No experts on meditation

[Gem]

Originally Posted by sunsoul

I don't think it is particularly difficult.... You find a technique or doorway that works for you. There is a choice there, and people will naturally attune to what works for them.

Also, I have no problem with seeing some people as having more experience than others. We don't even have to bring up the topic of them being enlightened or spiritually aware. The experience of the teacher will be something living and rich, something that can actually help transform people or sow some seeds. In the public eye we have the Dalai Lama or Thich Nhat Hanh.. But, you also have people further down the chain do their thing and helping people to live a little bit more naturally and calmly.

Yes, I am all for people not being brainwashed or meekly 'following instructions' but I don't think that happens the vast majority of the time. People usually meditate on their own anyway and the group sessions are relatively rare unlike other faiths or traditions. There is plenty of time to work out for yourself what works for you....... If you have a teacher to help you -especially in the early stages- this can only be of benefit to your practice.

Again, it all goes back to personal choice and we will choose how to practice and who to listen to!

My general thrust isn't the bagging out of formal technique. Though the problems associated with systematic methodology are quite numerous, and a large number of instructive practices are somewhat misguided, there's problems with everything and everyone is misguided sometimes. The only difference is being indoctrinated and conditioned by rote and repetition and remaining flexible enough to change direction when you find you're being led down the garden path by the gnomes.

One thing that I have wondered is, 'what works'. That is one interesting area of discussion, which might be difficult to discuss, because people seem to have answer, and you know a man with answers only hears questions. For example, one question is, is your mind coming up with answers now, or is it reflective upon deeper possible implications of this conversation?

There are things I've become sensitive to in my communications with 'the experts'. There's a lot of noise that makes listening difficult, such as my attempts to explain the more underpinning concepts of the breath meditation was practically impossible to do because the forces of antiquity and discourses of knowledge are extraordinarily loud for me speaking as one little person, and where the consensus is that your breath is but a method of mental focus, there is no room to converse on the deeper aspects of it, because to do so is bound to contradict the antiquity from where prescriptive discourse perpetuates.

What this relates to is the rigour of formality, not only in such practices as zen monasticism, but the rigid traits of individual mentality that are like a loud voice that drowns out other sound, a hard sensation that overbears the subtle, a rigid mind that struggles with change... where the conversation is a fluid, unguided, unpredictable and spontaneously untangling and unfolding of itself without preconception or premonition.

The only difference is one of approach.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by wstein

In my private (warped) view of meditation, most people never get past practicing meditation to actually meditating. They forever spend their time in the preliminaries battling ego, mind chatter, emotions, etc. I'm not saying those things aren't worthwhile, to me they just don't seem to be meditation itself. In my way of seeing it, meditation starts when one gets to just being.

Yes I know that's not the 'official' view.

To me, your unofficial view is at the heart of it, an the emotional healing is fundamentally reliant on the passive and non-judgmental qualities of the awareness of being.

I heard Gangaji have a conversation with a young man who was strongly committed to a particular sect of Buddhism. It's quite an interesting conversation I thought.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBCKhnP4TA4

[sunsoul]

Originally Posted by wstein

In my private (warped) view of meditation, most people never get past practicing meditation to actually meditating. They forever spend their time in the preliminaries battling ego, mind chatter, emotions, etc. I'm not saying those things aren't worthwhile, to me they just don't seem to be meditation itself. In my way of seeing it, meditation starts when one gets to just being.

Yes I know that's not the 'official' view.

I think that is intrinsically the official view and all views...

Many people come through the door and can't sit still, etc. Some can maintain some form of practice but not easily.. This is the reality.

You just try to sow some seeds and let the roots take shape as and if they can..

[sunsoul]

On Gem's points... Again, I don't see any real problems if I am honest. You seem to be making it more complicated than it is.

As I mentioned in my very first post people go with what makes sense to them. This is the foundation from which everything else can spring. In India, they have always had a multitude of practices on offer.. prana yoga (breath), bhakti yoga (love), jnana yoga (knowledge) and whatever else. If breath meditation works for you then go with it.

In my real, practical experience no one has ever told me what to think or feel when talking about or instructing on meditation. The basic techniques have been presented and away you go... Maybe you had a different experience? Did this always happen at every centre or monastery that you visited?

Perhaps some might feel rather constricted by certain techniques or teachings but I have never had such feelings. They were always a raft to the other shore!

[jonesboy]

Sunsoul,

Excellent post. I could not agree more.

Originally Posted by Gem

My general thrust isn't the bagging out of formal technique. Though the problems associated with systematic methodology are quite numerous, and a large number of instructive practices are somewhat misguided, there's problems with everything and everyone is misguided sometimes. The only difference is being indoctrinated and conditioned by rote and repetition and remaining flexible enough to change direction when you find you're being led down the garden path by the gnomes.

This is interesting.

Your Breath technique is a formal technique in many traditions. You mentioned problems associated with systematic methodology. If that is a reference to a specific tradition or traditions can you reference any of those numerous issues with such tradition?

Next you mentioned being indoctrinated and conditioned by rote and repetition. Can you give some examples within any tradition where this comes into play? If you want we can use AYP as an example of such a tradition and we can go through so that you can prove your points or we can find they may be misguided and a bit over generalized maybe.

One thing that I have wondered is, 'what works'. That is one interesting area of discussion, which might be difficult to discuss, because people seem to have answer, and you know a man with answers only hears questions. For example, one question is, is your mind coming up with answers now, or is it reflective upon deeper possible implications of this conversation?

Your saying that anyone that has an answer isn't listening correctly and then you ask a question? :)

Your question is a circle and one that doesn't matter. If you are chasing thoughts with thoughts you will never get anywhere. What you are feeling or thinking yes may come from somewhere deeper. Somewhere unknown, which is why I talk about the emotional body technique :) It gets you past the mind, past thoughts because you can't know Gem.

There are things I've become sensitive to in my communications with 'the experts'. There's a lot of noise that makes listening difficult, such as my attempts to explain the more underpinning concepts of the breath meditation was practically impossible to do because the forces of antiquity and discourses of knowledge are extraordinarily loud for me speaking as one little person, and where the consensus is that your breath is but a method of mental focus, there is no room to converse on the deeper aspects of it, because to do so is bound to contradict the antiquity from where prescriptive discourse perpetuates.

First you do realize you are saying that you are an expert. That you are THE expert. That you know more than all the past and present experts on any system or shall we narrow it down to breath meditation and the states one can acquire with it's use.

Words have meaning. There are words who's definition has been used and verified over and over again for thousands and thousands of years. When one is talking about the matter it is wise to have a common language for shared meaning.

If you are trying to say that everyone is wrong and you know better. It make sense that you would have researched, therefore learned the terms to understand what is known.

You have not which is troubling and why you have such issues on this topic.

What this relates to is the rigour of formality, not only in such practices as zen monasticism, but the rigid traits of individual mentality that are like a loud voice that drowns out other sound, a hard sensation that overbears the subtle, a rigid mind that struggles with change... where the conversation is a fluid, unguided, unpredictable and spontaneously untangling and unfolding of itself without preconception or premonition.

The only difference is one of approach.

I am not a zen guy but some people are. There are many paths/traditions to fit everyone. Yet what seems rigid is really what is teaching you to be free and fluid. There is a difference from seeing a thing and experiencing a thing.

And if it doesn't work out move on to something that does feel right.

[VinceField]

Originally Posted by Gem

Power play ^

There are more power plays in Gem's threads than there are in the Stanley Cup.

[Mr Interesting]

For me it really is a kind of natural progression to just forget all the rules as it's something I learnt quite early with my art, and going back thirty years why I failed at art school. Simplified down to essentials there is a thought to make followed by an urge to make, and if that's not enough, then there are plans about what to make and how to make it.

I realised if I planned stuff out then the making became raught (possibly not quite the right word but it'll suffice), even boring because I'd taken all the chance of surprise from the task and couldn't go off on tangents because I'd already invested work into the outcome... so out the door that went, and the smallest amounting of planning just to get started came into play. This opened intuition no end and creating thing I could never have imagined by sitting with pen and paper.

Then I kinda got even to the end of that where even making all these wonderful thing became raught simply because so what. It's like majic for a job, so what if it's majic... it's still just work for some created justification which isn't really there.

Now I'm sitting here and I've kinda let the world, my world fall apart for four years. First thing was give up ambition and see what happens. That was kinda weird 'cause stuff arrived anyways and without wanting it. Then I went to school again to learn clay but I was really there just to collect the pension offered and wasn't really interested... kinda was but it turned out a bit silly when they all expected me to be like a real artist, given clay has this crafts thing going on, but it was little more than interesting. I mean people are great and I love people but all these silly excuses as to why they're this and not that... boring!

Then after that I kinda figured out there was actually something I'd always wanted to do and low and behold the raw materials to do so just appeared out of nowhere and I kinda shifted stuff around to get started but then lost interest.

So I've just kinda let it all fall apart and what's been really quite interesting is that it doesn't really. It's kinda that my perception of things has changed. What I kinda had thought was meant to be can actually be whatever it likes 'cause in the end it's just a bunch of stuff and then nature doing it's thing where the stuff isn't.

I'll come back to this as I've just started moving stuff around.

[Mr Interesting]

I suppose what's making sense for me is that it all points towards going into the place of letting it all go as I've kinda been practising that all my life anyways and it isn't that each stage gets kinda empty of what I thought it might possess so much as taking things as far as they can go kinda reveals a next stage which offers whatever it offers and it's not so much that as a trust builds up, a willingness even to just find things essentially empty and keep on going with that.

But maybe you have to give the world your absolute best shot. Make it pay, as it were, and keep finding what it pays isn't necessarily illusive but there's a refining going on.

It's funny but after four years people are starting to say I'm depressed which is kinda weird because they've had four years to figure it out and it's almost as if they've been waiting for me to jump back in then I just never have so the only thing really left, despite no depressive tendencies other than not doing much, must mean I'm depressed.

I'm kinda enjoying this, hope I'm not raining on your parade there Gem 'cause I do admire your ability to ask the hard questions, I appreciate it 'cause I'm starting to see I'm pretty good at that too.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by sunsoul

On Gem's points... Again, I don't see any real problems if I am honest. You seem to be making it more complicated than it is.

As I mentioned in my very first post people go with what makes sense to them. This is the foundation from which everything else can spring. In India, they have always had a multitude of practices on offer.. prana yoga (breath), bhakti yoga (love), jnana yoga (knowledge) and whatever else. If breath meditation works for you then go with it.

OK, because I'm not against methodology, but there are some problems with it.

In my real, practical experience no one has ever told me what to think or feel when talking about or instructing on meditation. The basic techniques have been presented and away you go... Maybe you had a different experience? Did this always happen at every centre or monastery that you visited?

Pretty much the same, I ended up doing a lot of Vipassana, which is good and I.m not bagging it, but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, which isn't to say I'm saying not to do it.

Perhaps some might feel rather constricted by certain techniques or teachings but I have never had such feelings. They were always a raft to the other shore!

I was practicing with that view, to get somewhere, progress and so on, but the more I practiced the more I doubted it, so eventually I queried myself, 'do I like it?' and then the purposes and aims became more like asides rather than the reasons.

The reason it seems complicated is the lack of preconception. 'The absence of the expert' doesn't make for complexity, it just means the conversation is responsive rather than prescriptive.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

Sunsoul,

Excellent post. I could not agree more.



This is interesting.

Your Breath technique is a formal technique in many traditions. You mentioned problems associated with systematic methodology. If that is a reference to a specific tradition or traditions can you reference any of those numerous issues with such tradition?

There are pitfalls particular to tradition where the past produces expectations of the future so that what we do now as a practice becomes a secondary activity as a means to an end.

Next you mentioned being indoctrinated and conditioned by rote and repetition. Can you give some examples within any tradition where this comes into play? If you want we can use AYP as an example of such a tradition and we can go through so that you can prove your points or we can find they may be misguided and a bit over generalized maybe.

The 'how to practice' mentality is fundamentally flawed and produces obedient people who imitate someone else who leads by promise. The systems provide tools, techniques and other forms of skills that can be attained, so it's good, but there are also the pitfalls of dogmatic adherence and disempowered obedience and the false promises that entice people into that.

Your saying that anyone that has an answer isn't listening correctly and then you ask a question? :)

People with preconceived notions already know what they are going to say, and this is quite predictable, for example, I know that you have preconceived notions and will plug the AYP site, and in order to retain your instructive position you'll position other people, which is why you demean me so often simply because I don't serve to validate any position at all, and therefore must be the fool the ego the poor hurt person the one that shouldn't be listened to, who should stop talking, the ignorant one etc and so on, because I have certainly heard a lot of these assertions, and they primarily are made by 'experts'. I know it's all dressed up in kindness and in helpfulness and so on... but if you can't begin to see that problems with the authority by this illustration, then you must be friggin blind.

Your question is a circle and one that doesn't matter. If you are chasing thoughts with thoughts you will never get anywhere. What you are feeling or thinking yes may come from somewhere deeper. Somewhere unknown, which is why I talk about the emotional body technique :) It gets you past the mind, past thoughts because you can't know Gem.

That's right, the meditation is the observation, not the thought, and it explores deeper.

First you do realize you are saying that you are an expert. That you are THE expert. That you know more than all the past and present experts on any system or shall we narrow it down to breath meditation and the states one can acquire with it's use.

I never said that and that's not the case. I'm not advocating breath meditation, but I'm not saying don't do it.

Words have meaning. There are words who's definition has been used and verified over and over again for thousands and thousands of years. When one is talking about the matter it is wise to have a common language for shared meaning.

Exactly, words have agreed meanings.

If you are trying to say that everyone is wrong and you know better. It make sense that you would have researched, therefore learned the terms to understand what is known.

I didn't say everyone is wrong or that I know better, and that isn't the case.

You have not which is troubling and why you have such issues on this topic.

I don't have issues with the topic.

I am not a zen guy but some people are. There are many paths/traditions to fit everyone. Yet what seems rigid is really what is teaching you to be free and fluid. There is a difference from seeing a thing and experiencing a thing.

And if it doesn't work out move on to something that does feel right.

I'm not a zen either so I don't really know, but I'm pretty much for the fluid forms of meditation, and basically enjoy the fluidity of the conversational approach rather than the 'do this and do that' of experts.