Buddha and Mind(neh.gov)
neh.gov
Buddha and Mind
https://www.neh.gov/article/buddha-and-mind
110 comments
> but overlook other passages about meditating over a corpse at a charnel ground
As morbid as that is, I feel like I would actually gain a lot of value from doing that...
As morbid as that is, I feel like I would actually gain a lot of value from doing that...
Death meditations are common in a lot of faiths. In Islam it's mentioned in hadith, Christianity has the practice of memento mori. And even in Time there was a tradition that during a Triumph, a large parade for a successful military commander and one of the greatest honors that could be bestowed on a person, a slave would be tasked to sit by the commanders ear during the celebration and whisper "remember you will die". I think it's naturally something a lot of people could gain from
If you've been around Catholics on Ash Wednesday, you may have seen them wearing ashes, which were probably imposed by a priest reciting
"Memento, homo, quia pulvis es, et in pulverem reverteris."
(Remember, man, that you are dust, and to dust you will return.)
a liturgical adaptation of Genesis 3:19.
"Memento, homo, quia pulvis es, et in pulverem reverteris."
(Remember, man, that you are dust, and to dust you will return.)
a liturgical adaptation of Genesis 3:19.
And, if birth is possible, why wouldn't rebirth be possible, or even the extreme default?
It just seems silly to deny possibilities.
It just seems silly to deny possibilities.
What is silly is saying that everything is possible until proven otherwise. It's possible when it's discovered, otherwise it's not.
If it's not possible, it's not studied or researched, so it will never be proven otherwise.
It's much more open-ended to say the opposite; that it's possible until it's proven not to be.
Much of our knowledge was discovered or formulated either because a person didn't know it "wasn't possible" or in defiance of consensus.
It's much more open-ended to say the opposite; that it's possible until it's proven not to be.
Much of our knowledge was discovered or formulated either because a person didn't know it "wasn't possible" or in defiance of consensus.
Ok, let's wait until someone else discovers then.
"In meditative states, the monks had remarkable control over their body temperature and oxygen intake. They could use their body heat to dry wet towels placed around them, where most people would shiver uncontrollably. They could raise the temperature of their fingers and toes by as much as 17 degrees. Some could even spend a night on a rocky ledge at an elevation of 15,000 feet in the Himalayas, where temperatures fell to zero degrees Fahrenheit, while they wore only woolen or cotton shawls. "
How well has this been replicated? Has a non-buddhist person ever been able to demonstrate similar feats?
It's such an astounding claim. I want to believe, but am still skeptical because it just so astounding.
How well has this been replicated? Has a non-buddhist person ever been able to demonstrate similar feats?
It's such an astounding claim. I want to believe, but am still skeptical because it just so astounding.
I was also curious about this. Looks like it is slightly exaggerated [1]
It is 17 degrees Fahrenheit, and the study mentions 8.3 degrees Celsius. A linked follow up study in 2013 was able to reproduce temperature increases between 1 and 6 degrees Celsius [2] Also, the results suggest that "...the peripheral temperature increases are primarily the result of increased peripheral blood flow due to peripheral muscular action (and proximity of the femoral artery) rather than a result of psychological (caused by meditation) or physiological (caused by breathing or isometric techniques) states." It looks like it is caused by blood vessels opening up (vasodilation) as a response to certain kinds of breathing exercises. If true, it is just an indirect result of the practice, not some form of body control that extends to other use cases.
[1] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/harvard-study-confirms-tib... [2] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
It is 17 degrees Fahrenheit, and the study mentions 8.3 degrees Celsius. A linked follow up study in 2013 was able to reproduce temperature increases between 1 and 6 degrees Celsius [2] Also, the results suggest that "...the peripheral temperature increases are primarily the result of increased peripheral blood flow due to peripheral muscular action (and proximity of the femoral artery) rather than a result of psychological (caused by meditation) or physiological (caused by breathing or isometric techniques) states." It looks like it is caused by blood vessels opening up (vasodilation) as a response to certain kinds of breathing exercises. If true, it is just an indirect result of the practice, not some form of body control that extends to other use cases.
[1] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/harvard-study-confirms-tib... [2] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
You might want to check this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCXr7rxTLBE
Wim Hof comes to mind. Guy melts ice for hours to break a world record. His control over his autonomous nervous system is amazing, basically maintains normal body temp even when aggressively cooled.
It looks like he can control his immune response too.
It looks like he can control his immune response too.
I breathe deeply and quickly through my nose with my whole torso (rather than just my belly, a mistake I carried along since teen years) to warm myself. I don’t have near the purported abilities some do, but what I can do so far I find useful. It can also help me go to sleep, as maintaining such breathing takes all my mental bandwidth, at the expense of rumination.
I recommend reading Breath, by James Nestor.
I also recommend only taking cold showers, because they feel great afterwards and because they save water and heat energy. “Breathing up” beforehand helps me bite the bullet if I’m feeling reticent.
I recommend reading Breath, by James Nestor.
I also recommend only taking cold showers, because they feel great afterwards and because they save water and heat energy. “Breathing up” beforehand helps me bite the bullet if I’m feeling reticent.
I have seen tummo meditation used by non-buddhist to raise their body temperature. With a little bit of practice you should be able to experiment with it yourself (one common recommendation: don't practice it in a warm room / wearing warm clothes).
I have heard of some success with mental exercises helping cold hand/feet syndrome. That is a fairly common condition for people in the winter.
Think the article is right in its diagnosis of mindfulness. Jack Dorsey going on a meditation retreat so he can go back and be even more productive at building the things that send everyone to meditation retreats has always been kind of funny to me.
The trend to turn spiritual practices into some sort of self-help healthcare to me is honestly just abysmal. In many ways it is worse than just not doing them at all.
C.S. Lewis once said that one can believe that Jesus is the son of god or a charlatan, but nothing in between. If you reject spirituality at least you acknowledge to take it seriously on its own terms, if you commit to it that's fine as well, but when you profane religious practices by turning them into some kind of corporate new-age productivity exercise in my mind it's about the worst of all worlds.
The trend to turn spiritual practices into some sort of self-help healthcare to me is honestly just abysmal. In many ways it is worse than just not doing them at all.
C.S. Lewis once said that one can believe that Jesus is the son of god or a charlatan, but nothing in between. If you reject spirituality at least you acknowledge to take it seriously on its own terms, if you commit to it that's fine as well, but when you profane religious practices by turning them into some kind of corporate new-age productivity exercise in my mind it's about the worst of all worlds.
I studied Vedanta in India at an Ashram for 4 years continuously without break.
One of the things my master would emphasise a lot was that physical yoga is the first stage on the spiritual path and meditation is the last. But he says they are easy to teach and have become completely commercialised in the West only because they are both really easy to instruct.
He cautioned us against the perils of meditation when you are unqualified, pointing out that it may lead to mental illness. In general, the qualification for meditation is total uparati, withdrawal from the world. A state of mind where the objects and beings of the external world have no sway on the mind at all — he would say “there is no push from within, there is no pull from without.” He said trying to meditate with the mind of a typical Westerner is like suddenly putting a brick wall in front of a car speeding on the highway. You will crash and it will be painful.
Some of the Upanisads have lines which repeat which say “this must not be spoken of” — being suitable only for prepared students, but now people walk around talking about illusions and maya like it’s just another How to Win Friends and Influence People or something.
If anyone is interested in reading his perspective on meditation, the chapter with the same name in Vedanta Treatise by A Parthasarathy is instructive.
One of the things my master would emphasise a lot was that physical yoga is the first stage on the spiritual path and meditation is the last. But he says they are easy to teach and have become completely commercialised in the West only because they are both really easy to instruct.
He cautioned us against the perils of meditation when you are unqualified, pointing out that it may lead to mental illness. In general, the qualification for meditation is total uparati, withdrawal from the world. A state of mind where the objects and beings of the external world have no sway on the mind at all — he would say “there is no push from within, there is no pull from without.” He said trying to meditate with the mind of a typical Westerner is like suddenly putting a brick wall in front of a car speeding on the highway. You will crash and it will be painful.
Some of the Upanisads have lines which repeat which say “this must not be spoken of” — being suitable only for prepared students, but now people walk around talking about illusions and maya like it’s just another How to Win Friends and Influence People or something.
If anyone is interested in reading his perspective on meditation, the chapter with the same name in Vedanta Treatise by A Parthasarathy is instructive.
Thanks for your insight and perspective. Reading about things like this resulted in me mostly stepping away from meditation some time ago. I still find some of the mindfulness skills I learned useful for managing stress, but I've decided not to take it deeper than that.
(One other reason: I had a horrific experience on a dissociative drug that, on further research, seemed to mirror the experience of many meditators who hit that brick wall you mentioned. It was the worst experience of my life, and if I risk hitting that wall again through meditation, it's not worth it for me.)
(One other reason: I had a horrific experience on a dissociative drug that, on further research, seemed to mirror the experience of many meditators who hit that brick wall you mentioned. It was the worst experience of my life, and if I risk hitting that wall again through meditation, it's not worth it for me.)
That's a common and probably valid in general way to look at westerners. However another reputable source said something to this extent: people in Asia have the right culture, the right mindset, but they have it too easy and their progress is so slow; westerners, on the other hand, are so immersed into materialism, their mind is so busy with shiny things, that they have no time for things that matter and their society is unsuitable for anything spiritual, but it is for this reason any achievement on the west counts as many on the east.
My opinion about this meditation thing is that there's something in it, but telling people not to try because it may accidentally destroy their mind is laughable. By the time one develops will so strong and concentration so stable that it may cause issues, one must already be knowledable enough.
My opinion about this meditation thing is that there's something in it, but telling people not to try because it may accidentally destroy their mind is laughable. By the time one develops will so strong and concentration so stable that it may cause issues, one must already be knowledable enough.
That's not strictly true, RE: Lewis. His opinion was even cooler.
Basically, Jesus was either: - A liar - A lunatic - The Lord
And any three of those is incredible and worth learning about.
He's either a crazy person who founded the most powerful organization in the history of human civilization.
A con artist who did the same thing.
Or literally god, and people are so cynical that ~75% don't believe it
Basically, Jesus was either: - A liar - A lunatic - The Lord
And any three of those is incredible and worth learning about.
He's either a crazy person who founded the most powerful organization in the history of human civilization.
A con artist who did the same thing.
Or literally god, and people are so cynical that ~75% don't believe it
Others have said it, but the 4th option; Jesus is fictional (not necessarily that he didnt exist, just the majority of writing about him is made up or embellished). Still somewhat interesting.
>He's either a crazy person who founded the most powerful organization in the history of human civilization.
I'd argue Rome had a lot more to do with that than Jesus. If Emperor Constantine hadn't found Christians to be expedient to his own political ends, the religion would probably have remained a strictly local Jewish cult, or been stamped out by Rome altogether.
I'd argue Rome had a lot more to do with that than Jesus. If Emperor Constantine hadn't found Christians to be expedient to his own political ends, the religion would probably have remained a strictly local Jewish cult, or been stamped out by Rome altogether.
Only if you assume that everything written about him is accurate. If his biographers were mistaken or made things up, then he could have been just a regular religious reformer.
Lewis seems like a smart guy, so I’m not sure how he missed that possibility.
Lewis seems like a smart guy, so I’m not sure how he missed that possibility.
Bear in mind that Christianity was an oral tradition and there were dozens or more gospels and various traditions like Gnosticism which would later become heresy, and none of the canonical gospels are believed to have been written sooner than a century after Jesus' lifetime, and not by their attested authors. It would literally be impossible for everything written about him to be accurate.
CS Lewis' Jesus is the result of judicious editing by the Council of Nicaea leaving a lot on the cutting room floor.
>Lewis seems like a smart guy, so I’m not sure how he missed that possibility.
He was a Christian. By definition he believed in the correctness of scripture. He wasn't actually trying to consider rational alternatives to Jesus' divinity, but to convince the listener that simply accepting Jesus as a moral teacher was absurd with a classic false dichotomy - that one must either accept Jesus as the Son of God or dismiss him as a lunatic. Of course, those aren't really the only possibilities, as the criticism page on Lewis' trilemma shows[0].
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis%27s_trilemma
CS Lewis' Jesus is the result of judicious editing by the Council of Nicaea leaving a lot on the cutting room floor.
>Lewis seems like a smart guy, so I’m not sure how he missed that possibility.
He was a Christian. By definition he believed in the correctness of scripture. He wasn't actually trying to consider rational alternatives to Jesus' divinity, but to convince the listener that simply accepting Jesus as a moral teacher was absurd with a classic false dichotomy - that one must either accept Jesus as the Son of God or dismiss him as a lunatic. Of course, those aren't really the only possibilities, as the criticism page on Lewis' trilemma shows[0].
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis%27s_trilemma
For better or worse, Christianity's explanation of that is that the eyewitnesses didn't expect to have to write about it for future generations; Jesus said he'd be right back.
> C.S. Lewis once said that one can believe that Jesus is the son of god or a charlatan, but nothing in between.
Horrible example considering that all evidence suggests that "in between" is the right answer: that Jesus was a Jew teaching Judaism to Jews and that was what the cult was centered around for hundreds of years before Jesus was elevated to being the son of God. It's strange that he'd assume the story had not changed.
Horrible example considering that all evidence suggests that "in between" is the right answer: that Jesus was a Jew teaching Judaism to Jews and that was what the cult was centered around for hundreds of years before Jesus was elevated to being the son of God. It's strange that he'd assume the story had not changed.
> C.S. Lewis once said that one can believe that Jesus is the son of god or a charlatan
C.S. Lewis was a Christian so he is using two-value logic. Most Asian philosophies is based on four-value logic hence difficult for Westerners to comprehend in full.
Jesus could have been liar or god or both or neither.
C.S. Lewis was a Christian so he is using two-value logic. Most Asian philosophies is based on four-value logic hence difficult for Westerners to comprehend in full.
Jesus could have been liar or god or both or neither.
Why can't just take the cultural lessons of the past for what they are and not believe them literally or completely dismiss them?
because they're not just lessons from the past, they're sacred ways of life. They're serious commitments, not something to be scavenged according to your own interests.
Exemplified by the fact that someone who uses Buddhism as some sort of glorified productivity tool hasn't learned anything from Buddhism but does exactly what Buddhism tries to eliminate, namely desire and the self.
The entire mechanistic thinking of treating culture like some kind of junkyard that can be scrapped for parts is itself a product of a sort of spiritually dead worldview.
Exemplified by the fact that someone who uses Buddhism as some sort of glorified productivity tool hasn't learned anything from Buddhism but does exactly what Buddhism tries to eliminate, namely desire and the self.
The entire mechanistic thinking of treating culture like some kind of junkyard that can be scrapped for parts is itself a product of a sort of spiritually dead worldview.
Check out the miserable fate of "Culadasa" (author of the Mind Illuminated) if you want to see what kind of Midas touch situation can come of meditation without the companion practise of virtue, particularly restraint. e: (Midas because the guy claimed to be so "enlightened" and "living in the moment" that he lost the ability to worry about say, other people's feelings, right and wrong, causing harm etc. Acted then in ways that caused his disgrace he is now isolated, leaving his very-much-extant sensual longings starved.)
My take is that "enlightenment" is a real state the brain can be in, and it can be invoked by meditation, or even spontaneously in some cases. But that this state may not actually have the level of impact on human behavior as many think it should.
In the west we seem to correlate "enlightenment" with some level of "perfection", but I think that's actually pretty far removed from what many eastern traditions consider it. This results in us having weird expectations about how somebody who is "enlightened" should behave.
I think it's totally possible that Culadasa has had the experience of "enlightenment" (a certain state the brain can exist in). But it seems like this state may actually be morally neutral.
There's a reason the Eightfold Path in Buddhism isn't just "meditate really good until you reach enlightenment".
In the west we seem to correlate "enlightenment" with some level of "perfection", but I think that's actually pretty far removed from what many eastern traditions consider it. This results in us having weird expectations about how somebody who is "enlightened" should behave.
I think it's totally possible that Culadasa has had the experience of "enlightenment" (a certain state the brain can exist in). But it seems like this state may actually be morally neutral.
There's a reason the Eightfold Path in Buddhism isn't just "meditate really good until you reach enlightenment".
The behavioural expectations are explicit in all the Buddhist traditions. You're also mixing up a temporary state with what's supposed to be an irreversible permanent change of nature. Of course, the notion that the rigors of virtue are just part of 'social conditioning' that a meditator will slough off is deliciously tempting to people want to have their cake and eat it too. "Freedom from desire but oh, should one happen to come up - hey why not act on it - not because I want to, just, randomly? haha. because nothing has essence right? no harm done haha."
My point wasn't "the West has it wrong, you have to dive into the Eastern traditions for the real answers". It was more, "it's really complicated in Eastern traditions already, and we've muddied the water even further by adding our own expectations and biases on top of that".
So what I mean is that some people, like Culudasa, probably experienced a brain state that might be called "enlightenment" in some contexts. But either we've been way oversold what that actually means, or he only reached one of the lower "stages of awakening" and hadn't yet fully, and permanently, abandoned all the fetters.
(I tend to think it's probably the former.)
So what I mean is that some people, like Culudasa, probably experienced a brain state that might be called "enlightenment" in some contexts. But either we've been way oversold what that actually means, or he only reached one of the lower "stages of awakening" and hadn't yet fully, and permanently, abandoned all the fetters.
(I tend to think it's probably the former.)
There are many states, of brain and matter. None of them - none, behavioural concerns or even desires or not, have anything to do with enlightenment. It's even meaningless to appoint so and so enlightened. In fact, stating such displays the ignorance.
No tradition have exclusive rights either.
What we can do is point the direction, what it is not, etc., when someone is seeking realization.
No tradition have exclusive rights either.
What we can do is point the direction, what it is not, etc., when someone is seeking realization.
Can you link to this story?
I don't know if it's summarized somewhere because it is still unfurling over reddit and forum reactions (to the claim against him, then his admission, then his later attempt to back-pedal). I would warn you that there's a lot of time to be wasted addictively trying to unpack what exactly happened here because 1) it's all arguments and interpretation and 2) if you have any interest in using meditation to move toward freedom from desire, here's someone who claimed to spell out exactly how to do that, but then obviously it didn't actually happen because he admitted to acting in a way that implies a high level of sensual desire, grasping and craving etc. - so it brings the whole undertaking into question, right?
My eventual take loosely is that the guy was somewhat of a charlatan/double-minded from the start so, it's fine - it's still worth trying to free yourself of desire you can probably do something like that, and best to go on as if this guy never existed.
My eventual take loosely is that the guy was somewhat of a charlatan/double-minded from the start so, it's fine - it's still worth trying to free yourself of desire you can probably do something like that, and best to go on as if this guy never existed.
The tl;dr is that he was hiring prostitutes and lying to his wife about it.
EDIT: seems like there's a lot more to the story, and I think the poster you're replying to is assuming only the worst possible interpretation: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheMindIlluminated/comments/kw6wbl/...
Also, apparently he now has terminal cancer, and likely has less than a year to live. He's staying with family, which makes the above posters comment about "he is now isolated, leaving his very-much-extant sensual longings starved.)" seem untrue and unnecessarily cruel.
EDIT: seems like there's a lot more to the story, and I think the poster you're replying to is assuming only the worst possible interpretation: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheMindIlluminated/comments/kw6wbl/...
Also, apparently he now has terminal cancer, and likely has less than a year to live. He's staying with family, which makes the above posters comment about "he is now isolated, leaving his very-much-extant sensual longings starved.)" seem untrue and unnecessarily cruel.
In Buddhism the term "Mind" refers to "Awareness" (aka attention, sati)
What you direct when you pay attention. What you concentrate when you concentrate. What gets jerked around when you are distracted.
(As opposed to "Mind", synonymous with "intellect", which is not what they mean. Call it a bad translation)
What you direct when you pay attention. What you concentrate when you concentrate. What gets jerked around when you are distracted.
(As opposed to "Mind", synonymous with "intellect", which is not what they mean. Call it a bad translation)
They have dozens of terms for states of mind and brain activity. Many are more precise than in western science.
[deleted]
Relevant: "McMindfulness: How Mindfulness Became the New Capitalist Spirituality" by Ronald Purser
''Provocatively illustrates how mindfulness has been hijacked by corporate interests, turned into an opiate of the masses, and how we can radically rethink the meaning of mindfulness in contemporary life.'' -- Dr. Steven Stanley, School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University
''Provocatively illustrates how mindfulness has been hijacked by corporate interests, turned into an opiate of the masses, and how we can radically rethink the meaning of mindfulness in contemporary life.'' -- Dr. Steven Stanley, School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University
That is the beauty of capitalism, its ability to turn everything into a commodity to exploit it.
Religion, science, lies, truth, everything.
One has to love it.
This is kind of unrelated but whenever discussions on meditation come up here, especially recently ones that have mentioned the dangers around it, I am reminded that my lineage stresses that meditation should not be undertaken until one has sufficient preparation with simpler practices, such as karma yoga (service orientated worship). The perspective is that if you start these practices before "calming down" (like being easy to anger, easily distracted in thoughts) that it can be very dangerous to learn these higher practices - that you can easily become even more depressed, angry or insane than when you started.
I've seen a number of articles on HN talking about people becoming depressed, depersonalized and so on after trying mindfulness meditation and I find it anecdotally interesting that it lines up with the teachings I am familiar with.
I've seen a number of articles on HN talking about people becoming depressed, depersonalized and so on after trying mindfulness meditation and I find it anecdotally interesting that it lines up with the teachings I am familiar with.
Because we have a hopeless understanding of the vast differences in minds found in the chimp troupe. Leave alone the consequences of such huge variation.
As soon as one chimp has a realization about its mind, it then thinks all the other chimps should and can have it too. Which is as dumb as a mango tree discovering it can produce a mango, and then walking around encouraging banana trees to try to do the same. The banana tree will fail no matter how much it studies the mango tree. It might even forgot it is capable of producing bananas.
As soon as one chimp has a realization about its mind, it then thinks all the other chimps should and can have it too. Which is as dumb as a mango tree discovering it can produce a mango, and then walking around encouraging banana trees to try to do the same. The banana tree will fail no matter how much it studies the mango tree. It might even forgot it is capable of producing bananas.
I have a bit of a backdoor experience into mindfulness through my background in lucid dreaming.
And I completely agree that people need to handle their psychic health before they go down these rabbit holes. Reality can get very fuzzy for anyone, let alone someone who's already depressive, manic, or dissociative.
And I completely agree that people need to handle their psychic health before they go down these rabbit holes. Reality can get very fuzzy for anyone, let alone someone who's already depressive, manic, or dissociative.
>I have a bit of a backdoor experience into mindfulness through my background in lucid dreaming
Could you elaborate on this? How does it help?
Could you elaborate on this? How does it help?
90% of lucid dreaming is just becoming extremely aware of your surroundings, and your experience of your surroundings, and whether they're real.
Once you find out a few times that they aren't it can pretty fundamentally change some of your perceptions
Once you find out a few times that they aren't it can pretty fundamentally change some of your perceptions
It’s an odd thing to ‘wake up’ to the reality that you’re dreaming. Any tips on getting into that state again would be welcome. It tends to happen for me after I’ve been pretty focused/mindful of the present for some time.
What's helped me is getting really comfortable to the fact that the things around me are never really real.
They're either wholly manufactured (dreams), or partially manufactured (flawed senses and biases).
This tends to make me very mindful when awake, and very lucid while asleep
They're either wholly manufactured (dreams), or partially manufactured (flawed senses and biases).
This tends to make me very mindful when awake, and very lucid while asleep
that's kind of funny, because for a couple years there i had a consistent meditation practice, but in the last 9 months i've been unable to keep a schedule of any kind, or at least that's how it feels. i've tried, in place of meditation, just not being contemptuous of people. i'm not very good at it. but it's funny to me that i'm going about things backward.
It sounds like you've become more conscious.
I dunno man. Awareness is already this big powertool that we are all using all the time. Casually, sloppily, intensely, obsessively, recklessly. But not really very intelligently.
(like what's an engineer but a man who uses his awareness like a hammer, beating riddles into submission?)
Learning to use your awareness intelligently strikes me as close to an unalloyed good thing. Meditation can do that.
(like what's an engineer but a man who uses his awareness like a hammer, beating riddles into submission?)
Learning to use your awareness intelligently strikes me as close to an unalloyed good thing. Meditation can do that.
I don't disagree that it's good to use awareness intelligently, but you don't even need meditation for that, according to Hindu thought much of that can be achieved through other yogas, namely karma yoga. Meditation is much more than learning to use your awareness intelligently. There are many types of meditation, too.
I know of only 2 meditation techniques. Samatha and Vipassana. (Aka Concentration and Growing. Aka meditation with a seed and meditation without a seed).
I have never heard of a meditation technique that was not simply a variation on those 2. But if you have one then I am all ears.
Also, ya, you could say that meditation touches some other stuff than just "getting intelligent with your awareness". Sure.
And as far as other ways of getting intelligent with your awareness are concerned. Ya sure, I can imagine such existing.
Also. Ya. Meditation can lead to much crazy. But that's a good education :)
I have never heard of a meditation technique that was not simply a variation on those 2. But if you have one then I am all ears.
Also, ya, you could say that meditation touches some other stuff than just "getting intelligent with your awareness". Sure.
And as far as other ways of getting intelligent with your awareness are concerned. Ya sure, I can imagine such existing.
Also. Ya. Meditation can lead to much crazy. But that's a good education :)
Meditation doesn't really promote the intellect. It needs direction. Something which karma yoga may provide for societal concerns, hatha yoga for physical, jnana for mind, etc.
There are over 100 meditations defined in Indian traditions. They're all useless without direction.
There are over 100 meditations defined in Indian traditions. They're all useless without direction.
>Meditation doesn't really promote the intellect.
I can go with that.
>It needs direction
You mean like a goal?
>Something which karma yoga may provide for societal concerns
I think it's closer to aesthetics.
>There are over 100 meditations defined in Indian traditions. They're all useless without direction.
Meditation can be approached as an experiment and an exploration. No goal necessary.
And when investigating a true mystery I think that a goal is inappropriate.
I can go with that.
>It needs direction
You mean like a goal?
>Something which karma yoga may provide for societal concerns
I think it's closer to aesthetics.
>There are over 100 meditations defined in Indian traditions. They're all useless without direction.
Meditation can be approached as an experiment and an exploration. No goal necessary.
And when investigating a true mystery I think that a goal is inappropriate.
That's a very secular and "I am my own Guru" approach. Not recommended.
Could you please elaborate more on the dangers of meditation?
This is a difficult topic because it's so fraught with misunderstanding and complexity, but I'd like to share a few thoughts, not all from the OP but from this topic in general.
1. Meditation as a tool for self-improvement
Meditation, especially and specifically Buddhist meditation, has been sold to Westerners as a tool for self improvement for the purpose of "getting a leg up" and as another commenter pointed out, this is self-defeating.
Buddhism, as taught by the Buddha himself, was about getting off the hamster wheel. It's about a prince who stepped down, but also who did not try to somehow get a leg up through suffering. But using Buddhism to get ahead in the corporate world is ultimately fraught with a contradiction of clarity, honesty, kindness, etc. with the tools often used in business- deception, exploitation, etc.- tools that are enforced by the constraints placed on corporate leadership.
2. Mindfulness as a tool of blame
One of the paradoxes of Buddhism, but specifically Zen, is the idea that the practice teaches you to be able to handle enormous stress. Practioners are taught to stay in meditation through physical distress, through mental distress, even while being hit with sticks, etc. This is a form of training.
What we have seen is that some unscrupulous people are using this as a way to exploit workers. "If you're stressed out, that's on you for not being strong enough/meditating enough." rather than address the working conditions.
3. Meditation as a badge
People will misuse anything as a badge, and meditation is no exception. There are meditation "jocks" (for lack of a better word)- people who will go to retreats and push themselves to meditate in harsh conditions or for long periods. They will then come back and use this as a signal to others of their greatness. It's paradoxical to the ideals of Buddhism, but it nonetheless exists, and it's used in ways that other signals often are- as a way to create cliques and networks.
4. Inwards looking as the only direction
Looking inward is great, but meditation and mindfulness are not substitutions for other types of self improvement, including therapy.
All of those can be true and it can be true that meditation is great and helpful. Any practice can be too much, or weaponized.
Those are just some of my thoughts on the topic.
1. Meditation as a tool for self-improvement
Meditation, especially and specifically Buddhist meditation, has been sold to Westerners as a tool for self improvement for the purpose of "getting a leg up" and as another commenter pointed out, this is self-defeating.
Buddhism, as taught by the Buddha himself, was about getting off the hamster wheel. It's about a prince who stepped down, but also who did not try to somehow get a leg up through suffering. But using Buddhism to get ahead in the corporate world is ultimately fraught with a contradiction of clarity, honesty, kindness, etc. with the tools often used in business- deception, exploitation, etc.- tools that are enforced by the constraints placed on corporate leadership.
2. Mindfulness as a tool of blame
One of the paradoxes of Buddhism, but specifically Zen, is the idea that the practice teaches you to be able to handle enormous stress. Practioners are taught to stay in meditation through physical distress, through mental distress, even while being hit with sticks, etc. This is a form of training.
What we have seen is that some unscrupulous people are using this as a way to exploit workers. "If you're stressed out, that's on you for not being strong enough/meditating enough." rather than address the working conditions.
3. Meditation as a badge
People will misuse anything as a badge, and meditation is no exception. There are meditation "jocks" (for lack of a better word)- people who will go to retreats and push themselves to meditate in harsh conditions or for long periods. They will then come back and use this as a signal to others of their greatness. It's paradoxical to the ideals of Buddhism, but it nonetheless exists, and it's used in ways that other signals often are- as a way to create cliques and networks.
4. Inwards looking as the only direction
Looking inward is great, but meditation and mindfulness are not substitutions for other types of self improvement, including therapy.
All of those can be true and it can be true that meditation is great and helpful. Any practice can be too much, or weaponized.
Those are just some of my thoughts on the topic.
> One of the paradoxes of Buddhism, but specifically Zen, is the idea that the practice teaches you to be able to handle enormous stress. Practioners [sic] are taught to stay in meditation through physical distress, through mental distress, even while being hit with sticks, etc. This is a form of training.
Let me pick on this bit, because I have experience here.
That sounds like a crappy, knockoff kind of zen. Any group worth their salt will know the difference. You can have some legitimate, profound, and just plain really engaging and mind-blowing experiences with zen practice, but you gotta practice correctly. Lifting weights any which way is a good way to hurt yourself, but lifting weights correctly can put on some muscle.
On the surface, you're just moving heavy weights around, but that's not really the point. It's the form, consistency, and holistic routine that matters in weight-lifting. In the same way, zen practice might look like it's just beating people with lack of sleep and sticks, but what matters is how these are executed and how they work together. Done correctly, intense willpower and mental fortitude are mostly orthogonal concerns.
Let me pick on this bit, because I have experience here.
That sounds like a crappy, knockoff kind of zen. Any group worth their salt will know the difference. You can have some legitimate, profound, and just plain really engaging and mind-blowing experiences with zen practice, but you gotta practice correctly. Lifting weights any which way is a good way to hurt yourself, but lifting weights correctly can put on some muscle.
On the surface, you're just moving heavy weights around, but that's not really the point. It's the form, consistency, and holistic routine that matters in weight-lifting. In the same way, zen practice might look like it's just beating people with lack of sleep and sticks, but what matters is how these are executed and how they work together. Done correctly, intense willpower and mental fortitude are mostly orthogonal concerns.
> That sounds like a crappy, knockoff kind of zen.
If it is, it's a long standing one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keisaku
The stick is meant to "wake up" practioners but it's also used to help them learn to endure pain. But also, simply sitting in place for long periods can be painful- knee pain, lower back pain, etc. are common. Zen training is about letting of the need to react to it, accepting it and continuing, just as one learns to endure and not react to thoughts that arise, or emotions that come and go.
If it is, it's a long standing one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keisaku
The stick is meant to "wake up" practioners but it's also used to help them learn to endure pain. But also, simply sitting in place for long periods can be painful- knee pain, lower back pain, etc. are common. Zen training is about letting of the need to react to it, accepting it and continuing, just as one learns to endure and not react to thoughts that arise, or emotions that come and go.
Please provide sources around the idea of "enduring" pain. Zen, and Buddhism in general, focuses a lot around compassion.
People can encounter quite a bit of pain from sitting but the advice is to relax and "let go" of the suffering as much as possible rather than "soldier on".
People can encounter quite a bit of pain from sitting but the advice is to relax and "let go" of the suffering as much as possible rather than "soldier on".
Even the wikipedia article you site says nothing about "learning to endure pain". Usage of the keisaku/kyousaku like that is not unheard of, but these stories get recounted as problems to avoid, not as models to follow. In my experience, the keisaku can really provide a spike of motivation, both hearing it echo throughout the zendo, as well as receiving the strike yourself. Any "pain" is on par with that of stiffly clapping ones hands; it might tingle a little bit.
Leg pain is also, of course, a thing, but this is purely incidental in my experience. Modulo special circumstances, the lotus position is really good at minimizing pain when sitting for extended periods. Of course, if your legs are not flexible enough to sit in lotus, then even zen monks will sit in half- or even quarter-lotus. I've even seen exceptional cases of people sitting in other positions for medical reasons, but over time, most gravitate to full lotus.
> Zen training is about letting of the need to react to it, accepting it and continuing, just as one learns to endure and not react to thoughts that arise, or emotions that come and go.
That's way too complicated. I'd be inclined to say that zazen is about folding your legs and sitting. Everything that happens in that space is orthogonal to your butt on the cushion, which is such a freeing feeling to directly encounter oneself.
Leg pain is also, of course, a thing, but this is purely incidental in my experience. Modulo special circumstances, the lotus position is really good at minimizing pain when sitting for extended periods. Of course, if your legs are not flexible enough to sit in lotus, then even zen monks will sit in half- or even quarter-lotus. I've even seen exceptional cases of people sitting in other positions for medical reasons, but over time, most gravitate to full lotus.
> Zen training is about letting of the need to react to it, accepting it and continuing, just as one learns to endure and not react to thoughts that arise, or emotions that come and go.
That's way too complicated. I'd be inclined to say that zazen is about folding your legs and sitting. Everything that happens in that space is orthogonal to your butt on the cushion, which is such a freeing feeling to directly encounter oneself.
These are not dangers of meditation in itself, but issues on how it is taught and understood.
Some forms of meditation can be inherently risky for people facing mental illness or emotional distress. That's why a good teacher is needed.
> idea that the practice teaches you to be able to handle enormous stress.
I never heard this in a Zen setting.
> Practioners are taught to stay in meditation through physical distress, through mental distress, even while being hit with sticks, etc. This is a form of training.
Phrased like this it sounds like Full Metal Jacket.
Zen, and meditation in general, can push people into confronting their emotions and inpulses and can be challenging, like psychotherapy. But it's not an ascetic practice and the endurance of suffering is not its goal.
Some forms of meditation can be inherently risky for people facing mental illness or emotional distress. That's why a good teacher is needed.
> idea that the practice teaches you to be able to handle enormous stress.
I never heard this in a Zen setting.
> Practioners are taught to stay in meditation through physical distress, through mental distress, even while being hit with sticks, etc. This is a form of training.
Phrased like this it sounds like Full Metal Jacket.
Zen, and meditation in general, can push people into confronting their emotions and inpulses and can be challenging, like psychotherapy. But it's not an ascetic practice and the endurance of suffering is not its goal.
Search "dark side of meditation" and you'll find a bunch of articles.
Here's an organization dedicated to helping people who've been destabilized by meditation: https://www.cheetahhouse.org/
Here's an organization dedicated to helping people who've been destabilized by meditation: https://www.cheetahhouse.org/
Some pointers here: https://www.vice.com/en/article/8xaq8g/meditating-can-lead-y...
A recent book about it is "The Dark Side of Dharma: Meditation, Madness and Other Maladies on the Contemplative Path" by Anna Lutkajtis, based on her PhD research on the subject.
https://www.amazon.com/Dark-Side-Dharma-Meditation-Contempla...
https://www.amazon.com/Dark-Side-Dharma-Meditation-Contempla...
I’ve practiced meditation for over a decade with many, many traditions in and out of Buddhism and never heard of this concern.
Not arguing that meditation can’t have downsides, but I think you’re way over exaggerating them.
Not arguing that meditation can’t have downsides, but I think you’re way over exaggerating them.
"I’ve practiced meditation for over a decade with many, many traditions in and out of Buddhism and never heard of this concern. Not arguing that meditation can’t have downsides, but I think you’re way over exaggerating them."
Here[1] is a recent HN discussion about an article[2] about just this. And here[3] is an earlier discussion about a similar article[4].
[1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27890790
[2] - https://danlawton.substack.com/p/when-buddhism-goes-bad
[3] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11752317
[4] - http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/the-dark-k...
Here[1] is a recent HN discussion about an article[2] about just this. And here[3] is an earlier discussion about a similar article[4].
[1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27890790
[2] - https://danlawton.substack.com/p/when-buddhism-goes-bad
[3] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11752317
[4] - http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/the-dark-k...
Worry not, for secular meditation does not get that far. Otherwise we'd have seen a psychosis pandemic vis-à-vis Calm.com's 40 million app installs.
what's app installs got to do with meditation? i guess that's your point though.
[deleted]
It's a meditation app
yeah, i got that, but installing an app isn't meditating, even if it's a meditation app. a measurment of app installs doesn't give you information on people's meditation practice.
You do not need information on their meditation practice to support the idea that secular meditation is on the rise and proof of that rise is at the very least evident in a secular meditation app getting such a large amount of installs.
The Buddha sought an escape from the state of dukkha, and our western political and economic systems depend on maximizing the state of dukkha.
How do you make ‘self-help’ from a philosophy that teaches that there is no permanent self to help?
How do you make ‘self-help’ from a philosophy that teaches that there is no permanent self to help?
Escape and seclusion is circumstantial, so bound to change into bridge-building on middle ground.
That's aspirational meditation, it's like seeing how much people exercise by counting gym memberships.
Many of the activities I've done in the service of tantric meditation have required an intense catharsis before continuing to the calm. All of that is one meditation.
Meditation (raja yoga) + karma yoga = 8fold path
Meditation is about quieting ones mind to ultimate stillness. This is where the ego disolves which is not exactly in alignment with the culturally dominant materialism that we find surrounding us (i.e. the quest for money power and status) all things that rely on an inflated ego.
Using meditation to improve in moving up in society is like using wood logs to put out a fire.
Using meditation to improve in moving up in society is like using wood logs to put out a fire.
"Meditation is about quieting ones mind to ultimate stillness."
There are probably hundreds of different techniques of meditation, in many different traditions, and with different aims.
For some, like in many types of Christian meditation, the purpose can be to deepen one's relationship with God. Quieting the mind or stillness might be part of a way to get there, but not the ultimate aim.
Even in Buddhism, there are, say, so-called loving-kindess-meditation which is less about quieting the mind than about increasing compassion and goodwill towards oneself and others.
In Buddhism there are also forms of meditation that seek simple nonjudgmental awareness, and others (like "just sitting") don't have any aim at all.
In various tantric forms of meditation the goal might be to liberate sexual energy.
Vajrayana Buddhism, Hinduism, and Sufism have many of their own forms of meditations with various aims.
There are probably hundreds of different techniques of meditation, in many different traditions, and with different aims.
For some, like in many types of Christian meditation, the purpose can be to deepen one's relationship with God. Quieting the mind or stillness might be part of a way to get there, but not the ultimate aim.
Even in Buddhism, there are, say, so-called loving-kindess-meditation which is less about quieting the mind than about increasing compassion and goodwill towards oneself and others.
In Buddhism there are also forms of meditation that seek simple nonjudgmental awareness, and others (like "just sitting") don't have any aim at all.
In various tantric forms of meditation the goal might be to liberate sexual energy.
Vajrayana Buddhism, Hinduism, and Sufism have many of their own forms of meditations with various aims.
[deleted]
> For some, like in many types of Christian meditation, the purpose can be to deepen one's relationship with God. Quieting the mind or stillness might be part of a way to get there, but not the ultimate aim.
A true Buddhist would argue that divinity is within a truly quiet mind.
See my username for one such practice
A true Buddhist would argue that divinity is within a truly quiet mind.
See my username for one such practice
Who gets to decide who's a "true Buddhist" and who's not, and what relevance does that have to Christian meditation?
The words and standards of the Buddha or other masters, just like Scientology isn't true Christianity even though it has Jesus in it all Buddhist practices aren't necessarily Buddhist if they have meditation in them...
And it's also what Christian mystics like Meiser Eckert and and Gnostics also believe.
And it's also what Christian mystics like Meiser Eckert and and Gnostics also believe.
I wouldn’t distill an entire region of the globe down to wanting money, power and status. Nor would I say that wanting those things, especially money, requires an inflated ego.
The stereotype of the noble destitute is overplayed. Wanting to be able to provide for my family and have financial security can be noble as well. It’s how one accomplishes those things that can be unethical.
Perhaps mindfulness helps someone stay grounded so that their focus on money doesn’t inflate their ego?
But seriously please don’t use stereotypes even if the stereotyped is of a group that is commonly thought of as in power.
The stereotype of the noble destitute is overplayed. Wanting to be able to provide for my family and have financial security can be noble as well. It’s how one accomplishes those things that can be unethical.
Perhaps mindfulness helps someone stay grounded so that their focus on money doesn’t inflate their ego?
But seriously please don’t use stereotypes even if the stereotyped is of a group that is commonly thought of as in power.
You’re being a little unfair to the commenter here.
The western interpretation of meditation is that the rat race can stress you out so meditate once in a while so you can keep running. Hence the name mindfulness based stress reduction.
This can help a lot of people but this was not what the Buddha was about. Buddhism goes far deeper and it’s understandable why they want to sell a more sanitized version. I can’t imagine a corporation paying for a spiritual practice that would make their employees question if working their lives away was really worth it.
The Buddha wanted us to transcend ourselves. To realize the illusory nature of most of our conceptions of ourselves. It’s not an app or a success technique. It’s something beyond all such ideas.
The western interpretation of meditation is that the rat race can stress you out so meditate once in a while so you can keep running. Hence the name mindfulness based stress reduction.
This can help a lot of people but this was not what the Buddha was about. Buddhism goes far deeper and it’s understandable why they want to sell a more sanitized version. I can’t imagine a corporation paying for a spiritual practice that would make their employees question if working their lives away was really worth it.
The Buddha wanted us to transcend ourselves. To realize the illusory nature of most of our conceptions of ourselves. It’s not an app or a success technique. It’s something beyond all such ideas.
Thank you for explaining much better than myself friend :)
As a practitioner of a Buddhist practice (see my username), meditation is about developing and mastering concentration the mind. The Buddha taught Meditation with out precepts (or living a moral life properly aligned with the universe) was in vain. This is this the reason the Buddha stressed precepts on how one should live as ultimately a mind focused on the material world and self interest will never have the stillness of one living a life of virtue for others which is why many people find meditation so awesome until they try to still there minds and blame the practice for this inability like in this article.
The problem I see is the framing of meditation into the portrait of modern society.
As a practitioner of a Buddhist practice (see my username), meditation is about developing and mastering concentration the mind. The Buddha taught Meditation with out precepts (or living a moral life properly aligned with the universe) was in vain. This is this the reason the Buddha stressed precepts on how one should live as ultimately a mind focused on the material world and self interest will never have the stillness of one living a life of virtue for others which is why many people find meditation so awesome until they try to still there minds and blame the practice for this inability like in this article.
The problem I see is the framing of meditation into the portrait of modern society.
You are right it is not just the western culture was mainly using the stereotype to prove a point specifically that moving up in a materialistic society is antithetical to what true meditation and spiritual practice aims at which is beyond the material world.
All the meditation I've done taught me that it was about being aware of what was happening in the present moment - i.e. mindfulness.
Most of the meditation I've studied taught me that quieting one's mind was not the goal and further not possible.
Most of the meditation I've studied taught me that quieting one's mind was not the goal and further not possible.
It is possible, for some, through extreme practices. But it is also regarded as destructive to the person.
It's a science to this, not just one end game. Different meditations have different purposes, etc.
What is my purpose? May be a good question to ponder for direction.
It's a science to this, not just one end game. Different meditations have different purposes, etc.
What is my purpose? May be a good question to ponder for direction.
Stereotyping is extremely rude. How would you like it if someone stereotyped whatever regions that you are part of? You are certainly aware that even within your own set of cultures, there's a wide diversity of opinions on what people want in life.
Let's stop making these kinds of silly generalizations. Within the United States there is a vast, vast diversity of opinion on basically any idea. I'm sure its similar virtually everywhere.
Let's stop making these kinds of silly generalizations. Within the United States there is a vast, vast diversity of opinion on basically any idea. I'm sure its similar virtually everywhere.
“Western” is the dominant paradigm for many (some in China might disagree? That empire is maybe just having a cat-nap), so taking the piss out of Western society seems a fine thing, especially since much of the climate trouble we’re in is due to Western ways of thinking and doing (this is largely the culture I was raised in).
Much like it’s not really a thing to be racist against those who identify as White; they’re in power and might be expected to have the wherewithal to take it without getting defensive.
Another more palatable example might be “roasting” celebrities; would it be okay to pick on in such a way those far lower on the economic ladder as they struggle to meet their basic needs in the face of generational stress and trauma?
Much like it’s not really a thing to be racist against those who identify as White; they’re in power and might be expected to have the wherewithal to take it without getting defensive.
Another more palatable example might be “roasting” celebrities; would it be okay to pick on in such a way those far lower on the economic ladder as they struggle to meet their basic needs in the face of generational stress and trauma?
Criticizing traits of a culture is different from stereotyping.
"culturally dominant materialism that we find surrounding us" is not implying that each and every person is materialistic.
The word "dominant" implies the presence of other, non-dominant cultures.
"culturally dominant materialism that we find surrounding us" is not implying that each and every person is materialistic.
The word "dominant" implies the presence of other, non-dominant cultures.
I edited the comment I initially had it more aimed at westerners which I realized was a mistake.
Ultimate stillness is death, and the ideas of nirvana while leaving folks behind is but a single school in Buddhist thought. I find it to be anti-humanist romantic escapism.
Another version of nirvana brings back the learnings to other humans and help alleviate their suffering.
Ego inflation causes a lot of the suffering for sure, but you can’t function as a human without ego either. To deny it is to deny humanity, to escape into a baby or animal like state.
On the other hand spiritual inflation (i.e bypass) of this sort can be just as bad; ego evolved because it was evolutionarily adaptive (despite having massive failure modes). You can meditate in complete peace only if you free ride others taking care of business of the real world.
Sati also means to remember, anamnesis in Plato’s terms. Among many, to remember who you are; not a god, not a devil, a human that evolved into consciousness and now has to reconcile the upstairs and the downstairs of reality with your fallacious cognitive machinery the best way you can.
Another version of nirvana brings back the learnings to other humans and help alleviate their suffering.
Ego inflation causes a lot of the suffering for sure, but you can’t function as a human without ego either. To deny it is to deny humanity, to escape into a baby or animal like state.
On the other hand spiritual inflation (i.e bypass) of this sort can be just as bad; ego evolved because it was evolutionarily adaptive (despite having massive failure modes). You can meditate in complete peace only if you free ride others taking care of business of the real world.
Sati also means to remember, anamnesis in Plato’s terms. Among many, to remember who you are; not a god, not a devil, a human that evolved into consciousness and now has to reconcile the upstairs and the downstairs of reality with your fallacious cognitive machinery the best way you can.
Death is never the first step, though it will be the last. Well-written :)
astrophysics(2)
nothing zen about animated sticky headers that make the page jump around when you scroll down. a giant "Information on NEH and COVID-19:" banner that takes up 1/4 of the screen and won't go away. why is this acceptable?
"Please don't complain about website formatting, back-button breakage, and similar annoyances. They're too common to be interesting. Exception: when the author is present. Then friendly feedback might be helpful."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
David Chapman has a whole (long, elaborate) theory about this:
https://vividness.live/consensus-buddhism
(actually I guess you could spend several days tracking down all of the different pieces of this account that Chapman has written across his several web sites!)