Buddhism Rocks

[MidnightSun]

It sure does, what u think?

[Thomas Knierim]

Midnight Sun: what u think?

I think I should delete this thread for lack of meaning. :lol:

Thomas

[MidnightSun]

I think I should delete this thread for lack of meaning

Awww...lol

beliefnet.com? cool i'll give it a try.

[Smurf]

nice!!

like the Belief-o-Matic
:lol:

[MidnightSun]

No worries he'll delete this topic soon now :P

[locomotive]

it rocks marbles.
I don't know why people go to monestaries though.

[Thomas Knierim]

The difficulty of keeping monastic discipline is a problem for beginners, but ultimately it is a trivial problem. -So I've been told.- You simply get used to it.

The true difficulty that the monastic life poses to the practitioner is that they can get attached to it. In this case either everything just becomes daily routine, or the practitioner seeks certain experiences for the sake of themselves.

That is, the monastic lifestyle can become a trap, just like every attachment can become a trap.

I have met "farang" monks in Thailand and they all seemed to struggle with certain types of problems. The monastic discipline (vinaya) was not one of them.

If you are interested in the lifestyle and the practical experiences of foreign (=Western) monk, I can recommend the book "Phra Farang" by Phra Peter Pannapadipo.

Cheers, Thomas

[locomotive]

I pickedup meditating this week. It's pretty hard. I ended up meditating for like 3 hours. First I got rid of all tension. Then I tried to let my body dissapear and I felt intense tingling all over my body and I stopped because it was like I was losing myself in this bliss feeling(?). Now thats something I would have liked to talk about with monk but then again I could findout for myself.
what do you people think?
meditating rocks.

[Thomas Knierim]

locomotive: I stopped because it was like I was losing myself in this bliss feeling.

Can you explain that more precisely?

[locomotive]

yeah maybe. So I started feeling a energetic tingling in my body. It went almost over my entire body and I think I was slowly concentrating entirely on that feeling when the intensity startled me. Now that I think about it I probable stumbled upon something that I should have gotten rid of. You know when you relax a muscle you see tension around it that should be relaxed first. Maybe thats what happened. Anyway at that point of intensity it felt like I was almost diving into the tingling feeling that would cover me entirely, my entire space, my entire world. I would dissapear. I think even my body seemed to dissapear, ironically. So I snapped out of it by moving my body.
Ow jeah it felt really good. better then any stuff I have felt.

[MidnightSun]

I think 3 hours is too long for daily meditation.

[Thomas Knierim]

Thank you, locomotive; interesting observations.

Three hours is indeed pretty long for a beginner (but not for an advanced meditator). If I understand you correctly, you have successively directed attention to several/all areas of your body and then relaxed the muscles in each part. This process should normally take only a few minutes. What method did you use for the rest of the meditation?

The tingling feeling is very common, especially for beginners. On the other hand, the experience of bliss is very uncommon. I think it may have been a sort of funny feeling which can arise from multiple causes, such as artificial breathing, sitting in an unfamiliar posture, and so on. This does occasionally affect the emotional centre.

Anyway, you may experience a number of unusual phenomena at the beginning. That's good. Many beginners do not experience anything at all. That's alright, too. More profound experiences usually take place only after many weeks or even months of intensive meditation. However, sometimes they happen accidentally.

At any rate, although these experiences are somehow interesting, they are side effects.

Cheers, Thomas

[scameter]

Yes I have done very similar things before locomotive, although not for three hours. In particular, unfortunately rare intervels, and with some specifications in nearly any time, I am able to calm my mind and to permit my mind to attent focus on a specific part or aspect of my body and enhance or dehance that aspect as central. It is an incredibly blissful, metaphysical, spiritual experience as you seem to have observed, and I take much pleasure in such experiences. I am able to make my body hot or cold, specifically to alternate between the effects; I am able to essentially lose myself, especially in thought-cental meditation, which often occurs without my specific effort for the effect; I have often had effortless occurances of outer-body experiences, one being during my sleep where I saw my self sleeping in the exact position to which I evidenced after awaking; as well as a few other things. It is very interesting, and I as well as many Buddhist believe in a means of reason based in thought scenarios to which imaginatively illustrate essentially the scientific method but rather thoughtfully rather than empirically, and I find this an extremely interesting means of discovery. :)

[locomotive]

"a means of reason based in thought scenarios to which imaginatively illustrate essentially the scientific method but rather thoughtfully rather than empirically, and I find this an extremely interesting means of discovery."
what do you mean with this?

I don't find it hard to stay with a certain body and make it cold, circulate chi or for instance holding the thought of relaxing and letting my body become straight but I find it hard to not beeing aware of something like for instance hearing or seeing. When I go into my own thoughts, like you do when you are in a train I have difficulty stopping those thoughts because nothingness is boring I guess. I can imagine myself to be dead for a few seconds then I snap back. I need to reevaluate my methods. It is obvious to me that I am restricting myself rather than not beeing able to do it. Or is there something that needs to be developed?

[MidnightSun]

When i meditate i see two weird circles. One ,which is the bigger, is blue and inside it there is another, green circle. What is this?

[scameter]

Meditation, in the buddhist fashion, as is described by the Dalai Lama in a book of his I'm currently reading.

I don't find it hard to stay with a certain body and make it cold, circulate chi or for instance holding the thought of relaxing and letting my body become straight but I find it hard to not beeing aware of something like for instance hearing or seeing. When I go into my own thoughts, like you do when you are in a train I have difficulty stopping those thoughts because nothingness is boring I guess. I can imagine myself to be dead for a few seconds then I snap back. I need to reevaluate my methods. It is obvious to me that I am restricting myself rather than not beeing able to do it. Or is there something that needs to be developed?

I think personally that you need to not worry about it, but rather remain calm and do it as often as you see fit, if it is 5 hours a day or 10 minutes a month. But, when I do essentially lose focus of existence when in my thoughts, it is most often not by my own merit, but rather just coincidental, and I only regain my physical focus when I apply effort to lose my thought.

When i meditate i see two weird circles. One ,which is the bigger, is blue and inside it there is another, green circle. What is this?

Hmm...I'm not sure. Is there anything in your life like this?

[locomotive]

:o

[MidnightSun]

Hmm...I'm not sure. Is there anything in your life like this?

That the whole problem..no..i cant realise what it is...

[MidnightSun]

Satanists stars and circles too? :lol:

I want to know what our honoured chief Thomas thinks about that :P

[Thomas Knierim]

Midnight Sun: When i meditate i see two weird circles. One ,which is the bigger, is blue and inside it there is another, green circle. What is this?

I don't know. It sounds a bit like the visual cortex firing randomly. It can mean all kinds of things, or nothing at all. I would have to know a great deal about the details of your meditation practice and yourself, to have any clue.

Cheers, Thomas

[scameter]

I agree Thomas, and honestly I think that this truly illustrates the complexity and unpredictability (unheard of to scientists, especially neurologists and scientific material reductionists) of human consciousness.

[MidnightSun]

:think: Maybe just some light effect

[Thomas Knierim]

At any rate, seeing colours, shapes, and patterns are a (relatively mild) form of hallucinations. Usually, meditators try to avoid this kind of thing by keeping the eyes (at least slightly) open during meditation. Apart from that, meditation with closed eyes has the obvious disadvantage you don't see anything, which can be hazardous, for example in walking meditation. :lol:

There is a phenomenon called closed eye visualisation. This usually takes shape in random noise, occasional flashes, or bright areas, which you see when you close your eyes. Random noise and flashes are quite common. In a state of deep relaxation (such as induced by meditation), closed eye visualisation can produce fields of colour, coloured geometrical shapes, or even solid objects. The state where these visions appear can also be induced by a mild hallucinogen such as THC/cannabis.

In addition, this class of hallucinations is associated with becoming unconscious. You have probably seen the little stars that revolve around the head of cartoon characters when they get beaten on the head. This phenomenon is real. On the verge of fainting, many pople actually do see stars, circles, and other colorfoul geometrical shapes. I have experienced this once when I suffered from a sunstroke after a day in the desert.

Cheers, Thomas

[locomotive]

so much people meditating.

yeah I get those flashes but I noticed it happens when my eyes move while closed. Plus I sometimes get clear sounds suddenly and I also sometimes see a whole scenery asif I am looking with my eyes in real life. It seems to happen when I am forgetting/letting go/relaxing muscle.
I know that I had the tendancy since I was little to tense muscle in my head or try to look into my skull when trying to think. I guess imagination would me more clear if I didn't do that.
Is it true that the self is expressed with flexing muscle?

[scameter]

The only meditation I do is when I sword fight, which is unfortunately rare, perform archery which is even moreso rare and equally unfortunate, sleep :D, or write poetry when I am indeed inspired to.

[scameter]

Hmm...maybe my definition of meditation differs from yours. Mine is no-mind wholeness, but to many Buddhists it is silently focusing on one thing extensively. Is that your definition?

[Thomas Knierim]

I think your disagreement may be based on the different Eastern and Western use of the word "meditation". The Eastern meaning is more narrow, as it always means engaging the mind in focusing attention, according to a number of well-defined (sometimes even rigid) methods. It is best described by the sanskrit word "dhyana". In the Western sense, the latin word "meditatio" has traditionally been used for all kinds of intellectual (and sometimes physical) exercises, in particular for philosophical inquiry. Remember that Descartes' book as well as the writings of Marcus Aurelius are entitled "meditations".

I am not sure whether archery and sword fighting would qualify as meditation. Likewise, I don't think on could count Hatha Yoga, Tai Chi Chuan, Qui Gong as meditation practices.

There's an article on meditation on wikepedia. Forget that one. It has many inaccuracies.

Cheers, Thomas

[locomotive]

wouldn't four element meditation be something like qi gong. whatever. What would be those well defined meditations. Maybe you could give me a source or tell me.? grazie

[MidnightSun]

I remember i saw some vision while meditating once. I dont remeber what it was now but i can assure u that was something incredible.

[Thomas Knierim]

locomotive: wouldn't four element meditation be something like qi gong.

The four element meditation in Buddhism is primarily used to break the identification of the "I" with the body. It is a mental exercise, whereas qui gong (chi gong?) involves much physical movement. There also seems to be a four elements meditation method in the Hindu tradition. Idon't know much about that one.

locomotive: What would be those well defined meditations.

I think the predominant aspect of meditation in the Eastern sense of "dhyana" is that it is a consciousness exercise, although the body may be involved in different ways. Consciousness is engaged in a way that is quite different from everyday (half-) consciousness. The whole idea is to make the person more conscious.

Cheers, Thomas

[scameter]

The meditation I speak of is what Osho described in his book, Zen.

[MidnightSun]

Osho :lol: They are making orgies between kids in lithuania.

[locomotive]

how do you become more conscious? I just want to know on what things it depends on.

[scameter]

Osho They are making orgies between kids in lithuania.

Umm...are we speaking of the same Osho?

how do you become more conscious? I just want to know on what things it depends on.

More conscious? As in, more aware and perceptive, or more intelligent, or something else?

[scameter]

lol I wish I knew; I mean Osho, which was his nickname, and he wrote much commentary on Eastern philosophy, such as in his book on Zen.

[locomotive]

why are you asking me

[scameter]

You asked the question, I assumed you knew what you meant by "more conscious".

[locomotive]

the answer to my origional question is the answer to your question.

[scameter]

lol Ok. :)

[Thomas Knierim]

locomotive: how do you become more conscious? I just want to know on what things it depends on.

The problem is that most people believe they are conscious when they are not sleeping. Unfortunately that is not true. Their waking experience is just a different kind of sleep. So, to become "more conscious" chiefly means to become aware that you are dreaming. This is by no means trivial, because, -as mentioned- people most adamantly believe they are conscious, especially the ones sleeping most soundly.

Cheers, Thomas

[scameter]

Of course, the names we apply to the different parts of the brain are simply symbolic, like much of human intellectual process. Thus, if we are not physically sleeping, it is called "conscious". If we are sleeping, it is called "subconscious", and if we are neither thinking nor dreaming, it is called "unconscious", hence the scientific fact that we use, through conscious and subconscious, only 10% of our brain, the rest being considered "unconscious" because it goes without use.

[locomotive]

then can you awaken or is becoming aware that you are asleep all there is?

[Thomas Knierim]

locomotive: then can you awaken?

Yes. Awakening is enlightenment.

[locomotive]

what makes dreaming while awake? not beeing mindfull? theorizing? remembering the past instead of looking at the present?

Could you please tell me a story of something you found out in yourself?

[Thomas Knierim]

locomotive: what makes dreaming while awake? not beeing mindfull? theorizing? remembering the past instead of looking at the present?

Dreaming is induced automatically. The tricky thing is that it happens subconsciously and we often make wrongful identifications when dreaming. For example, we might see a person we don't like in the company of another person. Although we don't know the other person, the fact of the company of the disliked person may cause us to be predisposed to a negative judgement of that person. This is an example of mistaken identification by the emotional centre. Yet, the thinking centre, the moving centre, and the instinct centre likewise produce mistaken identifications.

Not being mindful is being asleep.

Theorising and conceptualising is not the cause of dreaming, but it is often accompanied by it, the reason being that trains of thought simply go off in the wrong way and if the conductor is asleep there is no way to stop them.

Remembering the past is often necessary, but dwelling in the past is certainly not. However, most people tend to dwell in the future rather than in the past.

locomotive: Could you please tell me a story of something you found out in yourself?

I am not sure what you mean... what do you want to know?

Cheers, Thomas

[locomotive]

if the instinct and moving centre etc can make mistakes they are either in some way controlled or surpressed. what do you think about that?

yeah I think dwelling in fantasies while doing something made me confused. Like that dream you have and you just don't want to wake up...hmm for some reason.

[Thomas Knierim]

psyche: why is remembering the past more valuable then the future...intuitively i agree but i want to know more precisefly how it is so...

I did not say that it is more valuable to think of the past than to think of the future. It is rather the case that more people tend to dwell in the future than in the past or present. With "dwelling" I mean to be there with heart and mind. Let me explain.

People live by the clock. There is always something that they have to do. When they get up, they think about what they are going to have for breakfast (future). When they have breakfast, they think about how they get to work (future). When getting to work they think about when they will arrive there (future). When they arrive at work, they think about the tasks they will have to work on (future). When they work they think about going back home (future). And it goes on like this.

It may sound exaggerated, but many people actually function like this. Their greatest concerns are always events in the future. When will I be done with the exam? When will I finish this project? When will I get payment? When will I move to the new house? When will I have a party/girlfriend/car/wife/divorce?

Obviously you cannot dwell in the present when you dwell in the future. Of course it is often necessary to retrieve memories of the past, or to make plans for the future. This is simply an operational necessity. But everything beyond necessity is excess. One cannot be mindful if one dwells in the future, because mindfulness happens in the present.

i think he would like an example from your own realization...i would too...

Most of my own realisations (or rather: observations/insights) are probably neither very interesting nor very useful for anyone else. The reason is that they either apply specifically to myself, or that they are very ordinary things. If there is anything interesting or useful I don't hesitate to mention here when there is a context for it.

Besides, I think of my own realisation as quite meaningless compared to the wisdom of the great teachers.

But if you must ask, I can give you an example. I had to close my company three years ago. The reason for this were sudden and unexpected hostilities from my partners, as well as the withdrawal of major clients. My dad died in the same year. I lost a beloved parent, many years of hard work, and a huge chunk of money within only a few months. Despite of this I did not feel very depressed or shaken and I wondered why.

The reason is that I realised that events just happen. Although I had this inner knowledge before, but I wasn't able to formulate it, because I wasn't able to accept it. But it is the truth. Everything just happens and there is no one to blame or to praise. The amount of control we have over external events, or the behaviour of other people, is next to nil. What is even more shocking, the amount of control we have over ourselves is likewise miniscule... unless we make a conscious effort to be mindful.

Finally, this led to the realisation that people are sleeping. The behaviour of people is largely controlled by conditions and programs. There's is no conscious reflection whatsoever. Okay, sometimes there is. The possibility for conscious reflection always exists. But few people make use of it. Things just happen. People are just part of the automatic flow of things. The reason for this is that mindfulness requires great effort. It is exhausting. People are simply too weak to sustain the effort.

I went to a Buddhist retreat in early 2004. The retreat was led by Mahayana monks from Vietnam and France. There were about 50 people in our group. One morning at 5:00 AM we went out into the park for walking meditation. The person next to me was fully immersed into the practice of mindful walking. Every step required complete concentration. Suddenly this person stepped right onto an ant trail. The poor meditator was so busy with the exercise that the environment was completely forgotten. This person was still sleeping.

Cheers, Thomas

[locomotive]

do you know if there really is an effort beeing done like a muscle that burns more energy or maybe some other task that is physically more demanding or is it a illusion or maybe a combanation of the things?

[Thomas Knierim]

locomotive: if the instinct and moving centre etc can make mistakes they are either in some way controlled or surpressed. what do you think about that?

Well, that's almost correct, although I would use another verb here. The instinct and moving circuits are dragged in; that is they produce automatisms and habits of their own, especially in older people. Let me give you an example: imagine you take piano lessons and you absolutely hate it. Say, someone forces you to take these lessons and you don't have a musical bone in your body. The whole thing is an embarrassment. If you continue this long enough, the moving circuit alerts the emotional circuit as soon as you sit down on a piano chair and reach for the keyboard. Later you might feel that the same posture makes you instantly feel uncomfortable, even if you are not taking piano lessons anymore. That's an example of wrongful identification of the moving centre.

Another example: Have you noticed that there are few weight lifters / body builders who are also good golfers? That's because the motion principles of weight lifting and golf are completely different. Once the body has developed automatisms for one sport (which it needs to do to become good at it), it is very difficult to reeducate the moving centre for the other sport. It's because the moving centre makes mistakes all the time.

Cheers, Thomas

[Thomas Knierim]

psyche: could you give me some of your input on non striving and action in non action...

The first question should be whether action and non-action are possible at all. Or respectively, the question is whether one is in a mental state that allows conscious intervention or non-intervention. Under normal conditions we act, when we receive excitatory signals, and we do not act when we don't receive excitatory signals or when we receive inhibitory signals. This means, normally the whole process is to a high degree automatic. Let's say tomorrow you have an exam. Recalling this fact produces an impulse to sit down and work on exercises (excitatory). Noticing the feeling of hunger yields a desire for food and produces the thought to neglect exercises (inhibitory) in favour of dinner. You can call the response to these conflicting impulses automatic as long as they remain unreflected. Conscious action or non-action is only possible if you notice the impulses as they arise and if you are aware of their nature. At that time your thought operates at a "meta-level" and the results can then be consciously influenced.

This example is of course simplified. Actual motivational impulses may be quite subtle and difficult to trace.

What I want to say is that true action and non-action is very difficult to achieve, because it requires you to understand your motivation. In other words, you must first find out what drives you before you can drive yourself. It's a bit like learning the buttons in your cockpit. :lol: But even if you have learned all the buttons, you are still tied to the feedback chain of the mind-machine and therefore driving it might still prove difficult. The fundamental problem is controlling the self. You might agree that the self is the most difficult thing to control. Anyway, it's multileveled. It's easy to control the lower/outer levels and harder to control the inner/higher levels.

Coming back to the exam example, we can outline what a proper reflection process might look like. You notice the impulse to sit down and learn. You investigate the cause of this impulse. It turns out that it is fear. You investigate the fear and find out that it comes from the ego being afraid of failing the test and being embarrassed. In this case you can perhaps dismiss the fear. Instead you should ask yourself whether the expected difficulty of the exam matches your level of preparation. If this is the case, then the second impulse of having dinner first can be given preference.

What concerns the principle of non-action, there are certainly many cases where non-action is better than action, in particular in three classes of situations. The first class constitutes situations on which our action can have no impact, the second class are situations of which we have insufficient information, and the third class constitutes situations which we already decided to leave alone. This sounds fairly straight-forward, doesn't it? The difficulty lies in deciding to which class a given situation belongs.

The first class may be the easiest to decide. Although it sounds platitudinous to state that we cannot change the past, many people do actually keep mulling over past situations, creating mental what-if scenarios, torturing themselves with retrospective hypotheses, which is generally a complete waste of energy. Situations are always in the present. When judging a present situation we simply have to rely on our present knowledge and wisdom. If the intuitive decision is pro action, and if there is enough time, we must ask why we decide for action. Getting into the habit of a quick freeze-frame self-analysis can prevent mistakes.

The second class of situations is curious. We have to decide what is enough information. We generally lack information. We cannot know the future. For example, you don't know if you are still alive tomorrow. But we still restock the fridge, because the fact that we are alive today is considered sufficient information. :lol: When you see a schoolboy bully hitting a younger kid, would you try yo interfere? Perhaps the bully isn't a bully and he is merely defending himself. Perhaps the younger kid is his brother and they are teasing each other. Or perhaps he was really mean and had it coming.

The third class of situations may sound absolutely trivial to you. If we decide to leave a situation alone we leave it alone. So what? The problem is that people are fickle. They are afraid of making mistakes. Therefore decisions are reviewed, reconsidered, and reevaluated. Although this is not always a bad thing, it costs energy and time. The expense on appraisal may quickly outweigh the possible benefits. Thus firm resolution (to either action or non-action) tends to perform better on average.

Cheers, Thomas

[MidnightSun]

Yay great :)

'you don't have to work as hard as you have been or harder in order to achieve the same results or more'...

"but in the end it doesnt even matter..." - Linkin Park - In the end :D

[scameter]

Indeed, very true midnight. :) Unfortunately, most people waste their lives because of this, thinking they are obligated to work.