Dharma's -" body"

[Guest guest]

Hi Dharma,

 

I meant to reply to your post on meditation but I seem to have lost it

somewhere - not very techie.

 

I seem to remember something to the effect of "body" going to sleep...sort

of, I know it was deeper than that but mind is failing me.

 

I was curious because although I don't know much about Advaita/Vedanta

methods - Sri Maharshi's instruction to get over the "ridiculous attachment

to body" has always stuck in mind.

 

So - it seemed to me that the obviousness of body, and the direct contact to

suffering through body would be a main Vedanta practice and I was surprised

that it wasnt for you. But, I am quite comfortable with any approaches, not

critical.

 

My initial introduction to meditation methods was Zen, but then I switched

to Samatha/Vipassana. Here one investigates the mind-body continuum. The

basic teaching of Buddhism is Satipattana, Ekyana Magga, the Only Way, or

the Sole Way. This is not to say that this is the only path, but that in

all paths, mindfulness is required and this was the main teaching of Buddha,

the inherent capacity of mind to be aware and to thus discover ultimate

reality. And one finds this basic teaching in all Buddhism, including

within all the bells drums and horns of the Tibetans.

 

In Buddhist practice one begins with the known - What is the world? (or "Who

Am I?") and through choiceless awareness penetrating and understanding the

true nature of what we call our world which is matter and mind. "matter" is

body - since it doesn't know - only mind knows. At least this idea does for

a starting point.

 

"Formations" or sankharas - means the factors, functions and relationships

which are grouped together to form a "body". And the example of a motor car

is used, parts are put together to from a "car" but the underlying idea is

that there is no enitity as such which can be found to correspond to "motor

car" since it is all formations - things put together. The more one sees

into the "body", its true nature, the less one is attached to the idea that

one "is" the body or even has one other than in conventional terms. The same

goes for all phenomena that we call "mind". In Buddhist practice, this

seeing directly for oneself, beyond the theories, is what allows mind to

just let go of what it clings to, which is the natural and continuous

arising of "insight." It's generally only after the experience of emptiness

that any of the practice really makes sense. This "Humpty Dumpty" fell off

the wall through inadvertant Kundalini awakening and had to be put together

again with the help of Vipassana - actually, just examined all the pieces

until I calmed down.

 

So this would appear to help one get rid of, or at least understand, this

"ridiculous attachment" to body.

 

The four "foundations" of mindfulness - objects for investigation are

contemplation of body, contemplation of feeling, contemplation of mental

contents and contemplation of mental state of mind as it presents itself in

the moment...all done with bare attention simply to see into the true nature

of phenomena -in Buddhist terms, impermanence, suffering and no-self.

 

Didn't mean to give a big lecture on Buddhism - just wanted you to know I

wasn't finding fault with your approach - the best practices are those one

feels called to do -Im currently enjoying a Sufi group. Ive discovered that

where Buddhists make Dzogchen a big deal, Sufi's just bang on into it simply

and directly and with great Heart - which I need more of.

 

love

 

Joyce

[Guest guest]

Hi Joyce,

>I meant to reply to your post on meditation but I seem to have lost it

>somewhere - not very techie.

 

>I seem to remember something to the effect of "body" going to sleep...sort

>of, I know it was deeper than that but mind is failing me.

 

I think I'll save myself a lot of typing and just repost two files: an

intro to meditation and one on the basic technique as I teach it. These

were written for an on-line group of young parents with no consistent

spiritual background and without active Kundalini... so the language is

simple and there's no mention of chakras.

>I was curious because although I don't know much about Advaita/Vedanta

>methods - Sri Maharshi's instruction to get over the "ridiculous attachment

>to body" has always stuck in mind.

>

>So - it seemed to me that the obviousness of body, and the direct contact to

>suffering through body would be a main Vedanta practice and I was surprised

>that it wasnt for you. But, I am quite comfortable with any approaches, not

>critical.

 

I don't quite follow this... detachment from the body and a practice of

suffering through the body? I can only say that I see no value in

suffering per se. I mean, why sit in an uncomfortable posture or in too

cold a place? Some might think there's something to be learned that way...

and that it should be learned. But I just want to teach meditation, and

I think it's easier without fighting pain, cold, etc. Just wrap the body

up warm and put it to sleep.

 

Actually, I didn't choose an approach or a practice. It came to me

naturally and free. In my teens I began to have conscious dreams. I

would find myself inside my head and quite conscious... nothing was there,

which was boring, so I made something appear. And found I could also make

things disappear again. I had no better idea than to just conjure a

handsome boy and cause some romantic scene to play out. I was a mother in

my 20s before it occurred to me that there might be something else to be

done with that state... to wonder how it would be, the next time it

happened, to pray.

 

So then all I had to do was figure out how to get there when I wanted to,

instead of just waiting for it to happen during sleep. And since I already

knew that the state was possible, it wasn't so hard. Just learning to put

my body to sleep and stay awake. ) As I was learning that, I began to

wonder if this was what the _Gita_ had been talking about! So I began

reading it again, and sure enough... it was a great help and always has

been.

 

You'll see when you read my two posts that this is where I start with my

teaching... how to get inside, how to withdraw the senses. I think now

that this came to me spontaneously probably because I had learned Dream

Yoga in another life when I was a lama. I sometimes call it "Raja Yoga

with a Tibetan accent."

>My initial introduction to meditation methods was Zen, but then I switched

>to Samatha/Vipassana. Here one investigates the mind-body continuum. The

>basic teaching of Buddhism is Satipattana, Ekyana Magga, the Only Way, or

>the Sole Way. This is not to say that this is the only path, but that in

>all paths, mindfulness is required and this was the main teaching of Buddha,

>the inherent capacity of mind to be aware and to thus discover ultimate

>reality. And one finds this basic teaching in all Buddhism, including

>within all the bells drums and horns of the Tibetans.

>

>In Buddhist practice one begins with the known - What is the world? (or "Who

>Am I?") and through choiceless awareness penetrating and understanding the

>true nature of what we call our world which is matter and mind. "matter" is

>body - since it doesn't know - only mind knows. At least this idea does for

>a starting point.

 

My impression is that there is more than one form of Buddhist practice.

After the words of Gautama himself, I am more drawn to the teachings and

practices of Tibetan vajrayana.

>"Formations" or sankharas - means the factors, functions and relationships

>which are grouped together to form a "body". And the example of a motor car

>is used, parts are put together to from a "car" but the underlying idea is

>that there is no enitity as such which can be found to correspond to "motor

>car" since it is all formations - things put together. The more one sees

>into the "body", its true nature, the less one is attached to the idea that

>one "is" the body or even has one other than in conventional terms. The same

>goes for all phenomena that we call "mind". In Buddhist practice, this

>seeing directly for oneself, beyond the theories, is what allows mind to

>just let go of what it clings to, which is the natural and continuous

>arising of "insight." It's generally only after the experience of emptiness

>that any of the practice really makes sense. This "Humpty Dumpty" fell off

>the wall through inadvertant Kundalini awakening and had to be put together

>again with the help of Vipassana - actually, just examined all the pieces

>until I calmed down.

 

Sounds like you had a really rough awakening.

>So this would appear to help one get rid of, or at least understand, this

>"ridiculous attachment" to body.

>

>The four "foundations" of mindfulness - objects for investigation are

>contemplation of body, contemplation of feeling, contemplation of mental

>contents and contemplation of mental state of mind as it presents itself in

>the moment...all done with bare attention simply to see into the true nature

>of phenomena -in Buddhist terms, impermanence, suffering and no-self.

 

To me this seems like an awful lot of reflective meditation. I would

rather get my students past the mental/intellectual immediately and on into

the real fun. I don't do much talking, I just lead them to the pond and we

all jump in. )

 

In writing about teaching, I forgot to mention that one kind of thing a

meditation teacher does usually escapes the notice of the students... that

is to join the group energetically into a functioning unit, to provide

extra energy to get the new people going, and to monitor everyone. I aim

in the first class to get everyone into the level above the intellectual,

even if just briefly. When I taught a one-hour workshop at a pagan/Wiccan

gathering, one woman came up to me afterward so happy she was crying. She

said it was the first time in her life she had ever been _without_ that

constant chatter of the mind.

>Didn't mean to give a big lecture on Buddhism - just wanted you to know I

>wasn't finding fault with your approach - the best practices are those one

>feels called to do -Im currently enjoying a Sufi group. Ive discovered that

>where Buddhists make Dzogchen a big deal, Sufi's just bang on into it simply

>and directly and with great Heart - which I need more of.

 

That sounds like fun!

 

Love,

Dharma