name for that ungraspable truth because it has that sense of... well primordial means means it doesn’t come and go. It doesn’t have a beginning and it doesn’t have an end. So that it’s not in the class of things that are impermanent. And it’s ground in the sense that everything is included in it. There isn’t anything outside of it. But of course if you were to try and say ‘then what is it?’ I want to sort of grasp it and get it. What is it then? That’s when the explanation just turns back to upadesha and meditation points you back to your cushion. It isn’t anything actually. You can’t say it’s anything because that would be to interpret it wouldn’t it? That would be to have an image of it or one step removed from it. It would no longer be direct experience. So we’ve talked about that in quite some detail this week and I’m sure we’ll be talking about it again in quite some detail as time goes by. The primordial ground is nothing other than what we also are also calling citta, or the awareness....intuitive awareness perhaps. And yet when we use intuitive awareness we could use that for the process of realizing or waking up to the primordial ground on the understanding that the two can’t be separated, so it’s all quite tricky, and it’s important to remember that this is all upadesha and for those of you who haven’t come across that word before upadesha is an instruction that is given to the practitioner by the teacher. And yeah it’s truthful veracity??. It’s completely within the relationship between the teacher and the student who is hearing it. And if you were going to take it and you were trying to analyze it you might find it wasn’t at all clear what it was referring to.

fivebells

@Jeffrey, yes, I think that could be a good way of looking at it.