Ygtjki

This morning I read many posts on this site. I felt like topics on Buddhist doctrine were somewhat clear to me, but those on meditation seemed complex, difficult to me.

I wondered: Does meditation practice increase knowledge about meditation? Is this what is meant by direct experience?

I feel this may seem as a naive question; I'm mainly wondering how something experienced (i.e. meditation) might affect cognition / knowledge about the topic of meditation.

For example, I'm unsure whether a person hammering nails all day would necessarily understand their task conceptually. Does meditation necessarily give one conceptual knowledge of meditation?

One possible answer is that meditation relies both on the theoretical understanding on what's going on, but also the direct experience. They are mutually dependent as far as i can see.

A mere theoretical understanding of meditation will not take us very far in the progress, just like meditation without a theoretical description of the phenomena involved probably won't take us far either.

Simple analogy:

The experience of watching someone drive (a car) for 1000 years can never compare to actually driving by yourself for 1 hour.

Going canonical: Meditation involves samadhi (tranquil absorption) and sati (mindful awareness).

When you investigate a phenomena (breath for example) with this state of mind, depending upon the strength of your mindfulness you will see aspects of the working of the mind itself.

Almost like seeing through the corner of your mind, you see how the mind itself works. And by virtue of seeing that you might see how reality is- this could come from different angles (impermanence, fabricated nature, dependent arising)- our mind releases a little bit "ahh this is silly, why am I so worried about this!".

But those are names we use to convey our experiences. No amount of scholarly dissection of those names will help our mind release it. Only direct, real time, seeing would. Meditation develops the skill and arena for such insights.

This seeing the working of the mind does not need a conceptual framework. But certain conceptual framework (the optimal way to nail a hammer) will help you hammer it deeper and better. But it relies on your experiential understanding of hammering a nail itself. The eight fold path is such a conceptual framework which points us in the general direction of these realizations.

Its like this.Say you face a problem with the direct experience of a certain feeling ,thus you decided to formulate a new meditation concept where you contemplate that feeling.

Direct experience is to investigate the true nature of reality its subjective quality

.In hammering nails one will experience nailing

Conceptual knowledge comes about as a result of problems faced when having a direct experience.

If the nail gets bent then one decides to hammer a bit slowly next time.

The question is a little muddled for a clear answer. Or, at least, that's my excuse.

Direct experience is unmediated so is non-sensory. Practice increases knowledge of meditation if all goes well but meditation takes us beyond experience and the experience-experiencer-experienced distinctions so direct experience is not the end of the story. As the Upanishds ask, 'Who is there to experience the experiencer?'

Meditation has no topic as such, other than finding out who you are. In the end this not about experience but about being.

This would be why the claim of Jesus and Al-Hallaj is not 'I know the truth' but 'I am Truth'. A relevant comment from Imam Ali, the first Shia Imam, may be, 'Why dost the reckon thyself a puny being when within thee the universe is enfolded.' Meditation takes us beyond the experiences of puny beings, direct or otherwise.