Wow, for so long I have assumed mindfulness to be “perspectiveless” or “subjectless” awareness. But as you beautifully put it, the awakened person simply “stops appropriating their subjectivity”. Your sharing of your understandings is a real gift to the few of us paying attention.

This feels I’m there, but I’m here and now. 🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽

Venerables, From my experience, of "keeping" my focus on the triangle area of the nose, I realised that my focus kept getting diverted by some distracting thoughts which arose. Thus, in order to focus on the triangle area, I also started "catching" thoughts/phenomenas and discerning that they are distracting in nature. Further I started discerning that thoughts were coming by themselves and I was getting distracted if I indulged with them in any manner. All of this understanding arose by me trying to "keep" the "focus of my attention" unwaveringly on the triangle area. (while other part of my attention caught phenomenas which could distract me. Also, all the while I also discerned that the sensations which arose in the triangle area were coming and going, by themselves. Thus I also saw to certain extent the impermanence of those sensations.). I have 2 related questions: 1. If a "focusing meditation" is done like this, is it wrong? If yes, can you please explain why? If it is right, is it because I am taking the direction of peripheral, or for some other reason? 2. I understand that the right meditation is the one which brings about the discernment of the nature of arisen phenomena . Did I understand it correctly? If I did, is it the only criteria for right meditation? Sadhu

Wonderful, with many detailed examples. Sadhu sadhu sadhu

"Vaya-dhamma sankhāra; appamādena sampadetha" ti makes more sense in light of these talks. Sādhu /|\

🙏

There is nothing wrong with cultivating concentration, but don't get trapped in it or believe that it leads to liberation. Ultimately if we want to wake up to our true nature we have to allow the opposite of focus to happen. Our attention must become diffuse. Remember, you can't turn a flashlight back on itself. The source of the light is not a thing, so it cannot be observed with a subject/object relationship. An easy way to think of it: If you can bring your attention to it, it isn't what you are looking for.

Excellent channel.

There's an assertion made at 30:52 by Nyanamoli Thero about the relationship between vedanā and phantom limb syndrome, but I think it's unclear. He seems to suggest that the unpleasantness of phantom limb syndrome is purely vedanā, but the sensations people experience with the disorder are often very localized (though localized beyond their body,) which contradicts the non-local nature of vedanā. If he was just saying how feeling and perception not necessarily bound together, why bring up phantom limb syndrome at all? Does phantom limb syndrome challenge Theravadin phenomenology?

great discussion..

Thanks Ajahn for the teachings, they help me a lot. I would like you to make a video to understand Jhana, explain how to think about it or make the interpretation of what the suttas explain about the various Jhanas, vicara, vitakka ...☸️🙏

yo these are so cool....saaaatu 3x very helpful bhante...

Hi, anyone know which sutta mentioned the smilies of meditate like an owl and jackal trying to catch their prey?

The way he described the "proper" practice of meditation reminds me of the practice of "just sitting" they do in Zen Buddhism, where you are not focusing on anything but at the same time not getting distracted by anything, so the effort goes into staying aware in the present moment and not "focusing" on an particular object like he said staying at the game and watching people come in and go out without following them. Does this make sense? Is it correct practice?

From my understanding on retreat and reading etc we initially concentrate on the breath until we reach 'access concentration' then we watch where the attention goes such as on thoughts, feelings sounds etc. We recognise where the attention is and we investigate that sensation until it has gone then gently bring the attention back to the breath. Is this correct.

Does practice make sense in normal life? greetings

Venerables, does this mean that the many meditators that have used single object meditations are wrong? They describe accessing jhana directly through a single meditation object.

19:13 MN 50 Māratajjanīyasutta: The Rebuke of Māra: “We practice absorption meditation! We practice absorption meditation!” Slouching, downcast, and dopey, they meditate and concentrate and contemplate and ruminate. They’re just like an owl on a branch, which meditates and concentrates and contemplates and ruminates as it hunts a mouse. They’re just like a jackal on a river-bank, which meditates and concentrates and contemplates and ruminates as it hunts a fish.

Mindfulness of sensations are closer to mindfulness of sense stimuli or pressure (phassa) rather than vedana (affective feelings).

14:30

It's not wrong, it's 100% correct to do. The time to stop focusing will happen by itself, because the body+mind will vanish. Samatha meditation until there is no mind or body, then you'll have no choice but to investigate how to move beyond. You'll still have intent to direct awareness probes. Sometimes I wonder if monks speak beyond their knowledge.

There may be some helpful information in this video but I can't seem to get past Ajahn Nyanamoli Thero's know-it-all attitude and ego. His personality seems very egoistic and I find it to be a turn off. Maybe it's just me.

Make video shorter. Straight to the point.