|
A person can
meditate themselves, and see for themselves, just
like they can walk the trails themselves, and find
new ones as well.
But, Fran, that's the whole issue, isn't it? Are
there really 'trails' there or just their
imagination? How could anyone know without
subscribing to one spiritual concept or another?
There's nothing objective about it. Indeed, it's
like the perfect petri dish for fertile imaginings
-- just you, your mind and whatever expectations
you plugged in, all set to brew in the dark with
your eyes closed.
No, Jim, it's not the whole issue. Why does
one have to subscribe to a spiritual concept in
order to practice meditation? It almost sounds like
you think meditation practice is some mind-control
technique for someone who wants to sell you a line
of spiritual hooey and have you meditate on
that, rather than simply meditate. It is
true that it can be USED as a mind-control
technique if there is a tie-in with spiritual
concepts (like the Maha-juju), but it doesn't have
to be that way. And unfortunately, it sometimes is
that way. People love to make a big deal out of
something that works for them, and they can make a
living at proselytizing, and the gurus depend upon
church ladies and hype-helpers. But, for example,
someone can sit with their eyes closed and 'look'
at light or more accurately for some, 'look' in the
area of their 'third eye' (or follow the movement
of their breath, or listen to the 'internal' sounds
of their body when they have their fingers in their
ears), rather than following their thoughts around.
And if a thought comes up, they just note what's
going on and put their concentration back on the
chosen object. Or maybe another technique is to
relax and let the mind float free, and just observe
where it goes, like following a kid around in a
candy store. Where's the spiritual concepts there?
And the person observes what they observe. These
types of techniques are relaxing for some of us. I
can understand that some others would not want to
bother. But to put it down as if it is the worst
thing around is puzzling. I'm sure people kill way
more brain cells with alcohol, pot, and legal
psych. meds than they do with a little meditation!
And waste just as much time (probably more) on TV
and empty-calorie movies!
Plus meditation, for some, is more about
being fully here than about going anywhere.
Yes, I understand that but what's to teach?
Personally, from all my experiences before during
and after K, people pretending to have some mastery
at 'being here now' were just posturing. Hell, I
did it myself! When I first got into 'Be Here Now'
and spent a summer in the mountains in Jasper, I
tried all the stuff in the 'cookbook' section in
that book and returned to Toronto earnest to show
people that, in my newfound silence, I had become
'high' or something. Really, it's ridiculous and
laughing-out-loud embarrassing. There I was sitting
around with my old friends trying desperately for
them to get the 'Those-who-know-don't-speak' trip.
Some of them 'got it' and nothing satisfied me more
than the few times I overheard someone say 'Did you
notice how Jim's changed? He's so spiritual now'.
What a crock! Anyway, I think that game continues
at much subtler, more grown-up levels, throughout
the meditation world. In fact, I think anyone who
sets themselves out as knowing anything special
about what goes on when you turn out the lights,
from either their own meditation or readings and
trainings, is, at minimum, exaggerating.
Jim, I agree there is more posturing and
fluff than substance to some of it. But for a
person for whom the meditation approach would be
beneficial, they need to learn somewhere, and/or
often want follow-up support and interaction with
others. Why are we here, for example, interacting
with others? Birds of a feather and all that. There
is also something to discuss. For people who are
practicing meditation as a tool (such as for peace
of mind, unwinding, stress reduction, pain control,
etc.), there are shared experiences to discuss
(discussion groups often happen in workshops or on
retreats, for example). Someone who has been
working with various techniques and applying them
to themselves and in various situations for a
number or years, or is compiling the experiences of
people who have, has some interesting experience to
impart for those who are so inclined. I just don't
agree with what you've said that anyone who has
anything special to say about meditation is
exaggerating, and that ANYTHING to do with teaching
in this area is posturing and bunk. Now as I said
earlier in this thread, the Maha offers no such
support. He merely keeps feeding and drilling in
dependence upon him, never doubting and all that.
I'm sure there are other situations where the
'support' or continuing instruction is equally
disingenuous or 'vaporware,' as they say in the IT
industry.
Maharaji's style was to go somewhere, at
least that's what it seemed like to me. Advertised
as find some place of peace that isn't here, in
this awful world. The 'Beam me up Scotty' thing.
Of course it was.
And there are people who come to meditation
for that sort of thing, an escape of sorts. That's
certainly where I was at in 1973. Sometimes after
someone slows down, they go at it as just one of
many things in their bag of coping skills, if there
isn't any harmful juju attached to it that takes
them in another direction. Because of the juju, I
had to strip off a lot of nonsense, and certainly
don't practice M's techniques any more because it
is way easier not to. So even going to it as an
escape, based on the person's level of angst,
desperation or temporary trauma, is not
reprehensible in and of itself.
Without the religious trappings and the hype,
things are simpler and stripped down.
Yeah, but if you really strip away those things
is there anything left but the dark, your mind and
whatever you put into it?
There's the key, 'whatever you put in it.'
What if you don't put anything in? What if you just
observe, or let it be what it is naturally? Again,
some people enjoy quiet reflection. Some don't. For
some people to sit in meditation is absolutely
aggravating. That's why the one size fits all
solution, or the 'you need this' approach, is not
only hype, it is potentially harmful to people for
whom this approach doesn't work. If it's tied in
with a religion, for example, a vulnerable person
thinks there is something wrong with them and,
carried out to an extreme, that they may as well go
kill themselves. But if it's not tied in with
religion they just say, 'none for me, thanks,' as
one of my friends whose wife is a meditator has
done. He can't STAND sitting. But to assert that
it's bad or useless for all is an extreme, and I
believe unwarranted, view.
But with meditation you are also talking
about the nature of the mind, and that does tie in
with science and psychology.
Oh sure, but that's science, not any meditation
tradition.
But there ARE people in meditation traditions
that do talk about the science of it, and there has
been scientific studies done of the effects of it.
This is important work, because it will be taken
out of the 'faith' realm and into the practical
realm. In the practical realm, either it is worth
your time, or it isn't, pure and simple.
As far as figments of imagination -- it would
be interesting to see just how much of the content
of anyone's mind is self-created. I don't think you
need to assume meditation is the culprit, if there
is indeed anything wrong with imagination, and if
indeed it is a bad thing. I would bet, not always,
but sometimes, just like everything else.
I'm not sure what you're saying here.
This ties in with you assuming that anything
that happens in meditation is a figment of one's
imagination. For the observation type of meditation
I spoke of above, there's nothing to imagine –
just let it be. But there are visualization
techniques where a person does just that, actually
conjures up a visualization, but it can go beyond
mere imagination. Some of what a person 'visions'
can be something very peaceful and loving and
healing, or can end up telling them a lot about
themselves, or a lot about how they relate to
others, or the world around them. And sometimes,
it's just a relaxation tool, such as visualizing a
favorite place. (I hear that that's how Paul
McCartney's wife made her exit, visioning riding
her horse in a favorite place.) None of this stuff
is bad in and of itself. I think that's why I
champion it on the Forum – because there is a
tendency for many exes to stridently say that it is
all bunk. (Run, screaming!!! Run, run for your
lives!!! The tingler is loose in the theater, right
now!!!!) And it is true that when one is first
exiting, one may need to give EVERYTHING related to
meditation the big 'heave ho' and sort it all out.
But this is not everyone's approach. Again, there
is no 'one size fits all.'
Meditation is fine. It's just not the big
deal that gets made out of it. A big deal also gets
made about saying it's all bunk, at least on this
Forum!
Postscript
So, Jim, I hope this is the end of this thread and
no more back-and-forth needed. I'm not trying to
change your views on any of this, but you keep
asking questions and part of me thinks you deserve
a response. But these long replies take too much
time! Your tendency to let no comment go
unchallenged that is favorable to meditation or any
sort of internal experiences that border on the
spiritual, has a chilling effect. I think you may
well know this, and seem to be watchdogging the
Forum in order to keep it free of such content, and
to control its tone. I cringed at making the post
that started this whole thread, thinking that this
would happen – and it did! I believe this is
what you want – to either debate us to death
until our POV is clarified and acceptable to you,
or scare such comments off the Forum entirely. I
noticed that you are going at it below with Brian
Smith, as well. In having to exhaustively explain
myself and have every such comment be challenged by
you is not conducive to a free and open discussion.
It makes me not want to bother to deal with the
challenge, debate and hair splitting, and thus I
avoid making certain statements on this Forum.
(Maybe this can give you a clue as to some of the
subjects I discuss on RE.) I question why you
cannot accept other people's views in this regard
at face value, but invariably challenge every such
post.
Best wishes,
Francesca
|