- Forum
- Sanghas
- Dharma Forum Refugees Camp
- Dharma Refugees Forum Topics
- General Dharma Discussions
- Why do I meditate? Why do you?
Why do I meditate? Why do you?
After some 4 decades of daily meditating, I have felt in the last few days why not skip meditating and just enjoy. Why do we spend so much time and energy in meditating? Why work towards seeing reality clearly? For me there is usually an inherent pleasure in my daily sits. There is that. But, I also get pleasure playing tennis, walking the dog and playing music. I read journals of people striving toward SE.Why? Why break phenomena down to the sensate level?
I asked a dharma friend today why he dedicates so much time to meditating. He responded he wanted to be able to cycle through the jhanas and nanas. I asked him why and he didn't have a good answer.
I know I am going through a stage that is probably temporary. I think this questioning is good for me. But...
================
Later I posted this:
Several things have contributed to my recent questioning. One was that last week I took part in a U. of Chicago study of experienced meditators. They had asked me how many hours of meditation I had. and I came up with over 9,000 hours. I then wondered what I had gained from this commitment of time. The second thing was thinking about the Pragmatic Dhamma teachers I have been exposed to. They seem overly concerned, in my opinion, with destroying the superman fantasy without replacing it with anything positive. For instance, I am rereading Daniel’s excellent book. It is great on technique. But, a take away was, why did I ever get involved with something like this. It only leads to more suffering. Another prominent teacher asked me what my meditation goals were. I answered, to reduce the power of the taints. This was gently skipped over. I interpreted this as meaning it wasn’t important to him.
I will continue meditating. Partly because of habit. Partly because that is what I do. Partly because it is interesting. Partly because I want to reach a state of meta-peace.
One post asked what my practice was. Every day I do one session of 4 Foundations noting, one session of non-dual meditation with self-inquiry added in at times and one session of whatever my mind wants to at the time which is usually 4 Foundations Noticing without labeling.
As a side note, the U. of Chicago people took my DNA sample. In their words, they “are interested in genetic similarities of people attracted to meditation.” Interesting.
Shargrol, how deeply have you looked into the presumptions you hold about just who your practice is happening to?
- Posts: 6503
- Karma: 2
So Jack, what are you?
- Posts: 6503
- Karma: 2
The second thing was thinking about the Pragmatic Dhamma teachers I have been exposed to. They seem overly concerned, in my opinion, with destroying the superman fantasy without replacing it with anything positive. For instance, I am rereading Daniel’s excellent book. It is great on technique. But, a take away was, why did I ever get involved with something like this. It only leads to more suffering. Another prominent teacher asked me what my meditation goals were. I answered, to reduce the power of the taints. This was gently skipped over. I interpreted this as meaning it wasn’t important to him.
Jack, there's a lot that you seem to be saying here. Let me start a reply by saying this: there is no specific pleasurable outcome for a teacher of any lineage to provide you with. There is nothing a teacher can actually do to get "you" "there." There is just here, just where you are right now, and where you will always be. It seems to me you could examine more deeply the desires you have expressed in your comments and you just might find that to be a fruitful exercise.
Also, do you work with a teacher regularly, or do you talk to one or two now and then? I urge you to do the former and not do the latter.
JMHO
,
shargrol wrote: I liked Chris' comment in my practice thread:
Shargrol, how deeply have you looked into the presumptions you hold about just who your practice is happening to?
Can you say more? Are you talking about self-inquiry?
Russell wrote: It might be very useful to look really deeply at how you identify with being a meditator.
Russell, I think I know what you mean but am not sure. Can you say more?
Ona Kiser wrote: It has seemed to me okay (fine, not a problem, normal) for meditation to change - both in what the word means to one, and how one relates to practice.
Good reply. Thanks.
The question still remains for me, What I am doing this for? This question remains more conceptual than existential. I will keep meditating. The question does effect what teachers I will listen to. I ask myself, Do I want what they have? Even then I listen to a wide range of teachers.
Our questions are not always what we think they are and the answers we hear or give ourselves are not always the honest answers, not because we are stupid but because our sense of who we are is deeply defended and we can't always see past the games we play with ourselves. Don't accept the answers that come to mind. Question the assumptions behind those answers, ever deeper. You usually know when you are getting close to the bone because tears and fears are revealed.
It can be an interesting path of investigation if one has the inclination to pursue it. This sort of approach doesn't appeal to or suit everyone and that's okay.
Ona Kiser wrote: I think what some of the others are gesturing towards (though I do not speak for them) is unpacking the unseen assumptions behind that question "What am I meditating for" - not to find a lawyer-in-court or college-essay type answer, but to explore your real motivations at a deep level. In other words, it NEEDS to be existential. It IS existential.
What she said
- Posts: 6503
- Karma: 2
The question still remains for me, What I am doing this for? This question remains more conceptual than existential. I will keep meditating. The question does effect what teachers I will listen to. I ask myself, Do I want what they have? Even then I listen to a wide range of teachers.
Jack, I'm certain I sound like a broken record to you but everything you post reinforces my hunch that you are looking for some kind of external solution. There isn't one. You have to make the Hero's Journey. There is no other way (save through yourself) to any form of salvation. In this case salvation equals deep realization and understanding of existence.
- Posts: 2340
Do you ever ask yourself, "How do I know what it is that they 'have' and that I want?" Or is it a matter of thinking about what they claim to have?
Are you really sure that you've put in thousands of hours out of simple intellectual curiosity-- which I take to mean 'conceptual' vs. 'existential.'
Russell wrote:
Ona Kiser wrote: I think what some of the others are gesturing towards (though I do not speak for them) is unpacking the unseen assumptions behind that question "What am I meditating for" - not to find a lawyer-in-court or college-essay type answer, but to explore your real motivations at a deep level. In other words, it NEEDS to be existential. It IS existential.
What she said
It is obvious to me that am motivated to meditate. This motivation is existential. A conceptual reason does help though.
jackhat1 wrote:
shargrol wrote: I liked Chris' comment in my practice thread:
Shargrol, how deeply have you looked into the presumptions you hold about just who your practice is happening to?
Can you say more? Are you talking about self-inquiry?
What I liked about Chris' statement is it is a reminder of how much is beyond practice method and personal relationship with practice. It reminds me that there is something inexpressible about the motivation and there is something indescribable about the results of practice. No one can explain awakening to anyone else, unfortunately. Everything else is talking about it in limited materialistic metaphors or creating a metaphysics about it that gives a false certainty about it.
By reconnecting with that motivation that comes before reason, it helps me stay committed to working with my teacher and seeing this through. If there wasn't a sangha of fellow practioners and teachers and those who share their awakenings (as limited as it is possible to do that), I probably would have quit long ago -- or just settled for a kind of mundane "slightly-better-ness", something akin to psychotherapy. But I'm dedicated --- and frankly really interested --- to seeing this thing through. Not as a person with a practice method, but as a being who's birthright is seeing the nature of experience and self for what it actually is... which, despite the 1000s of pages of reading I've done, still seems to best described as beyond communication and must be directly experienced, so to speak. I'm drawn to experience it, I can't lie about that, yet I can't explain it.
Lately I've been thinking that all my reasons for meditating and working on different practice methods have helped -- but also covered up the way motivation appears in the psyche, as deep question that just can't be shaked off or explained. And that unworded question is the energy that seems to push/pull us closer and closer to the deep answer that can't be explained.
Kate Gowen wrote: "The question still remains for me, What I am doing this for? This question remains more conceptual than existential. I will keep meditating. The question does effect what teachers I will listen to. I ask myself, Do I want what they have? Even then I listen to a wide range of teachers."
Do you ever ask yourself, "How do I know what it is that they 'have' and that I want?" Or is it a matter of thinking about what they claim to have?
Are you really sure that you've put in thousands of hours out of simple intellectual curiosity-- which I take to mean 'conceptual' vs. 'existential.'
I ignore what they say about their own attainments. I do pay attention to how they present themselves, what they write about, the instructions they give.
This is from my first post in this thread:" I will continue meditating. Partly because of habit. Partly because that is what I do. Partly because it is interesting. Partly because I want to reach a state of meta-peace." Simple intellectual curiousity is a small component.
- Posts: 2340
"How" as in, what exactly are you looking for or at? What exactly makes you certain that they 'have' it? What are your criteria? Where did you derive them?
All this inquiry is into how you 'work' when you're on automatic, your unquestioned, and therefore unconscious, way of being/doing. Which is exactly where the answers are to be found, of course. The teachers, the avatars-- they're a visual aid to knowledge you don't know you have: "inside information."
Kate Gowen wrote: Thanks for answering my nosy questions. I would like to redirect attention to the only crucial one of the lot, though: HOW do you know they 'have' what you 'want?'
"How" as in, what exactly are you looking for or at? What exactly makes you certain that they 'have' it? What are your criteria? Where did you derive them?
All this inquiry is into how you 'work' when you're on automatic, your unquestioned, and therefore unconscious, way of being/doing. Which is exactly where the answers are to be found, of course. The teachers, the avatars-- they're a visual aid to knowledge you don't know you have: "inside information."
Thanks for posting, Kate. I think I have already posted what I want. From what I read and hear, i do question if they "have it". I question if they have the inner peace I sense (might be wrong) in some people. They fully participate in the messiness of life but have this meta-peacefulness. Maybe this way of expressing the opposite is more clear. If I see someone kicking a dog and making derogatory remarks about people, I can and do make a judgement I don't want to be like them or do whatever practice that created this state.
Chris Marti wrote:
The question still remains for me, What I am doing this for? This question remains more conceptual than existential. I will keep meditating. The question does effect what teachers I will listen to. I ask myself, Do I want what they have? Even then I listen to a wide range of teachers.
Jack, I'm certain I sound like a broken record to you but everything you post reinforces my hunch that you are looking for some kind of external solution. There isn't one. You have to make the Hero's Journey. There is no other way (save through yourself) to any form of salvation. In this case salvation equals deep realization and understanding of existence.
I apologize for not making myself clear. I am not looking for an external solution. I try a lot of techniques. Some work and others don't. This includes the every day part of my meditation routine which is the non-technique technique of just sitting. I like the Kalama Sutta where the Buddha says, listen to the wise ones. Try their teachings out. If they work, great. If not, discard them. (And not in this sutta) You are your only light.
- Posts: 6503
- Karma: 2
After some 4 decades of daily meditating, I have felt in the last few days why not skip meditating and just enjoy. Why do we spend so much time and energy in meditating? Why work towards seeing reality clearly? For me there is usually an inherent pleasure in my daily sits. There is that. But, I also get pleasure playing tennis, walking the dog and playing music. I read journals of people striving toward SE.Why? Why break phenomena down to the sensate level?
To me this signals a seeking that is external, not existential (in the sense that this word is being used in this conversation). It appears to be looking for something that makes one happy, create pleasurable experiences, etc. For me that is not what the practice is or has been about. It has been about uncovering the deep processes that comprise the sensations of pleasure, pain, joy, sadness, being, not being, and how those processes contribute to the compound process that I sense as "me." That is why I would and do sit and break phenomena down to the sensate level - because that's the level at which all process plays out. Seeing the process of dependent origination at play - witnessing the dance of existence. I fear a misunderstanding is at play and would prefer to address that misunderstanding directly.
You also posted this:
The second thing was thinking about the Pragmatic Dhamma teachers I have been exposed to. They seem overly concerned, in my opinion, with destroying the superman fantasy without replacing it with anything positive. For instance, I am rereading Daniel’s excellent book. It is great on technique. But, a take away was, why did I ever get involved with something like this. It only leads to more suffering. Another prominent teacher asked me what my meditation goals were. I answered, to reduce the power of the taints. This was gently skipped over. I interpreted this as meaning it wasn’t important to him.
You seem to be taking issue with pragmatic dharma and specifically with pragmatic dharma teachers because they are not replacing the "superman fantasy" with something "positive." Again, to me this is a signal of a misunderstanding of what the practice, any practice, is supposed to be. My experience, and the general experience of every advanced practitioner I know from many traditions, is that practice leads to some pain and suffering. This is virtually inevitable because practice forces us to address those parts of ourselves that are not fun, pleasurable, pretty or nice. But as I see it until we do that we're not really practicing. If we cannot face, investigate and come to understand the nature of our humanity in every manifestation then we cannot know fully what we are. We cannot wake up if we avoid that confrontation with what the sutras call Mara.
Waking up is possible for every one of us but it's not about finding pleasure and avoiding pain. For me, that is the very definition of samsara. Rather, investigating what causes suffering, being able to be with suffering (or any sensation as it really is) allows for the deep, existential understanding that opens us up to what a human being truly is.
Nope. I am very aware of being more and more open to the immeasurable joys and immeasurable sorrows. I notice that in my own life as I progress down the path. The other day I was feeling compassion for a tree that was cut down which I later thought was pretty dumb. Emphasizing the sorrows and not mentioning the joys one can obtain is a problem for me. I used the term “meta-peace” in an earlier post. To me, that means fully realizing and facing all the crap that comes up but being ultimately OK with it.
I seem to have a problem being clear in my interactions with you.
- Posts: 6503
- Karma: 2
A practice is said to “work”if, in a reasonable time frame, it delivers one or several of the
following.
Reduction of your physical or emotional suffering
Elevation of your physical or emotional fulfillment
Deeper knowledge of who you are
Positive changes in your objective behavior
Jack
- Posts: 718
FWIW I see what you and Chris are talking about as related-- maybe you guys just aren't connecting in this conversation for whatever reason. For me opening to what's arising in each moment and seeing how phenomena function definitely involves confronting the suffering-making activity that mind can do and it also definitely leads to less suffering-making activity over time. I'm not sure it's possible to disentangle these two things as in my experience seeing suffering-making clearly spontaneously leads to STOPPING lol. On reflection, that may even be the only criteria I can clearly identify for saying when a particular suffering-making moment has been 'seen clearly'-- when it drops.
It's like by avoiding suffering (unawakeness) there is a pseudo-relief that is extremely tenuous and cyclic at best (avoiding suffering = suffering). Meanwhile fully experiencing anything-- being awake-- may make suffering-making more apparent (and so more intensely felt) but fully experiencing anything allows it to arise function and pass without a trace (freedom). So, these seem two sides of one coin to me.