January 30, 2009
Problems with meditation
I have a good friend who's a Tibetan Buddhist monk, and I mean actually Tibetan, not an American who has become interested in Tibetan Buddhist meditation or Tibetan Buddhism.
And by the way, if you're engaged in any sort of meditative or spiritual practice or religious practice, I highly recommend becoming friends with someone who's a high-ranking member of that spiritual tradition or religious tradition. Because when you have one of those friends you find out what's going on behind the scenes. You discover things about your practice that you would never otherwise find.
For example, my friend Yeshe (I've changed his name to protect his privacy) called me one day and told me that he was resigning as head of a very large monastery. I was a little surprised by this because having that position in the monastery is a position of great import and honor.
So I asked him, "Why are you leaving?"
And he very simply answered, "Too much politics."
Not what you most would expect to hear about a monastery.
Anyway, the point is that there might be unseen or un-noticed aspects of these practices that we're engaged in, and it would be helpful to explore them.
One day I was at a workshop with Yeshe and he was asked to teach a particular Tibetan Buddhist meditation. Many of the people in the room were beginner meditators.
So Yeshe led them through a mindfulness meditation practice from the Tibetan tradition. At the end of this 20 minute session, many participants reported that they had very pleasant experiences. Some described their experiences with adjectives that, frankly, made me think they were exaggerating.
Finally, one woman sitting directly opposite Yeshe in the big circle in which we sat raised her hand and said with a certain kind of confessional quality and exasperation, "This just really didn't work for me, and it's always like this. My mind wanders. I can't focus I can't concentrate if I'm trying to visualize something I can't keep the image in my mind. I just couldn't do it."
What Yeshe said next really impressed me, because like seeing behind the scenes at the monastery. He said something that I had never heard a Tibetan monk say publicly. It was quite revealing quite honest.
He said, "If you take most of the monks from the monastery, who meditate four to six hours a day or monks who are living in a cave in the mountaintop to meditate for many hours a day… and you brought them to America and put them in a shopping mall, they would have problems, too."
The look on relief on the woman's face was palpable, but then something else crossed her mind and she asked, "Well, what I supposed to do about it?"
What Yeshe said next, surprised and amazed me even more. He answered, "Practice more."
I was shocked that nobody seemed to notice the contradiction in what he said. His first answer revealed that even the "professional" meditators would have the same problem if they were living your life, and the second answer suggested that practicing more would allow you to be better than even the pros!
How could practicing "more," which for most people would be 20 minutes a day, solve a problem that would be had by monks who practice for HOURS?
I think this exchange highlights something about both the problems that people report with meditation and why they have the problems.
One thing that's highlighted is how common certain problems are. That they're so common is highly suggestive that, perhaps, there's a flaw in the methodology, not the application of the method.
Another highlighted issue is the notion that doing more of something that isn't working will somehow make it work.
I'd like the conversation about meditation and these issues to be more visible, both among the "professionals" (meditation teachers), and those who just want to meditate.
Maybe this would lead to a new set of solutions or, maybe, we would just notice a glitch in the fundamental beliefs that we have about meditation and how one improves as a meditator or integrates meditation into daily life. Maybe this would lead to more honest and realistic expectations.
Maybe this alone would actually improve the quality of our meditation practice. I suggest this, both philosophically and also because this is what happened in my life; When I started investigating these fundamental ideas that motivated my practice, and the technique itself, I stopped practicing the way I had been for 30 years. This led to a whole new way of thinking about meditation and meditation practice that delivered reliably more consistent results for me. And when I shared what I found with others, they reported the same.
I look forward to where the conversation continues to take us.
Comments on Problems with meditation »
I'm going to take a leap here and propose that there is some wisdom in what your friend Yeshe said. Of course I don't know exactly what he meant..I'm guessing.
I'm a natural doubter. In Roman Catholicism there is an apostle called Thomas the Doubter who gets a very bad press because he will believe nothing until he sees it. As a child I was demonised because Thomas was the apostle I identified with, from my POV, the only sane one in the bunch.
I was a lapsed catholic by age 12, though still with all the graphic horrors in place.
I did find a teacher in later life who was smart enough to set me impossible tasks, such as 'don't think' and who never explained just demonstrated–I had no choice but to think and to think hard and fast if I wanted to stay in one piece.
It took a while but he allowed me to find out for myself that all these commands are pointless and he laughed like a drain when the penny dropped for me. I wouldn't have believed anyone, had they told me, anyway.
This teacher was nobody special, but he gave me the opportunity to make a start on having a bit of faith in myself, not a bad result in my book. I use what he taught me every day.
Hi Ellen,
Hmmm… I'm not sure that Yeshe's suggestion was an example of the kind of wise teaching you describe. I think that he was parroting what he'd heard for decades in the face of evidence that it's not a useful instruction.
I know in some lineages they give you impossible tasks so that you discover the task is, in fact, impossible (e.g. Go over there and don't think for an hour… and now try again and think non-stop for an hour).
In this case, I don't think there was an ulterior motive of learning something as a result of discovering the instruction was a pointer rather than something that you should be able to accomplish.
89801@aol.com
Very intruiging reads. Is it too much of an oversimplification to draw a connection between meditation/prayer and Spirituality/religion? It is my hope andlief belief that we are finally starting to achieve our goals as a mindful society, so to speak.
For me, it can be both incredibly exciting and terribly frightening. I'm thankful there is a place to discuss like this.
Hi Alace,
VERY interesting question. But to answer it, you need to define the words "spirituality" and "religion."
Meditation and prayer are actions… we can define them and see if someone is actually engaged in performing them (though we can't see in their mind to know exactly what they're doing or how well, they can report whether they're attempting to follow a set of defined instructions). But "spirituality," for example, is a concept that has many connotations. And "religion" also has some wiggle room (though, I'd argue, less than spirituality).
I really didn't like this article at all.
The first thing I didn't like is how put naturally born Tibetans above all others. It is a huge fallacy of the west to see Tibetans as being spiritually higher or more developed or something like this. While there a significant part of the Tibetan population enter monastic life it does not mean that all Tibetans are spiritual. You might be surprised at humanities' consistency transculturally.
In traditional Tibet, the monastery was the main point of political power. It wasn't uncommon for there to be struggles and politically orientated fights between the different traditions. A hermitage tradition existed outside monastic settings for leaving the politics behind.
The only thing i got out of this article was how cool you are for having a real live tibetan friend.
You should read "Prisoner's of Shangri-La" by Donald Lopez. It reveals a lot about the connection between Tibetan Culture and the west.
Hi Lotwell,
If you poke around this blog, you'll see that we agree. I don't have the idea that Tibetans are any better/different than anyone else. And, in fact, I have a number of posts highlighting our mistaken idea that the "East" is somehow "spiritually superior."
My reason for highlighting that my friend is Tibetan is to emphasize that he was born into the Buddhist culture and didn't adopt it later in life. BTW, it's easy to have Tibetan friends if you live in a place where Tibetans live (Boulder, CO being one of those places). Oh, and I have read Lopez's book and greatly enjoyed it for the very reasons you point to — it demystifies and mangles the positive projection that many Westerners point at the East. Frankly, I thought the movie "The Cup" did the same thing.
But let's discuss the real point of this article. And let me preface my next comment by saying I'm friendly with a number of the original teachers in the U Ba Khin lineage, and have done more than 20 Vipassana courses, starting in 1983.
What I was trying to emphasize here is that the inability to develop concentration, for example, may not be a fault with the student, but inherent in the fact that we're taking a technique dramatically out of context. Goenka has often said that the reason for doing retreats is that the situation is more conducive to practice than regular life… but even then, there's no guarantee that you'll achieve Access Concentration, let alone bhanga or any of the other stages of Vipassana.
I know there have been many conversations over the last few decades about why the 2nd generation students (i.e. those of Goenka, Sayama, Robert Hover, Ruth Denison, and John Coleman) have not demonstrated the same "attainments" as U Ba Khin's 1st generation students (including those just listed). But those have been private conversations.
In the same way that you're able and willing to separate fact from mythology when it comes to Tibetan culture and spirituality, I have the idea that bringing those private conversations into a more public arena could tease apart the myths and mistaken notions about meditation itself.
Oh, I just remembered this story: I once said to one of the Vipassana teachers, "When you're teaching, you're not merely sitting and practicing, are you? You're doing something to try to affect the students, right?" The teacher replied, "Oh, yes." I then asked, "Well, why is that a secret?" The teacher replied, "Because we don't want the students thinking their progress is a result of anything other than their practice."
For many reasons, I don't think that keeping that secret is helpful.
Hi Steven
Now i am really curious: what can you tell us about those private conversations you've had about why 2nd gen students in the U Ba Khin lineage haven't achieved the same attainments as the 1st gen teachers? It would be helpful if you even hinted at what such conversations contained! Very interesting idea.
Another thing,,, I can tell you from my exerience what the Vipassana teachers are doing to try to affect the environment, other than just sitting there practicing, that you mention in your reply would be helpful to know,,, what they are doing is practicing metta bhavana, the cultivation of unconditional loving kindness. It is not a kept secret, in fact if you listen carefully to Mr Goenka's discourses, he reveals this quite readily himself, and if you ask a teacher what s/he does during the course, s/he will indeed tell you. No secrets. And indeed some people have misinterpreted this to mean that the power of the teacher's metta is a force that will liberate the students, which is opposite to what Mr Goenka himself teaches.
Just to demystify what might seem like a secret, for whatever reason.
Actually, they're doing something other than simply practicing Metta Bhavana.
What the 3rd generation teachers are doing (those trained by Goenka) is not the same as what the 2nd generation teachers are doing (Goenka, Ruth Denison, Sayama, the late Robert Hover, John Coleman), or what U Ba Khin was doing.
And, in that difference is, in part, the answer to your question about he conversation about students' attainment.
I know that U Ba Khin and some of his students, among them Goenka, practiced a lot of chanting and reciting various traditional Pali verses as a very important part of their personal practice, which is a very common practice in Burma. Certainly, some of this recitation involves calling upon invisible forces (devas and brahmas) to come and listen to the dhamma, to give protection etc. Which is not a kept secret either, as most if not all the traditional Pali texts are translated in various versions and readily available to westerners. So it can't be this you are referring to.
I think U Chit Tin chanted Pali also, but I don't know that Sayama, Hover or Coleman ever practiced any chanting in front of students. Who knows what they practiced in private. Having never had the opportunity to sit with those teachers, it's hard to tell.
Another thing I can think of that is mentioned in the literature, is that these 2nd gen teachers all met Webu Sayadaw, the highly attained and respected monk, who advocated practicing Anapanasati continuously, leading to "wet" Vipassana, where concentrating one pointed for long enough leads to absorption (jhana), which leads to total dessolution (bhanga), setting the stage for split second (or longer) cessation (nirodha) — the first dip in enlightenment (nibbana). I can imagine Webu left a deep and lasting impression on U Ba Khin and his students, which is only available in the form of crackly voice recordings and grainy video snippets from 40 years back.
These are some of the things I can think of. Am I getting closer to the answer, that elusive answer? ;-D
"Closer"? Hmmm…
Well, you're rounding out the picture, for sure.
U Ba Khin and most of his senior students, Westerners included, believed that the various devas, brahmas (and others) are real. So, part of what they were doing does involve placating them, asking for protection, etc.
U Ba Khin believed that to step into Nibbana, the actual physical place you were in had to be properly "conditioned", which included having the help of numerous non-physical beings. He also thought that once that place was created, it could be "transmitted" to other places/students via the Nibbana-dhatu.
But, no, that's not quite what I'm referring to
I'll give you a hint: Have you ever noticed that when you pay attention to sensations at the "edge" of your body, they don't seem bound by the physical edge you see? Given that, you can do something akin to attending to sensations outside of yourself in the same way you would attend to them internally.
Contrary to popular (mistaken?) belief, bringing the attention outside the "edge" of the physical self figures prominently several places in the U Ba Khin tradition. Just to mention a few:
In the metta bhavana instructions on the ten day courses with Goenka, it is clearly mentioned that Metta bhavana, the cultivation of loving kindness, is a completely different technique from Vipassana bhavana: One should first direct the attention to sensations, but then one should let the attention spread outwards beyond the "edge" of the physical body, let it permeate the surrounding atmosphere, and direct it towards certain people and various beings from all the different realms (including devas, brahmas etc), both nearby and in distant places, etc. all the while staying with the sensations, and thus charging the vibrations of the body with Metta. This is just the practice, but in its developed form it can lead to Brahma-vihara, constantly having feelings of infinite love, compassion, sympathetic joy and equanimity—-a very high stage.
"Actually, they're doing something other than simply practicing Metta Bhavana." Hmmm…simply practicing Metta Bhavana… sounds very simple! Far from being simple, I think practicing Metta bhavana is taking meditation practice to a higher level, and it is to me the crux of the Buddha's practice.
Goenka goes on to say that the atmosphere and the very place where one meditates every day, including–importantly–metta bhavana, eventually gets charged with the vibrations of purity, and therefore it is recommended to meditate in the same place and at the same time every day, making meditation there easier and more powerful over time. The not so subtle inference is that, yes, indeed invisible/intangible forces, helped by the purity of the meditator and the power of transmitted metta vibrations, all influence the development of a meditator. They are all supporting conditions that nudge the meditator towards nibbana.
In John Coleman's book and elsewhere, there is mention of a letter written by U Ba Khin where he specifies synchronizing the time and place for the transmission of vibrations which will help Coleman carry out his first Vipassana course. U Ba Khin says it is just like a radio broadcast, where the success of transmission depends on the strength of purity of both the transmitter and the receiver, in this case U Ba Khin and Coleman.
There is no reason to assume such transmission of vibrations is absent in Goenka's teaching.
In a Vipassana newsletter published a couple years ago, in which Goenka thanks various people who have helped him carry out U Ba Khin's mission over the decades, Goenka mentions an incident that took place after Goenka had started teaching in different countries, and years after U Ba Khin's death: Goenka was distraught and just about to stop teaching Vipassana altogether after he came to know from a reliable source–a friend–that U Ba Khin, long since deceased, had stopped transmitting his Metta vibrations and well wishes to Goenka. Presumably the transmission was carried out from another realm. It turned out that this reliable source was simply spreading false rumours, since the course—and subsequent courses–finished without a glitch, and the good vibrations were perceived by Goenka to be even stronger than before.
In more modern times, before each Vipassana course, a recording of U Ba Khin's chanting is played by the assisting teacher in the meditation hall "to charge the course atmosphere with good dhamma vibrations." It is no secret, as sometimes an old student is brought along to meditate with Goenka's assistants as well, to strengthen the effect.
Something about this lead spiked my interest:
"I have the idea that bringing those private conversations into a more public arena could tease apart the myths and mistaken notions about meditation itself."
"I don't think that keeping that secret is helpful."
Being no believer in keeping secrets, I like your attitude, Steven. So lets hear it!
Further details, whatever you have, certainly is appreciated.
First of all, TT, you've clearly done more research into this lineage than anyone I've met (possibly even more than me). And, more than that, you know how to read between the lines in the information that you have found. And, more than THAT even, you understand distinctions that are lost on most.
So, that said…
Instead of saying "simply practicing Metta," I was not trying to minimize the significance of Metta practice, but to highlight that this was not only or exclusively what they were doing or, sometimes, at all what they were doing.
While Coleman mentions the transmission of Nibbana Dhatu as a support, it's not something that Goenka talks about and I've never heard it mentioned by him or by the ATs. I haven't even heard Sayama discuss doing it. So while they *may* be doing it, I never got any indication that they were. The fact that it's mentioned in John's book means it's practically hidden, given the small number of people who've read that book (I first found a copy at the Columbia University library… it took me a while to find a used copy… but that was pre-Internet).
When Robert would talk about U Ba Khin, he would do it using a grammatical tense and a "flavor" of having just had a chat with the guy about whatever we were discussing.
Oh, backing up a bit… keeping your attention focused on your sensations as you spread your awareness to greater and greater distances is not quite the same as what I'm referring to.
Now, while I'm all for not keeping secrets, I'm not ready to publicly broadcast some of the info I'm referring to. I have a few reasons for this — some of which relate to a possible book, others because I want to do it in the right context (and I'm not sure a blog post and comments is that context).
That said, give me a shout and I'm happy to tell you privately (get me your contact info via the Contact Us link)