Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
captivated by a form of meditation
Joshua
Veteran
Hey,
Lately I've been captivated by a form of meditation and I'd like to know if it accords with Buddhism or if I've taken a wrong turn. It's a bit difficult to put into words and it's this very notion of non-conceptual practice that makes me believe it's either my friend or foe, nothing inbetween. I began reflecting on the idea that light rays emit from objects and, coming in contact with my eyes, I see; until then sight does not exist for me. In fact this occurs with all my senses. Furthermore, following this logic, form is also subject to this examination, literal and non-literal alike because of my nervous system, emotions and perceptions; like this the remaining aggregates arise. Thus I've witnessed the arising of the entire spectrum of my consciousness. I then simultaneously and non-conceptually experience non-self and emptiness intimately as never before and withiout relying on wit. Afterwards I quickly realize access concentration and much faster than ever without any silly concentration exercises, simply through pure insight. After doing this a few nights in a row many times throughout the waking day I will feel as if there's a duality between the world before my senses that I watch as if dissociated from and this strangely perpetuated self through an ingenious engine of sense media and aggregates. This doesn't bother me, in fact I find it intriguing, so there's no nihilism that I've before experienced.
My question lies in if I ought to continue this or otherwise. I understand the Buddha went through two gurus taking him to the deepest jhanic levels without liberation and contemporary tantrayanas don't even practice it. Achieving access concentration means little then, I can see. Stream-entry must be purely about directly experiencing insight. Am I inching towards that path?
Lately I've been captivated by a form of meditation and I'd like to know if it accords with Buddhism or if I've taken a wrong turn. It's a bit difficult to put into words and it's this very notion of non-conceptual practice that makes me believe it's either my friend or foe, nothing inbetween. I began reflecting on the idea that light rays emit from objects and, coming in contact with my eyes, I see; until then sight does not exist for me. In fact this occurs with all my senses. Furthermore, following this logic, form is also subject to this examination, literal and non-literal alike because of my nervous system, emotions and perceptions; like this the remaining aggregates arise. Thus I've witnessed the arising of the entire spectrum of my consciousness. I then simultaneously and non-conceptually experience non-self and emptiness intimately as never before and withiout relying on wit. Afterwards I quickly realize access concentration and much faster than ever without any silly concentration exercises, simply through pure insight. After doing this a few nights in a row many times throughout the waking day I will feel as if there's a duality between the world before my senses that I watch as if dissociated from and this strangely perpetuated self through an ingenious engine of sense media and aggregates. This doesn't bother me, in fact I find it intriguing, so there's no nihilism that I've before experienced.
My question lies in if I ought to continue this or otherwise. I understand the Buddha went through two gurus taking him to the deepest jhanic levels without liberation and contemporary tantrayanas don't even practice it. Achieving access concentration means little then, I can see. Stream-entry must be purely about directly experiencing insight. Am I inching towards that path?
0
Comments
As for your line of thinking, give this thought some time... since things like touch and smell and sight are just electrical impulses in the brain that are CONVERTED to things like color, etc.... no one REALLY even knows what the world is really like "out there." What we see and feel is just our minds interpretation of whatever it is out there.
One thing though.... from what you said about " I've witnessed the arising of the entire spectrum of my consciousness." According to Buddhism, there is no "my consciousness." There are various kinds of consciousness depending on what it is that is being perceived but not consciousness belonging to a "me."
You might find some writings by non-Buddhists like Ramana Maharshi to be of some interest as well. I recommend "Be As You Are" translated by David Godman. Good luck!
I know that there's no one consciousness. I should have added that to what I called the 'engine' of the senses and aggregates. But yes, that's very much what I'm talking about, with more emphasis on the artificiality of the gears and cogs of the apparent mind and less on the speculation on "what's out there".
May I divert the subject for a moment and ask for your interpretation of orthodox meditation, I have no confident understanding of it.
Thanks again.