FrugalPatat wrote: ↑Sat Jun 30, 2018 7:04 am
When I was younger I experimented with duration and length. If I meditate longer than 20 minutes or more frequently then I can enter a profound state of peace and I get prone to feelings of extreme joy. But I am less desiring of this state than when I was in my early twenties. I need a balanced amount of inner tension; and 4 times of 20 minutes a week gives me just that.
Increasing even more the frequency/duration and it becomes possible to enter a state of complete detachment of earthly stressors. I don't find this a desirable state of mind.
I don't quite follow: are these states you describe the 2nd and 4th jhanas, respectively?
Smashter wrote: ↑Thu Jun 28, 2018 8:15 am
I was thinking of my progress toward enlightenment in the sense described
in this book, which became my bible of sorts. You can achieve a whole lot before you get to the end of the path.*
And I totally agree with your point about making it my "life mission" being a big jump. It's very extreme. That's what I was aiming at with the bit about "maybe it's the way I'm wired." I like to be all in, or all out.** The only thing worth doing in moderation is moderation
. I'm working on getting better at that.
Ah, gotcha
; that book is perfect for you, as Daniel is much the same in the lack of moderation department, from what I have read. But if you are where I think you are in your meditation, changing your goal from perfecting the concentration to going all out for enlightnement is still an extreme switch.
Can you reliably enter the jhanas, at will? If not, you might want to master those. They bring a ton of benefits all on their own. Not to mention entering the jhanas is essential for giving you a stable, non-threatened platform from which to consider why you cling to the things you cling to (ie, what's the allure of clinging?). Having a stable focus point allows you to see why the mind moves away from that stable focus point, in other words.
Being an all in sort of person is great and all, but you might want to consider setting more gradual goals for yourself (if meditation still is of interest to you). Remember that the path is like a long, winding road going up a mountain. Rather than trying to take the top of the mountain by storm, maybe focus on the next leg of the road?
Smashter wrote: ↑Thu Jun 28, 2018 8:15 am
* Then there is a path after the path. And a few more paths. And then, apparently, you "cycle through the stages of insight" over and over, whether you want to or not, for the rest of your life. So the journey is never really over. Or something like that.
I'm not sure what you're referring to here. Once the path is complete, that means you've abandoned the cause of suffering. In the context of (Theravada) Buddhism, there really isn't any paths after that. You're done. If you've really reached the end of the path, then the choice to cling to something (ie, think about it repeatedly) would be optional on your part; hence, it would be your choice to think about these stages of insight you speak of.
But, full disclosure: I don't think Daniel is an arahant. I think he's reached stream entry, but I don't think he's further along than that. So I tend to be cautious about his descriptions of the states after stream entry.