Markus

Whenever you get it done. Whenever it serves you best. Experiment around. Who knows your experience better than you anyway? It's like asking: "What kind of music should I listen to?"

I think the laws of nature are conceptualizations of the way reality operates. Don't think anyone could really walk through walls.

@Bruno Sousa One hour is just the beginning. Try 3 or 4 hours like I do;) (ego speaking) I don't mean at once, not nearly there yet. But 3 or 4 sessions - sure. I must say I notice magic happening, and yes, absolutely anyone can do it if they wish.

"The world is fundamentally fucked up, because people don't realize it is perfect as it is." - Me (as far as I know)

@Shantanu I don't know whether it is avoidable. From my experience, as long as there is either crossing of legs or ankles pressed against a surface, the feet or legs will go numb. Even if it feels like there isn't any pressure, they still do. So as far as any lotus posture, whether quarter, half, full, or Burmese, goes, legs going numb is probably unavoidable...unless you adjust your posture during the sit, I guess. Since I practice strong determination sitting, that is not something I'm familiar with.

I think cold showers are great indeed. There may or may not be significant health benefits but the discipline aspect alone is great. Starting your day with a cold shower is a no-bullshit approach: it clearly shows your success for the day. If you do it, you got out of your comfort zone. If not, you didn't.

Meditation may or may not be fun. Both are normal. If it's not fun, that especially means you should do it. Maybe start with the "Do nothing" technique. Leo has a video on it, so does Shinzen Young. As you get used to meditating, you start to enjoy the flavor of purification that discomfort gives you. Yesterday, I was at a point in strong determination sitting where I felt I couldn't take any more, so I moved my hand a checked my phone. 15 min was left on the clock. I sat through it, and the feeling I had after it was over was incredible. And so was in a sense the feeling as I was torturing myself: I knew I was purifying consciousness, learning to have equanimity with contractive forces.

With postures where you sit on the floor, on a mat, on a cushion, this is normal. These postures put pressure on your nerves so the signals don't get through. You're not actually cutting off blood circulation so don't worry about massive necrosis or anything like that As your body adjusts to the posture, you probably won't go numb quite as fast. Could pressure on nerves damage them? Theoretically yes, and there certainly are some stories of that happening. But if nerve damage does occur as result of a posture, it is gradual and you couldn't cause sudden damage or anything like that. Plus nerves have a good capacity to heal themselves so even if minor damage does occur, it should go away once you stop doing the thing that caused it. To sum up, it isn't something you need to worry about. If you get up, and in a few minutes your legs are fine, everything's alright. There is a meditation technique called strong determination sitting where practitioners may sit for long hours, and they're allegedly fine as well. I'm personally practicing sds, building up the time I sit with adding 5 more minutes consistently. As long as the numbness subsides after the sit like it always has, I have nothing to worry about.

@Leo Gura That's fair. I always feel embarrassment when someone points out to me I'm gossiping. On another note, I have a question for you, Leo. It seems to me that unethical behavior tends to cause suffering to the person engaging in it, and that having high enough awareness thus tends to make one's behavior very ethical. But if we're talking about a very enlightened person doing something that can cause great suffering to others, is he himself at all suffering from it? If not, he has no incentive to stop.

Joshu Sasaki Roshi? I wonder what additional work he would've needed to get these tendencies out of him. It actually seems like sexual misconduct is not too uncommon among Zen teachers.

You can meditate with any sensory phenomena. So yes, the noise definitely shouldn't be an excuse not to. Silence has its benefits and drawbacks like anything else.

Surrender..would surrender mean the relaxation of both the body and attention? It is difficult to describe yes, but do you mean what one could describe as "being aware of being aware" where you "rest" as awareness instead of having attention focused on any object? The kind of a state that you drop into when you ask "Who am I?" or "Am I aware?"

I'm having intense interest about hearing more on how to catch the moment when one falls asleep/wakes up. How did you do that?

@zenny Anything that could bring pleasure to new heights, plus provide some sort of spiritual benefit, definitely appeals to my ego. The interesting thing about the term "tantra" is that historically, it doesn't have a sexual meaning at all, as I recently discovered by Listening to Shinzen Young's "The Science of Enlightenment". Early Buddhist scriptures were called "Sutra" and somewhat later Buddhist scriptures were called "Tantra". Some Hindu scriptures were also called "Tantra". As Buddhism and Hinduism cross-fertilized, part of their symbolism was indeed sexual union, and sometimes even part of their practice. One branch of Buddhism was really into the idea of bringing every aspect of life onto the path, including dreams and sleep, and also including sex. That said, I don't really know anything about Tantric sex, nor sex in general, at least practically not. I'm a virgin (I would much rather opt for the less embarrassing version of "I've never had sex") and haven't done anything sexual or intimate with anyone. Certainly that's a source of embarrassment due to cultural programming, being 18 and all. Considering my current life situation and goals, I'm not obsessed with changing that either. Once I do have a sexual partner, whenever that would happen, I'd certainly be interested in trying some of the "spiritual" sex practices out. Anyway, I gotta go back to writing my life story in the journaling section, plus gotta meditate today a well. I'd perhaps like to continue this discussion, depending on where it leads, but doing so today would be looking for a distraction from the real work I have to do. Peace out;)

@zenny I absolutely do, hence I said it's 3/3 vs 1/3. That's why I'm wondering whether concentration meditation has any particular benefit that mindfulness doesn't. If there isn't, I don't see why it's practiced, other than out of tradition.

@zenny I know all that. Or at least think I do. My ego loves the feeling. I love the feeling. I should elaborate. The way I would distinguish between concentration and mindfulness is this: 1. Concentration Meditation. You focus on a sensation. You put all your attention on the object of focus and withdraw your attention from anything else. The ultimate goal would be to focus on that sensation so intensely you become it, and only it. So if you focus on the sound of a mantra, you become the mantra. 2. Mindfulness Meditation. You focus on an aspect of experience, be it a sensory category or the perceptions associated with some process (hearing, thoughts, hearing in and out, all inner perceptions, the perceptions of washing the dishes, any vanishing of perceptions you can notice etc.) The objective here is to make finer and finer distinctions in that aspect of experience. The ultimate goal is to have a complete experience of that aspect of experience. In mindfulness it's not just about concentration (focus on an aspect) but also clarity (more and more distinctions in an aspect) and equanimity, which you talked about:) It seems to me that mindfulness is vastly superior. It's definitely more effective for enlightenment, emotional control and lots of other things. Concentration meditation could provide temporary calmness and help with focused activities like reading, listening. What I'm wondering is whether there's any extra benefit to doing a bit of concentration meditation next to mindfulness. Right now I feel like concentration meditation is 1/3 while mindfulness meditation is 3/3.

@MelanieWalker Alright. First of all, you can not do cardio in a way that would target slimming down a specific area of the body. The reason cardio can make a person lose weight is because it increases their caloric expenditure to the point where they burn more calories than they consume. When you burn more calories than you consume, your body uses its fat reserves to provide you with energy. You have no control over where the fat will come off. That is purely genetic (and hormonal but that's only significant if a person has a hormonal disorder). Secondly, you should work out your whole body. Otherwise you end up creating muscular imbalances and exacerbating those that already exist. You can put a little more emphasis on lacking areas, as well as stretch the muscles that are tight (which tend to be the ones that are naturally more developed). Thirdly, if you're at a healthy weight (and judging by your profile picture you absolutely are), you have to come to accept that your body type is as it is. If you store more fat on your lower body, or or are bulkier in your lower body, that's how it is. Remember that you judge your own body way more than others do, others probably don't think there's anything wrong with your body. What you really need to do is learn to love yourself.

@zenny How would you describe or characterize the difference between the effects of concentration meditation (mantras, focusing on an object) and mindfulness meditation?

@Praw I've seen both videos at least once and as far as I can recall it didn't cover what I want to know in this thread sufficiently. I might rewatch them at some point to make sure.

I believe I have a set of pretty good techniques that I use in my practice. This thread isn't about me seeking what to use, but rather of mapping the different meditation techniques that exist in the world. I looked briefly into TM, formed an opinion about it and am now welcoming second opinions from anyone who's had some kind of experience with either TM or mantra meditation in general.

Shinzen Young is great. Why? I'd say for the following reasons: 1) He has created a clear and comprehensive system for mindfulness meditation, he has a free e-book called "Five Ways to Know Yourself" which is available on his own website. 2) He is non-dogmatic in his teachings, fully acknowledging his way is just one way to go about the path. While he learned meditation within the context of Buddhism, he has knowledge about the meditative traditions of other cultures and religions, and the parallels they all have. 3) He has meditated for over 40 years and has over 30 years of teaching experience. I definitely recommend checking out the channels "Shinzen Young" and "expandandcontract" on Youtube.

First of all I'd like to say that I find it rather annoying when people give answers like 'Enlightenment doesn't take time because it's always there' or 'This question is just a distraction from the Truth'. While those answers are valid in a sense, it is clear that the questioner is interested in a pragmatic answer as to how long one needs to work to get enlightened. How long it takes seems to vary extensively depending on the method and of course the person. I guess one could make general conclusions about which methods are more effective, for example, self-inquiry is likely faster than most mindfulness approaches. My theory would be that Enlightenment happens faster for those who are more mindful throughout the day. If one does an hour of self-inquiry a day and goes on to live in the typical unconscious way for the other 23, it's going to take longer than for them than for someone who keeps up a steady questioning throughout the day.

I have been a bit confused about the "looking" process or the form of Self-Inquiry Leo describes in "How To Become Enlightened", and how it differs from Ramana Maharshi's version. The method Ramana Maharshi prescribed I understand as follows: 1. A thought arises 2. You inquire "To whom does this thought arise?" 3. The mind gives the answer, how ever subtly, "To me". 4. You inquire "Who am I?" What "Who am I?" is supposed to do is stop all thought and bring awareness "back into its source", which essentially makes it defocused so all perceptions (including ones of the body and mind) appear as content in awareness rather than "I". Rupert Spira has his version of the process where you simply ask "Am I aware?", which essentially does the same thing as "Who am I?" What both Maharshi and Spira have implied is that by continuously returning awareness back to its source, it gradually starts to stay there, which will give you insight into your true nature not being an object and produce an Enlightenment experience. The thing I'm having difficulty with understanding is what one is supposed to do after inquirying "Who am I?" or "Who is aware?" in the "looking process" described by Leo. Am I supposed to just let awareness rest while maintaining the sense of openness and wondering? Or am I supposed to actively look around in my awareness and try to find a perception of "I" (which of course by definition I never will)? If that is the case, am I supposed to actually answer the question as well, such as "I'm behind the eyes somewhere" and then inquire "Well who's aware of the one behind the eyes?" When I used to practice the "looking process" I would ask "Who is aware?" and find a perception in the head region (as that is where the sense of self is strongest) and then ask "Who's aware of that perception?", which would lead to another perception etc. I'd gladly appreciate if someone helped me clear this up:)

That's good to hear because that's what I've been assuming. I would put my effort into building mindfulness and having an enlightenment first, then deal with beliefs and the shadow. As long as I'm psychologically capable enough to keep doing enlightenment work, I don't see the problem with that approach. If you don't mind me asking, for how long have you been doing this? I'm perhaps too curious about how long it took other people to attain enlightenment.

My understanding is that meditation builds mindfulness to see through the bullshit, while autolysis gets the bullshit out of the way. Either way you see what lies beyond. I just presume mindfulness is a skill that needs to be cultivated rather than something that naturally comes with enlightenment. Shinzen Young at least has said that most ordinary people who have spontaneous enlightenment experiences lose them as they don't have enough awareness to understand.