0

I notice I have practised meditation in a very biased way, in the sense that I contemplate my experience in a neither focused, neither supported way. Here, by support, I mean a contemplation supported by an object.

So, basically, I am aware of my consciousness and the interaction of thoughts and impressions within it, although without a specific support.

To me, a focused meditation would imply moments of consciousness unified by some specific centring focus.

Similarly, supported meditation implies sensory, perceptual focuses rather than experiences which are bound to alter and vary.

An actual object, whether material as a physical object or perceptual as the breath, would fulfill both these aspects.

QUESTION 1: What is the effect/consequence of meditating in such a vague way? Of simply attending to consciousness without an ongoing object of focus?

QUESTION 2: Would such a way of contemplating actually decrease focus and energy (virya) in some cases?

  • Objectless meditation is my preferred approach, which might qualify as 'cultivating the empty field'. You speak of 'focus', but objectless meditation is not about narrowing ones focus. I would suggest a meditation object is an aid to practice that eventually has to be abandoned. Just some thoughts. – PeterJ Jun 17 at 11:27
3

QUESTION 1: What is the effect/consequence of meditating in such a vague way? Of simply attending to consciousness without an ongoing object of focus?

Consequences might be that unity of mind cannot happen since there is no object to focus attention on, meaning e.g. Vitakka and Vichara, cannot happen.

Insight-meditationally speaking, without an object to attend to, I don't see how insights could arise.

QUESTION 2: Would such a way of contemplating actually decrease focus and energy (virya) in some cases?

It might block the (seven) Enlighenment Factors from arising.

  • Mindfulness on mind, in that case on consciousness, "knowing mind" is actually part of good vipassana objects, one of the four frames of references. Only that object would be great, hight talented, uprooting quick everything. Of course the answer fits good to the asking/ers mind, but if just taking the text in account, like most would, properply good to discriminate in this regard, Nyom Lanka. – Samana Johann Oct 23 '17 at 18:31

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.