--- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@...> wrote: > > ED, > > I'm reading an excellent book by Daniel Ingrams at the moment 'Mastering the Core Teachings of The Buddha'. In it, he writes in considerable detail about the nanas and the jhanas.
Mike, but nothing on Jnana (mainly a term in Hinduism)? > What I'm finding is that I experience something profound whilst meditating and then read that it's just something you have to go thru 'on the path' and not that unusual. The uncanny thing is that these experiences often occur in sequence and you only find that out after the fact (i.e, on the maps). I too arrived at this realization recently, thanks to the article on Jhanas by Jay Michaelson, posted by you on the Zen Forum recently, (and which I never gotten around to thanking you for.) > I just don't hold with that 'it's all just makyo' anymore. I concluded the same about you a few weeks ago, when you reported experiences that seemed to suggest that you may have experienced the first or the first two jhana states. Jhana states are not too frequent in Zen practice, because shikantaza is mainly a mindfulness-type meditation practice, and jhanas are usually the outcome of concentration-type (shamatha) practices. When jhana states occur in Zen practice, they usually do so *after* the mayko states and prior to the kensho states. > I guess it has to be experienced to understand that, but I'm finding that with vipassana meditation you can feel/see the mind becoming brighter and a much deeper sense of metta than I ever experienced in 10 years of Zen. > > Mike I do not at all discount metta states, although their ultimate benefit to self or other is not clear. And after all, will not metta states also be transcended? Your revealing the recent experiences in your practice and the Jay Michaelson article you posted have clarified certain matters for me, and for which I am grateful. At the present time, I am observing the nihilistic-like state I have been moving into: All dharmas are empty. Life is empty and meaningless other than for the meaning one gives it. --ED
