Meditation Hindrances and Breakthroughs: A Multilevel First-Person Phenomenological Analysis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a strong article that makes a valuable addition to the field. The review of the present literature is good and the information discovered during the research retreat is presented in a way that is straightforward and easy to follow, especially where the use of tables is concerned. 

 

There are a few places in which I would recommend slightly more definition of terms or material that may be unfamiliar to readers, given the broad scope of material covered in this publication. 

 

What are the domains typically measured? (paragraph 1 under 1. Background) 

 

At the top of page 2, briefly define the jhanas in a phrase or sentence or two.

 

Under method, when you first mention micro-phenomenological interviews and self-inquiry, offer a brief (less than a sentence) explanation of what that includes.

 

On page 12, when you explain techniques associated with regulating one’s attitude, I would include a discussion of what a non-dual attitude is.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The language in this article is good overall. The writing is grammatically sound, although I noted an occasional tendency toward run-on sentences without sufficient punctuation to make the writing easy to follow. There is always an inherent difficulty in writing about abstract ideas, so when in doubt, err on the side of shorter sentences and references to concrete concepts.

 

I noted a couple of places with slight grammatical error in Paragraph 2, page 2:

Remove the hyphen between “three-days” and add a dash or comma between “Bodhi Tree” and ‘a process that represents….” 

 

In the last paragraph of page 16: 

Remove “gives” in between “Figure 2” and “synthesizes.” Add “an” to “gives an overview of different relations….’ 

 

Add a phrase: “The meditative activity tends toward a breakthrough, which is supported by [add] the use of certain [/add] strategies.” 

 

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

General comments:

 

The text makes an important qualitative contribution to the study of "meditation hindrances and - breakthroughs". It reports the experiences of five practitioners on a retreat, and classifies their experiences of meditation hindrances and breakthroughs. The approach is phenomenographic, using first-person observation as the basic unit, while arriving at more general conclusions.

 

Clearly, the sample of five male practitioners is one-sided and small. This is not a shortcoming in qualitative studies, where the aim is to figure out what the relevant questions would be in a pioneering enterprise. Regarding the sample, it would be useful to spell out that female practitioners were not included, and perhaps add some discussion about the potential lacks of understanding meditation due to the sex-based sample. One might also add that it is a fairly traditional approach to have sex-based separation in meditation retreats.

 

While the text begins by discussing adverse effects of meditation, the overall tone is to discuss meditation not as a therapeutic or wellness practice, but of a more traditional kind, rooted in the spiritual-religious conceptual framework. This is the impression, anyway. If this observation is correct, it would be good to explicate that such was the case, that we are not here encountering a group of people doing meditation to get stress-relief in order to have a more fulfilling career, etc. 

 

If the previous observation has any validity, then it would be particularly important to explicate both the meditation tradition (Buddhist? what kind?) and the method. We get information about focus on breath, and the word jhana for advanced states, which gives a hint of a Buddhist practice. These should be spelled out, particularly because there is a mention of prayer as a remedy, which may be alien to some meditation traditions. Minimally, the text should explicate what kind of meditation was done, or if everyone had a different method.

 

Quotes from participants are illustrative and to the point. One receives a somewhat one-sided picture, though, as some participant voices are overwhelmingly more prominent than others. One way to address this is to point out, that the chosen sound-bites illustrate more general patterns - if this is the case. Otherwise, perhaps good to explain that the participants' reported experiences were de facto very different, and add some motivation why not all participants were referred to uniformly.

 

The text is structured with clarity. Explication of the various phases coherently leads to the stated conclusions. There is need for further research, and this article is an important opening.

 

 

Specific comments

 

p. 2

"If we look to the spiritual traditions and their view of meditation, there is certainly

mention of specific positive effects, such as bliss and peace in connection to the jhānas"

 

[jhanas are referred to several times in the text; give a short explanation what it means and explain that it is a tradition-specific term, which does not appear in Yoga-sutras, which is referred to in the text]

 

p. 13

 

"And then it drops, waves. There are two major phases of waves, sort of building and flowing through the body and then going down a bit again and then rising again. […] as it comes, it’s the usual thing of feeling like I’m being pulled up, very present. Happy. Peaceful. Strong clarity."

 

[informant reference is missing]

 

p. 16

 

"An area where much research is needed is the effect of different strategies when encountering meditation hindrances. While a range of hindrances was described in the present study, the effectiveness of each was not tested."

 

=> This is unclear - what does "effectiveness of hindrances" mean? Is the intended meaning this:"While a range of hindrances and strategies to deal with them were described in the present study,..."?

 

"Furthermore, the achievement of advanced meditation states, such as advanced concentration absorption states or cessation..."

 

=> Cessation of what? Is the idea that concentration ceases? Or that hindrances cease? Or something else? For an academic article that speaks for general meditation hindrances, it would be good to avoid using a vocabulary internal to a particular tradition (another example: jhanas, not a term applied in all meditation traditions)

 

"At the same time, the use of conscious intention and the attitude of prayer may support the arising of advanced states (Anonymized, 2019b)."

 

=> Prayer was mentioned only once. It is not clear whether prayer would be a strategy applicable to most participants or only one individual. This would be an important issue, since now the impression is that the meditation tradition that was explored on the retreat is of a non-theistic kind, perhaps Buddhist. If that is the case, then it is questionable whether prayer would work as a general strategy in a non-theistic setting, whereas it would be an obvious choice in a theistic meditation tradition.

 

It is possible that a practitioner is familiar with prayer due to growing up in a Christian culture, but then there would arise a need to discuss the potential benefits and problems with an eclectic approach. 

 

p. 17 

"Willing the absence of hindrances can hardly be separated from willing the encounter with the hindrances."

 

=> This may be obvious from the point of view of the stated goals in the meditation tradition - awakening, enlightenment, liberation, self-realization, etc - yet if meditation is used as a therapeutic method to contribute to general well-being (a secular, or this-worldly goal), then it is not clear why they cannot be separated. It could be the case that practitioner X experiences anxiety by doing meditation - a hindrance - and the remedy would be to give up meditation, which could lead to increased well-being. I am giving this example to illustrate how the practitioner's own goal-setting maybe an important factor.

 

p. 18

"both constitute a dynamic whole that mirrors and reflects the human being back to itself."

 

=> This would obviously be the case for a practitioner who is simultaneously a scholar of meditation, or interested in the academic research on it. Historically, though, most practitioners of meditation are not well-read - if at all - in the academic research on meditation. I don't know which percentage of scholars studying meditation also practice meditation. In any case, for the dynamic whole constituted of both approaches to actually reflect back to the human being, it would have to be the case that this human being is actually interested, informed, and engaged with both aspects.

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I thoroughly enjoyed this article, it brings in new insights on meditation in particular the hindrances. It is well-written and easy to follow along. Researchers and readers interested in the practice of meditation will find this article very useful.

However, it would add more value to the article to bring into perspective the content or object of meditation. The author did not make any reference to religious faith in hindering meditation but in many situations, the hindrances to meditation can be manifestations of crisis faith or be caused by a feeling of alienation from the Supreme Being.  

1. What is the main question addressed by the research?

The research examines aspects that hinder meditation and facilitate breakthroughs in meditation and provides some suggestions on how the hindrances can be overcome.  

2. What parts do you consider original or relevant for the field? What specific gap in the field does the paper address?

The author’s empirical study on a specific small group of meditators and focusing on their individual specific experiences is original and provides new insights into this specific group encountered and dealt with their hindrances and breakthroughs. The specific gap in the field addressed by the paper the new perspectives and definitions of meditation hindrances and breakthroughs and the actions taken by specific meditators remove, reduce and overcome hindrances to meditation. Future studies can built on this by confirming or disputing these findings.

3. What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?

A fresher perspective on empirical experiences – the meditators tell their stories and insights instead of the gurus. The method followed in the empirical study adds to the way hindrances to meditation can be studied and critiqued.

4. What specific improvements should the authors consider regarding the methodology? What further controls should be considered?

The methodology and controls in the article are sufficient and do not need any improvement.

5. Please describe how the conclusions are or are not consistent with the evidence and arguments presented. Please also indicate if all main questions posed were addressed and by which specific experiments.

The author is meticulously consistent in the evidence and arguments presented – the article examines the mediation hindrances, described and critiques them and provides critical insights of managing them. The article is excellently integrated.

6. Are the references appropriate?

Yes, they are.

7. Please include any additional comments on the tables and figures and quality of the data.

These are appropriate and add value and light to the author’s arguments, discussion and conclusion.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf