Shinzen Young has been very influential for me ever since 1990 when I used to edit/master Shinzen’s recorded dharma talks for Bill Hamilton’s Insight Recordings. I may well have gotten the inspiration for the interactive meditation from Shinzen (I don’t remember exactly). In fact, the idea of shifting gears, which I later expanded into the 3-Speed Transmission, also comes from Shinzen; he once mentioned in a recorded talk that he thinks of mindfulness of the body as 1st Gear, and he downshifts into it when he needs traction. So, I owe a great debt of gratitude to Shinzen; I consider him to be a true pioneer and one of those rare dharma teachers who really understands something about pedagogy (teaching and learning theory.)

Having said that, (based on the link you just sent) Shinzen and I have different points of emphasis while doing the interactive meditation with a student. He seems to focus on his algorithmic approach, which helps him target the instruction and guide the student skillfully. My main focus is to help the student master a technique, one of many in their yogi toolbox, that they can use throughout their lives to dis-embed from their experience.

Your point about zooming in and zooming out is excellent. In fact, it’s essential. You want to be able to see your experience clearly at every level of resolution and from multiple points of view. Sliding up and down through the strata of mind from gross to subtle and back; noting while deeply concentrated and while not concentrated at all; zooming in with a tight focus and zooming out for a diffuse focus: all of these are part of becoming fluent with and ultimately free within your own mind.

Thanks for the questions!

Kenneth

To answer all three of your questions in order:

1) Vipassana is compatible with anything that happens; vipassana is just the art of seeing your experience clearly, in real time. Nothing lies outside of that.

2) The 3 Speed Transmission teaches you to observe whatever arises in the mind without manipulation and to also surrender to what is always already the case. So, it is inherently non-manipulative. This is different from active energy practices that seek to redirect or consciously cultivate kundalini or chi.

3) The 20 Major Strata of Mind model is synthesized from Buddhist maps of Insight Knowledges and Realms of Absorption (jhanas). As such, it contains 13 states that are known for their pleasant, joyful, blissful, ecstatic, transcendent, or equanimous natures. So, yes the states you refer to are included in the model.

Some years ago I was sitting around a television watching The Wizard of Oz with my family and some family friends including their little 5-year-old, Tommy. When we got to the part where the flying monkeys attack Dorothy, somebody elbowed me and pointed to little Tommy, who was sitting, mouth wide open in abject terror, eyes riveted to the TV screen. The elbowing continued around the room until all of the adults in the room where watching little Tommy, who was completely oblivious to the fact that he was now the center of attention. Little Tommy was embedded. As far as he was concerned, it was he who was being attacked by flying monkeys. Finally, one of the adults, moved to compassion by Tommy’s suffering, put a hand on his shoulder and said, “It’s all right, Tommy. You’re here with us. It’s just a movie.”

It’s possible that different people use the term “radical identification” in different ways (I hadn’t heard the term before I saw it in your post), but I would say that little Tommy was “radically identified.” And he was suffering. It was an act of compassion to reach out and help him dis-embed from his nightmare. We can learn to do that for ourselves; we can be our own wake-up call. It’s a beautiful thing to wake up and look around, only to find that you are safe and sound in your own living room, surrounded by loved ones. You can still watch the movie, but without the suffering. This is enlightenment, and this is why dis-embeddedness is preferable to radical identification.

One man's opinion…

Kenneth

So, if I understand this correctly, these phenomena (softness, hardness, warmth, coolness, pressure, tension, release, etc) appear whenever the mind is turned to noting/noticing. They are purely products of the mind process, and we are using the breath, or sensations, or whatever, to activate the part of the mind that gets stuck (in order to unstick it)?

I've been following the breath (without noting) for a while now, and have had little luck attaining jhannic states. However, perhaps that was due to my thinking of it as Vipassana practice, and looking for sensations to dis-identify with? I guess it would be hard to stabilize a jhana when I'm looking to tear it down before I even get into it….

thanks for another excellent post/dialogue. 

regarding real-time feedback loop, i find Kenneth’s description to be very similar to my teacher’s (Shinzen Young) style of teaching. the vocabulary may differ a bit but i find them very similar, if not exactly identical. (see Shinzen’s description of his interactive guided meditation ~  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDmJ-3nLYNk )

i really like Kenneth’s description of dis-embedding. my question to Kenneth: how do you relate dis-embedding with equanimity? 

also, i think that there are two ways we can approach dis-embedding: by zooming in, or by zooming out. for example, i can zoom in to a particular sensation (e.g. breathing) to break down its sensory components thus enabling me to dis-embed from it. alternatively, i can zoom out and observe (or visualize) my body as if i’m looking at it from another person’s perspective, which also enables me to disembed from my identification with the physical body and eventually with the witness. so what’s your take on the zoom in vs. zoom out approach?  

thanks again. keep it flowing.

I am practising Ashtanga Vinyasa style hatha yoga and AYP energetic pranayama and meditation. I am very interested in Vipassana meditation. Is it advisable to do it after powerful asana practise and are these two practises compatible? AYP meditation and samyama tend to result in pleasurable, even blissful states of mind with feeling of peace and inner silence after the practise. How energetic practises relate to 3 Gears method? Are these states of mind in your 20 Major Stata of Mind map?

Antero.

Yes, this is an important point. In fact, the Mahasi Sayadaw mental noting technique as taught by Sayadaw U Pandita deliberately combines samatha and vipassana. By following the breath at the rise and fall of the abdomen and noting "rising, falling," the yogi can access deep states of concentration. And by carefully noticing and/or noting the sensations associated with the rise and fall of the abdomen, e.g., softness, hardness, warmth, coolness, pressure, tension, release, the yogi clearly objectifies and dis-embeds from those phenomena. It's really quite an elegant technique, balancing, as it does, concentration and insight.

Following the breath without noting, on the other hand, is a pure samatha (concentration) technique and leads to deeply concentrated states including the jhanas. One way to move through the Progress of Insight is to first attain subtle states via the samatha technique, and then apply vipassana to those states. I call that "vipassanizing" the jhana. Whether you use this back and forth technique of alternating samatha and vipassana, or whether you develop both concentration and insight together as in the Mahasi technique, the result is the same: the balancing of samatha and vipassana leads to progress through the Four Paths of Enlightenment.

Yes, this is an important point. In fact, the Mahasi Sayadaw mental noting technique as taught by Sayadaw U Pandita deliberately combines samatha and vipassana. By following the breath at the rise and fall of the abdomen and noting "rising, falling," the yogi can access deep states of concentration. And by carefully noticing and/or noting the sensations associated with the rise and fall of the abdomen, e.g., softness, hardness, warmth, coolness, pressure, tension, release, the yogi clearly objectifies and dis-embeds from those phenomena. It's really quite an elegant technique, balancing, as it does, concentration and insight.

Following the breath without noting, on the other hand, is a pure samatha (concentration) technique and leads to deeply concentrated states including the jhanas. One way to move through the Progress of Insight is to first attain subtle states via the samatha technique, and then apply vipassana to those states. I call that "vipassanizing" the jhana. Whether you use this back and forth technique of alternating samatha and vipassana, or whether you develop both concentration and insight together as in the Mahasi technique, the result is the same: the balancing of samatha and vipassana leads to progress through the Four Paths of Enlightenment.

KF

And also, for making the distinction that vipassana disembeds, while samatha takes you deeper.

My mind is at rest!

In order to access all 20 strata of mind, it’s necessary to develop a very high degree of concentration in addition to moving through the Four Paths of Enlightenment. That means that you have to balance samatha (concentration practice) and vipassana (insight practice, e.g., mental noting). Along with the noting practice, it’s important to do some kind of practice that is specifically designed to take you to the more subtle places in the mind. Some examples are following the breath (with or without counting); gazing at a kasina object; reciting a phrase or phrases (e.g., a mantra or metta phrases). It is also possible to go deep in concentration by dwelling as the Witness, i.e., keeping the sense of observer in the foreground and letting the mental states develop in the background.

Is it possible to access all 20 strata of mind by just doing noting practice?

Thanks for another interview that gets to the heart of the matter!

Tina

Can you explain what the intent, attitude & experiential differences if any, are between disembedding from a state/object and penetrating the state/object? Or is this two different ways of talking about the same thing?

I recommend practicing pure samatha in addition to noting practice, even for beginners. Concentration is one of the seven factors of enlightenment and is never wasted. Ability to access the more subtle layers of mind is essential to progress in developmental meditation in addition to being its own reward. By "its own reward," I mean that the ability to spend a few minutes each day in a calm, undistracted state can contribute immeasurably to a sane and happy life.

Yes, this is an important point. In fact, the Mahasi Sayadaw mental noting technique as taught by Sayadaw U Pandita deliberately combines samatha and vipassana. By following the breath at the rise and fall of the abdomen and noting "rising, falling," the yogi can access deep states of concentration. And by carefully noticing and/or noting the sensations associated with the rise and fall of the abdomen, e.g., softness, hardness, warmth, coolness, pressure, tension, release, the yogi clearly objectifies and dis-embeds from those phenomena. It's really quite an elegant technique, balancing, as it does, concentration and insight.

Following the breath without noting, on the other hand, is a pure samatha (concentration) technique and leads to deeply concentrated states including the jhanas. One way to move through the Progress of Insight is to first attain subtle states via the samatha technique, and then apply vipassana to those states. I call that "vipassanizing" the jhana. Whether you use this back and forth technique of alternating samatha and vipassana, or whether you develop both concentration and insight together as in the Mahasi technique, the result is the same: the balancing of samatha and vipassana leads to progress through the Four Paths of Enlightenment.

Think of penetrating the object as a subset of seeing the object clearly. To see the object clearly is to dis-embed from it. In other words, when I am looking at something, saying “look at that thing over there,” even if the “thing” in question is a sensation within my body or a thought within my mind, it is intuitively obvious that the “thing,” which is now seen as an object, is not “I”. Surely “I” must be the one who is looking, rather than what is being looked at. What I’ve just described is what I mean by objectifying phenomena and therefore dis-embedding from them. Dis-embedding just means that I am no longer confusing experience with self. “I” am not my experience, and this is known deeply, pre-consciously, every time I note “pressure, coolness, pleasant, unpleasant, joy, fear, remembering thought,” etc.

So, objectification (seeing an object clearly) is the game in a nutshell. Within that larger understanding is the question of seeing experience at a high enough resolution to notice that things are not solid; they are made up of smaller phenomena that come together to create the illusion of solidity. Here we can use the simile of the rope. When you first see a rope lying across the rope, you can objectify and dis-embed from it even at the gross level. It appears to be a rope. Fine. You can note, “seeing, seeing,” and immediately become aware that you are not the rope; you are apparently the one looking at the rope. So you are dis-embedded and that is excellent progress.

But you can go deeper, and this is where penetrating the object comes in. As you move closer to the rope, you see that it is not a rope at all; it is a line of ants moving back and forth across the road. You have now penetrated the object and are seeing it at a higher level of resolution! And you can still objectify and dis-embed from it. “Seeing, seeing.” “I” am not the rope, nor am I the ants. Surely I am the one who is looking at the newly de-constructed object.

But you can go deeper. So far, we have taken the observer for granted. “I” must be the observer. Let’s look into that. It turns out that we can turn the light of attention around to take the apparent observer as object. The jig is up! Even the so-called witness is just another object. It cannot, by definition, be “I”. We have penetrated even the illusion of self.

But there is more. Who knows the knower? There is awareness, in this moment, into which both subject (“I”) and object (the stuff “I” am looking at) are being born and dying in each moment. When we stand aside and allow this awareness to recognize itself, it turns out that awareness is not other than the entire manifest universe.

I’ve just outlined the 3-Speed Transmission: seeing 1) objects, 2) subject, and 3) awareness clearly and allowing them to be as they are.

Thanks for the excellent question.

Kenneth