I studied and fiddled a little with the "five hindrances" to meditation practice this past week. Attachment, aversion, sleepiness, restlessness, and doubt. The first four are pretty obvious, but I had some trouble wrapping my brain around the notion that doubt can hinder effective meditation. After a Heineken and and episode of Six Feet Under put me in a properly warped state of mind last night, I think I kind of got it. My meditation workbook defines doubt as "an inability to make a commitment, or to take the risk of finding out for yourself where a certain path might lead." The workbook warns in particular against skeptical doubt, something I've always tended to see positively. Because of my preconceived idea on the subject, it took me a while to see it in a new light. Anyhow, the author explains that "because we're unable to commit or take a risk, we remove ourselves from the process of discovery. We stay at a safe distance. Instead of letting something speak to us, we obsessively analyze it; perhaps we disparage or judge it. We haven't actually experienced it fully or deeply because we haven't allowed ourselves to. That is how doubt functions in the mind: we remain immobilized at the fork in the road." According to the author, doubt is a "very jumpy state. You hop from one thing to the next, considering and wondering and judging and assessing." The cure is to let the mind settle, "even on a simple object in the moment." It's a concept labeled "sustaining attention."

I think a certain amount of skeptical doubt is good, and I like at least reading deep intellectual discussions even if I don't always feel qualified to participate in them. However, at some point, one has to take a leap of faith in some direction. Try something out and see if it works. If not, try something else. I see rather a lot of the less positive side of skeptical doubt on the Foyer, quite honestly -- good people bashing their heads against the proverbial wall because they can deconstruct and disparage all of the contradictions in the belief system about which they formerly were passionate. However, they are unable to take a leap of faith from purely rational analysis to something positive and spiritually affirming. I suppose this is to be expected to some degree, given the harsh anti-intellectual, follow-the-prophet rhetoric from the pulpit in Salt Lake City. However, a leap of faith and ignorant, blind obedience are different animals. It's taken me a while to grasp that. Thanks for the great comments, Doug. I've gone back and edited some things. Thoughts?