How well does loving-kindness train concentration compared to breath?

[G CMember]

If I decide to spend some or all of my practice time on loving-kindness meditation, does this come at the expense of not training my concentration as well as I would if I focused on the breath? I mean, if I understand correctly, TMI says that the breath is a better focus than loving-kindness (*) because it does not need to be actively generated, but it isn’t clear to me how much of a problem this active generation would be in practice.

(*) Well, more accurately it says this about mantras, but it seems like loving-kindness should be the same in this respect.

[Michael DunnMember]

Hello GC,

I see the Loving Kindness (LK) practice as a beautiful practice to complement to the more traditional shamatha practices, and would recommend a balance of both.

As you quote the book, if you are interested in achieving effortless stable attention, then the breath is recommended. Yes, in theory, one could develop shamatha solely through LK, but LK has a different goal than that, so practice for these reasons too. So, ask yourself what you want to achieve with your meditation practice, and decide from there.

All work done on the cushion, if you are practicing diligently, i.e. according to the instructions, is a worthwhile meditation. Your training in attention will not decline by you doing LK, if you work diligently.

In my experience, a balanced approach is always the healthiest way forward.

Michael
Dharma Treasure teacher-in-training

[Anonymous]

Hi GC,

Loving-kindness is a profound practice that “kills two birds with one stone.”

First, it selectively strengthens the intention to regard others with warmth and friendliness. This spontaneous capacity develops into a powerful intention that can be sustained continuously on or off the cushion as a kind of divine abode (“brahmavihara”), where the mind can rest. Over the long run, this friendliness becomes the default attitude of the mind. Also, since this practice involves imaginatively extending one’s own sphere of self-concern to others, and eventually to all beings, it can lead to experiences of not-self and non-duality.

Second, loving-kindness develops concentration. It is particularly usefu for those who have difficulty arousing feelings of joy and happiness in meditation. This can be helpful for people who are perfectionists or pessimists! Loving-kindness is also a useful supplement for overcoming the dryness of Stage Seven. The major deficit of loving-kindness as a concentration practice is that it doesn’t give you a sensory object, like the breath, against which to measure and increase the vividness and clarity of your perception. For this reason, sometimes it’s harder to notice dullness while doing loving-kindness.

I hope that’s helpful, GC!

Metta,

Jeremy
Authorized Dharma Treasure Teacher

[Anonymous]

I see I forgot to address the issue of “active generation” you mentioned. The act of generating the meditation does not impede the development of concentration via loving-kindness. (When you first start learning this practice, it may take some extra energy, and annoyance may arise, but these usually pass fairly quickly.) Some people even discover that actively generating the meditation, as opposed to passively observing an object, actually helps to stabilize attention.

[G CMember]

Thank you very much! 😀

[Amiran CMember]

It may be of interest, that using loving kindness one can access all the Jhanas, which is as good concentration as it gets. Ajahn Sujato, Ajahn Brahm and Bhante Vimalaramsi seem to be encouraging this method (see eg. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS3wpCCphd4 for an overview from B. Vimalaramsi student).

[Ivan GanzaMember]

The problem is that there is not a generally accepted definition of Jhana. Many teachers have different definitions. Culadasa has a great audio teaching retreat about it, where he goes into great details about it.

So in some definitions; it would be true, but by others, not 😉 Just depends what your idea of Jhana is.

-Ivan/ (DT Teacher in Training)

[PopMember]

As far as I understood, Bhante Vimalaramsi’s jhanas matches Culadasa’s “Very Lite Jhanas”. but I don’t know if Culadasa’s implied critique is related to a higher-than-acceptable dullness in them and/or that BV’s TWIM method is based in an alternate attention method, going back and forth metta and release of tensions, even though it’s eventually done automatically (automatic like Culadasa’s Stage 4 uninterrupted breath attention).

[charlesanattaMember]

Some say it’s possible to become fully-awakened using metta as your only method for accessing the jhanas. It’d be great to learn what Culadasa thinks about that. I’m not entirely convinced that’s true so for me the breath remains my main object of meditation. But metta is still something we all could use more of. It can be life-changing when you realize that the joy of love actually comes from loving, not from being loved. You can send your love this way to all beings anytime and experience mind-blowing bliss if you cultivate it long enough. This pleasure causes no harm to anybody. It’s not dependent on external factors, such as using other people. Most of us are truly unaware of how much control we have over how we shape our experience. I wish all beings come in contact with the truth (Dhamma) eventually and for them all to be free of suffering. Yes, even those that have caused and will cause me and countless of others to suffer. I sincerely and with all my heart also wish them everlasting true happiness.

With Metta,
Charles

[Amiran CMember]

Speaking of the depth of the Metta Jhanas – I remember Bhante Sujato describing progression of Jhanas the way he practices it and he made it clear that these are visual nimitta Jhanas (so pretty deep, in terms of concentration level).

[Ivan GanzaMember]

Charlesanatta,

In terms of your question: My personal opinion is: Anything that makes you ‘accident prone’ can eventually do the job. We could argue about the effectiveness of one particular method over another, that would probably not be very helpful though.

Your term “fully-awakened” is problematic and would need to be clearly defined. My personal belief is there is “no end in sight”. As long as we are human, we can continue to grow, and deepen whatever our level of awakening may be. Even the Buddha would still meditate and retreat to the forest and such.

Cheers,
-Ivan/ (DT Teacher in Training)

[charlesanattaMember]

Hey Ivan,

“Anything that makes you ‘accident prone’ can eventually do the job.”

I really hope that’s the case, for the benefit of all beings.

What I meant by fully-awakened was becoming an Arahant.

Also being an Arahant doesn’t mean one is perfect in every way conceivable, I don’t think that’s possible at all, there will always be room for improvement in other areas of life. A fully-awakened one is someone who reached the ultimate goal of the practice (in my tradition) by getting rid of all ten fetters of becoming, a lot easier said than done!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetter_(Buddhism)

I’m actually more than happy with reaching any of the lower 3 stages of enlightenment to be honest, even the 1st one. Because after attaining the fruit of Stream Entry you’re guaranteed Nibbana, it’s irreversible at that point. Whatever happens I will continue to meditate for as long as I live (like the Buddha did).

With Metta,

Charles

[Ivan GanzaMember]

Well said 😉

[Author]

Posts