Where to meditate?

[ajay0]

Meditation can be done anywhere one feel is good, but sometimes one find a place that make the meditation more easy, and to me that is deep within the forest or a mountain.

Do you have some area you meditate more often or does it not matter?

I like to meditate in the beach or in the midst of nature, where there is more prana, and consequently superior quality of meditation.

It is said that carbon dioxide makes the mind more unconscious and less aware, and which is the perhaps the reason why there is a correlation between increasing crime rates and cutting down of trees indiscriminately.

Trees linked to less crime, research finds

Reduce crime and violence with trees in your neighborhood |


I also find that places where people meditate regularly or houses made as per vastu shastra , are useful in terms for attaining a high level of meditation in a shorter period of time. Sometimes, the peaceful vibes in such places automatically induces one to meditate.

 

[Shantanu]

You are confused with terms here. There are two basic types of meditation; Concentrative meditation, and Insight, or Awareness meditation.

A third meditaion is thoughtless meditation: it requires constant sleep every sleeping and waking hour. When the eyes open, voila: there is total awareness and dharma is clear.

 

[Spirit of Light]

A third meditaion is thoughtless meditation: it requires constant sleep every sleeping and waking hour. When the eyes open, voila: there is total awareness and dharma is clear.

Umm all meditations do empty the mind of thoughts, in the form that we observe only, no thinking. Not sure what you mean by thoughless meditation? in what tradition does it come from?

 

[Shantanu]

Umm all meditations do empty the mind of thoughts, in the form that we observe only, no thinking. Not sure what you mean by thoughless meditation? in what tradition does it come from?

It would appear to me that Buddhist mindfulness meditation believes in focussing on every thought and determining its morality to base one's actions on, so I do not know what you mean by saying that it clears the mind of all thoughts. Even if it did, it would not amount to what I am describing. This meditation has been taught to me from the experience of going through great upheavals in my life where there was a constant need for action from me just to be able to survive in samsara, which is the goal of an advaitin.

I do not know of any traditions prescribing this form of thoughtless meditation. It is based on total non-attachment to anything whatsoever, so one goes to sleep whenever there is no action to be performed.

 

[Spirit of Light]

It would appear to me that Buddhist mindfulness meditation believes in focussing on every thought and determining its morality to base one's actions on, so I do not know what you mean by saying that it clears the mind of all thoughts. Even if it did, it would not amount to what I am describing. This meditation has been taught to me from the experience of going through great upheavals in my life where there was a constant need for action from me just to be able to survive in samsara, which is the goal of an advaitin.

I do not know of any traditions prescribing this form of thoughtless meditation. It is based on total non-attachment to anything whatsoever, so one goes to sleep whenever there is no action to be performed.

it depend on who you speak with in buddhist tradition, but for an experienced meditator there is no thoughts to be observed, only breath is observed before this too also disapear. This within medtation of 4 jhanas, Actually Minfulness meditation as a sitting medtation was never thought by Buddha, that form of medtation come later, Buddha only teached jhana meditation according to scriptures.

The thoughtless meditation you describe, is that your own form f meditation?

 

[Shantanu]

it depend on who you speak with in buddhist tradition, but for an experienced meditator there is no thoughts to be observed, only breath is observed before this too also disapear. This within medtation of 4 jhanas, Actually Minfulness meditation as a sitting medtation was never thought by Buddha, that form of medtation come later, Buddha only teached jhana meditation according to scriptures.

The thoughtless meditation you describe, is that your own form f meditation?

I just am in a constant state of this meditation determining my next actions on the basis of non-attachment to anything (not even to my knowledge of Brahman-Consciousness): that is how I determine my dharma as an advaitin.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I just am in a constant state of this meditation determining my next actions on the basis of non-attachment to anything (not even my knowledge of Brahman-Consciousness): that is how I determine my dharma as an advaitin.

I have no idea what that means, but that is ok i will let you continue your state of being in meditation

 

[Shantanu]

I have no idea what that means, but that is ok i will let you continue your state of being in meditation

It means meditation serves a purpose: that is of wanting to live perfectly in dharma with infallible actions. In my opinion this is the only form of meditation that will immediately lead to instant realisation of reality and thus the decisions on what is the correct morality and so dharma: nothing else is needed.

 

[Windwalker]

A third meditaion is thoughtless meditation: it requires constant sleep every sleeping and waking hour. When the eyes open, voila: there is total awareness and dharma is clear.

That's nothing scholars recognize as a distinct 3rd category. What you are describing falls under the Casual states of either and both of the two recognized basic types of meditation. In Casual states thoughts are effortlessly still and silent, nonexistent for all intents, whether you are using concentrative or awareness meditation techniques. There is no need to make up a new category when the data already fits well within the currently recognized ones.

BTW, if you are typing posts on the forums you are actively engaging with thoughts. You aren't in a state of deep causal sleep. We tend to move between the states as we attempt to function in the world. How trapped you become in anyone of those, is the actual concern. To me, these higher states of consciousness are to inform the lower states, which are not without purpose in the world. The goal is not to escape life, but to fully live it.

 

[Shantanu]

That's nothing scholars recognize as a distinct 3rd category. What you are describing falls under the Casual states of either and both of the two recognized basic types of meditation. In Casual states thoughts are effortlessly still and silent, nonexistent for all intents, whether you are using concentrative or awareness meditation techniques. There is no need to make up a new category when the data already fits well within the currently recognized ones.

You are describing conscious efforts to meditate in your two categories. I am describing meditation as just 'being' in a permanent manner,without any attempts to consciously focus on anything.

 

[Windwalker]

You are describing conscious efforts to meditate in your two categories. I am describing meditation as just 'being' in a permanent manner,without any attempts to consciously focus on anything.

There are those, myself included, who say if you are "trying" or making an effort to meditation, that is not meditation. Meditation is without effort. It's like the story I heard of the Buddhist monk who said to his master, "Master, I practice meditation constantly." And the Master responded, "That's good. One day soon you can quit practicing it and start actually meditating".

The "effort" in mediation is to make no effort. If you are making an effort, you aren't meditating. It's that simple.

You should read the link I shared. There some good information in there I think may help you with your confusion about these areas. Let me highlight the Casual states for you, which are for all intents and purposes effortless states.

THE CAUSAL LEVEL

Q: That’s very clear. So what about the next level, the causal?

A: You’re sitting there, just witnessing everything that arises in the mind, or in your present experience. You are trying to witness, equally, all the dots on the wall of your awareness. If you become proficient at this, eventually rational and existential dots die down, and psychic dots start to come into focus. Then, after a while, you get better at witnessing, so subtler objects or dots start to show up. These include lights and audible illuminations and subtle Deity forms and so on. If you continue simply witnessing—which helps you disidentify from lower and grosser forms, and become aware of the higher and subtler forms—even subtle objects or subtle dots themselves cease to arise. You enter a profound state of nonmanifestation, which is experienced like, say, an autumn night with a full moon. There is an eerie and beautiful numinosity to it all, but it’s a “silent” or “black” numinosity. You can’t really see anything except a kind of silvery fullness, filling all space. But because you’re not actually seeing any particular object, it is also a type of Radical Emptiness. As Zen says, “stop the sound of that stream.” This is variously known as shunyata, as the Cloud of Unknowing, Divine Ignorance, Radical Mystery, nirguna (“unqualifiable”) Brahman, and so on. Brilliant formlessness, with no objects detracting from it.

It becomes obvious that you are absolutely one with this Fullness, which transcends all worlds and all planes and all time and all history. You are perfectly full, and therefore you are perfectly empty. “It is all things and it is no things,” said the Christian mystic Boethius. Awe gives way to certainty. That’s who you are, prior to all manifestation, prior to all worlds. In other words, it is seeing who or what you are timelessly, formlessly.

That’s an example of the causal level; that’s jnana samadhi, nirvikalpa samadhi, and so on. The soul, or separate-self sense, disappears, and God or separate Deity form disappears, because both—soul and God—collapse into formless Godhead. Both soul and God disappear into the Supreme Identity.​

There's a lot more there for you to glean good information from. I recommend spending some time reading it. Ken Wilber Stages Of Meditation | Awaken

 

[Windwalker]

I want to add some further thought on the effort vs. effortlessness of meditation. Meditation isn't something you do. It's a state of awareness that just happens. You enter into it. You don't produce or manufacture it. It's nothing that your ego can take credit for. It is not a matter of self-effort.

However, there is an effort to show up to the door. There is an act of the spiritual Will that is in play here, naturally. You do have to show an intention to set aside all the distractions and make an effort to discipline yourself enough to keep yourself from falling back into patterned responses. Paradoxically, there is an effort to make no effort. It is the effort, not to accomplish something, but to simply let go and not try to accomplish something. It is an effort to "allow". It is an effort to get out of the way and simply let it be. It becomes as the Buddhists say, "The gateless gate", or an "effortless effort".

This is nothing the ego can claim as a prize, because it is precisely the letting go of the ego's attempt to achieve a goal. The goal, is to simply BE. And that is something we all already are. The goal is to get out of the way, and do nothing. But to make no course correction, is just apathy and sloth, not an act of the spiritual Will. The only two main principles to guide the effort to open the door to meditation, is to show up at the door with intention, and no expectations of results, no seeking, no looking, no trying to accomplish.

This is nigh impossible for the ego to comprehend, as the ego is all about adding to itself, achieving goals, gaining goods, building itself up. Meditation is about moving all that to the side and letting these natural states arise of themselves from within us. This is not an achievement, anymore than one can be said to have attained their lungs.

 

[Shantanu]

There are those, myself included, who say if you are "trying" or making an effort to meditation, that is not meditation. Meditation is without effort. It's like the story I heard of the Buddhist monk who said to his master, "Master, I practice meditation constantly." And the Master responded, "That's good. One day soon you can quit practicing it and start actually meditating".

The "effort" in mediation is to make no effort. If you are making an effort, you aren't meditating. It's that simple.

You should read the link I shared. There some good information in there I think may help you with your confusion about these areas. Let me highlight the Casual states for you, which are for all intents and purposes effortless states.

THE CAUSAL LEVEL

Q: That’s very clear. So what about the next level, the causal?

A: You’re sitting there, just witnessing everything that arises in the mind, or in your present experience. You are trying to witness, equally, all the dots on the wall of your awareness. If you become proficient at this, eventually rational and existential dots die down, and psychic dots start to come into focus. Then, after a while, you get better at witnessing, so subtler objects or dots start to show up. These include lights and audible illuminations and subtle Deity forms and so on. If you continue simply witnessing—which helps you disidentify from lower and grosser forms, and become aware of the higher and subtler forms—even subtle objects or subtle dots themselves cease to arise. You enter a profound state of nonmanifestation, which is experienced like, say, an autumn night with a full moon. There is an eerie and beautiful numinosity to it all, but it’s a “silent” or “black” numinosity. You can’t really see anything except a kind of silvery fullness, filling all space. But because you’re not actually seeing any particular object, it is also a type of Radical Emptiness. As Zen says, “stop the sound of that stream.” This is variously known as shunyata, as the Cloud of Unknowing, Divine Ignorance, Radical Mystery, nirguna (“unqualifiable”) Brahman, and so on. Brilliant formlessness, with no objects detracting from it.

It becomes obvious that you are absolutely one with this Fullness, which transcends all worlds and all planes and all time and all history. You are perfectly full, and therefore you are perfectly empty. “It is all things and it is no things,” said the Christian mystic Boethius. Awe gives way to certainty. That’s who you are, prior to all manifestation, prior to all worlds. In other words, it is seeing who or what you are timelessly, formlessly.

That’s an example of the causal level; that’s jnana samadhi, nirvikalpa samadhi, and so on. The soul, or separate-self sense, disappears, and God or separate Deity form disappears, because both—soul and God—collapse into formless Godhead. Both soul and God disappear into the Supreme Identity.​

There's a lot more there for you to glean good information from. I recommend spending some time reading it. Ken Wilber Stages Of Meditation | Awaken

The type of meditation that I am talking about means that one always ascertains the truth in all aspects of ones dealings, and it does not take any effort or deliberate focus on anything: the mind does everything given the stillness that is faciliatated from no thoughts.

 

[Windwalker]

The type of meditation that I am talking about means that one always ascertains the truth in all aspects of ones dealings, and it does not take any effort or deliberate focus on anything: the mind does everything given the stillness that is faciliatated from no thoughts.

Exactly what I said. You are describing meditation. Not the techniques to get to that state. You are describing the state itself. And that is what exists in all forms of meditation. It's not a different type of meditation. It is meditation.

I'm curious, are you claiming to be in a perpetual, permanent state of no-thought? If so, where are your thoughts you are typing coming though in the posts from you I'm reading?

 

[Shantanu]

Exactly what I said. You are describing meditation. Not the techniques to get to that state. You are describing the state itself. And that is what exists in all forms of meditation. It's not a different type of meditation. It is meditation.

I'm curious, are you claiming to be in a perpetual, permanent state of no-thought? If so, where are your thoughts you are typing coming though in the posts from you I'm reading?

Yes I am. The mind is however interrupted from this permanent state of no thoughts by incidents that the require actions for my survival, such as the mundane aspects of living, brushing ones teeth, eating food, driving to the station to pick up my wife or to the workplace to pick up my daughter; and when I switch on the computer to see if any prompting for action has been inserted that require attention. When finding your post the mind becomes restless again in that it directs a reply. I do not have any clue as to what the reply should be until I start writing. I only know at the end of the writing that I have produced the desired end-product that I need to when no further amendments come in my actions. The determinant of that is whether I continue to survive in order to exist or whether I have come to the end of the road. My advaitin philosophy is never to abandon a conversation because that is detrimental to survival for existence. Hence your posts must have a response. It is only when I have responded that I reflect on what I have written and see where that takes me in my quest for the truth.

Thus when prompted, the mind breaks off from its no-thoughts mode and responds to the stimulus received by generating the appropriate reply through actions not thoughts. When the decision to act is taken the right thoughts appear in the words or deeds that I engage in. I am not attached to these words or deeds: once they are performed they go out of my mind unless there is more action that needs to be taken, in which case the mind is still interrupted by the situation that I face and I continue acting.

When peace of mind is attained, the mind reverts to no thoughts.

 

[Windwalker]

Once a person is enlightened there is no need for meditation.
No I do not get mad because I have nothing to fear: I have no fear, no love, no compassion, no emotions, no ego, nothing left but the Self.

This is what worries me about what you are calling enlightenment. The exact opposite happens to be the case, as is attested to throughout the ages from all mystics. I can say this is true from experience as well, not that I'd be so bold as to state that I am enlightened. There is no "finish line" within the Infinite. Only deeper and deeper layers of Love.

I think what you are confusing here is the difference between non-attachment, which mean you are not attached to things like emotions, versus detachment, which is what you describe where you don't feel them at all. The latter is a dissociation, not a spiritual enlightenment. While it gives relief, it does not equal Peace, which is the nature and essence of Divine Love.

On the contrary, it means you feel love more deeply than the whole world could contain. It is experienced in everything, fully. Not detached in the least, but liberated from all attachments. There is a profound difference between these two.

 

[Shantanu]

This is what worries me about what you are calling enlightenment. The exact opposite happens to be the case, as is attested to throughout the ages from all mystics. I can say this is true from experience as well, not that I'd be so bold as to state that I am enlightened. There is no "finish line" within the Infinite. Only deeper and deeper layers of Love.

The universe is controlled by Brahman Consciousness which generates actions to take it along its unfolding and we are just pawns in this unfolding: this is determined through advaita oneness with Brahman with an equanimous mind that is calm and dispassionate. All that happens is just Brahman having its own way. I know because I am Brahman: Tat Tvam Asi. That is what I describe as enlightenment of an advaitin. This enlightenement is attained from total lack of attachment to any form of duality. Consider this statement with regards your comments on detachment and attachment.

 

[Windwalker]

this is determined through advaita oneness with Brahman with an equanimous mind that is calm and dispassionate.

Dispassionate, does not mean devoid of love. Equanimity does not mean devoid of love. Non-attachment does not mean devoid of love. One can experience Divine Love as Infinite Compassion and Infinitine Love, but as one which is unattached to any desired outcome generated from one's own personal desires.

This is what distinguishes Divine Love, or one's own Buddha Nature or true Self, from egoic love, which has the small self's self-interest in mind. Divine Love, is universal. It allows, and does not cling. It does not judge between good and bad. That Love is beyond all dualities.

When you describe a lack of Love, a lack of Compassion, a lack of Grace, etc., this is dualistic. It is not nonduality.

All that happens is just Brahman having its own way.

Where then does Love exist? Only in the human emotional sphere?

While I agree everything that arises is "just is", that in no way means it is devoid of Love. In fact, non-Love, is non-reality. Everything arises from Love. "God is Love". The experience of Brahman is Satchitananda. "Ananda," that divine bliss is that divine Love.

I know because I am Brahman: Tat Tvam Asi.

I know because I have, and do experience Satchitananda. I too experience Reality, as Reality. If the ego is in there, if that is the focus, then the ego is what I experience with all its incompleteness, clingings, attachments, and lack of Love.

That is what I describe as enlightenment of an advaitin.

Detachment is not enlightenment, according to mystics and my own experience.

This enlightenement is attained from total lack of attachment to any form of duality.

Divine Love is not duality. It's nonduality. A lack of Love, is what is in fact a duality.

 

[SalixIncendium]

@Shantanu and @Windwalker, in reading the exchange above, it appears to me that your differences are in terms rather than worldviews. From where I’m sitting, what @Windwalker is referring to as ‘Love’ and what @Shantanu is referring to as ‘equanimous dispassionate detachment’ is in actuality satcitananda (truth-cousciousness-bliss).

Turiya is satya - Pure nirguna consciousnesses, and this understanding of one’s true nature leads one to bliss/joy (“Love”), which, in my humble opinion, is enlightenment.

 

[Windwalker]

@Shantanu and @Windwalker, in reading the exchange above, it appears to me that your differences are in terms rather than worldviews. From where I’m sitting, what @Windwalker is referring to as ‘Love’ and what @Shantanu is referring to as ‘equanimous dispassionate detachment’ is in actuality satcitananda (truth-cousciousness-bliss).

Turiya is satya - Pure nirguna consciousnesses, and this understanding of one’s true nature leads one to bliss/joy (“Love”), which, in my humble opinion, is enlightenment.

I am wondering that myself, and am pushing a little to see if we can't get beyond what may just be language. I am concerned to say that Brahman is a lack of love and compassion however. The experience of the Divine is anything but that. But it definitely is not "attachment", in that it is not specifically bent on that one thing or one outcome. It's equally Love to all realities. Life, death, young, old, coming going, it's all the Same Love.