Trouble with silencing my mind while meditating...

[shiningstars]

Originally Posted by sky123

I agree with you markings regarding martial arts and spirituality, they go together perfectly.

If you look at the Shaolin Monks and also Zen Buddhism you can see the connection.

False equivalency.

Clowns can also go together perfectly with spirituality, ditto firefighters, dancers, helpers and CEOs.

Shaolin Monks lend on concentration techniques which have some overlap but are not reflective of practicing Buddhism i.e. one can use/overlap with various techniques, but it does not reflect that that person is a practicing Buddhist.

Shaolin is based on Buddhist philosophy/settings to some degree, but there is question as to the cultivation of inner Buddhist practices today - which is the mark of a student. It is not important though. All form is only surface based. People who cannot see/penetrate beyond form will always find the wrong road, unfortunately.

All martial arts require strong mental discipline and so encourage/cultivate concentration techniques - particularly one pointed concentration - this does not mean the inner cultivation is the same as a Zen Buddhist, monk or otherwise.

marking's constant annoyance (of spiritual masters, of techniques, of slow progress, of quotations, of Islam, of his idea of "net manner" etc. just within a week) is more than proof of this.

shiningstars

[sky]

Originally Posted by shiningstars

False equivalency.

Clowns can also go together perfectly with spirituality, ditto firefighters, dancers, helpers and CEOs.

Shaolin Monks lend on concentration techniques which have some overlap but are not reflective of practicing Buddhism i.e. one can use/overlap with various techniques, but it does not reflect that that person is a practicing Buddhist.

Shaolin is based on Buddhist philosophy/settings to some degree, but there is question as to the cultivation of inner Buddhist practices today - which is the mark of a student. It is not important though. All form is only surface based. People who cannot see/penetrate beyond form will always find the wrong road, unfortunately.

All martial arts require strong mental discipline and so encourage/cultivate concentration techniques - particularly one pointed concentration - this does not mean the inner cultivation is the same as a Zen Buddhist, monk or otherwise.

marking's constant annoyance (of spiritual masters, of techniques, of slow progress, of quotations, of Islam, of his idea of "net manner" etc. just within a week) is more than proof of this.

shiningstars

'False equivalency'......False identity

[shiningstars]

Originally Posted by sky123

'False equivalency'......False identity

sky123

Interesting correlation. At the end of the day, all identities are false, including your own.

It is only your willingness to cling to your own pebbles, that you find such pleasure and frequency in small minded activity.

shiningstars

[Dan_SF]

Originally Posted by Soul_Surfer

Hi, I meditate, with like a year break, for about 4 years. I try to focus on a mantra, but the mind uses every opportunity to disturb the silence in between the chanted mantras(i say them mentally actually). Sometimes it seems like I can sense the silence underlying the whole area of my mind, but can't quite get there. Any ideas how could I improve my practice? All help will be greatly apprieciated.

The mind gets literally bored by the same repetitive pattern.

There is a simple trick for this.

Whenever it kicks in, recognize it and say thanks, then start chanting another mantra.

When it kicks in again, thank him again and go back to the 1st, and vice versa.

I do not know how fast you are chanting this, but chanting it very slowly can be of help too.

God bless you.

[Hemera]

Don't try to silence it. Otherwise you will just end up frustrated. Focus on noticing what you're thinking about. You will inevitably lose your self in thought many times, but each time you do, bring your awareness back to the fact you'v been thinking and notice what the thought(s) was about. This is the beginning of awareness.

[aloha]

aloha,

(my first post)

Replying to surfer dude...

Key to meditation is context, bra. Gem speaks of retreats and minimum amounts of time expended, which gives us something of one person's context for meditation, but everyone is different. Some people might benefit from ten minutes a day. I suspect that the western penchant for achievement leads many meditators to overdo meditation greatly, especially in the formal setting, competing with each other and taking pride in how long they sit, or even how uncomfortable it is. If your meditation is boring or filled with fantasy, try shortening the time. It should be a peaceful respite and/or an insight fest, not a tedious exercise in developing spiritual muscle.

In buddhism, the context to the practice of meditation is given by the fundamental insights of the buddha, that is the dhamma, and association with those who practice it (triple gem: buddha, dhamma, sangha). These are the four noble truths: 1) life is generally unsatisfactory (e.g. death, old age, sickness; not getting what you want); 2) this condition is due to desiring (things to be other than they are); 3) extinction of desire brings the end of dissatisfaction; and 4) there is an eight-fold path to the ending of desire/dissatisfaction. These truths cannot be stressed too much, they are the essence of wisdom. The eight-fold path is a context for meditation. The path involves keeping moral prohibitions of the obvious sort, living an honest and upright life; thinking, acting and speaking in a kindly and wholesome manner; and on this basis developing mindfulness through the practice of meditation. It involves renouncing outward, sensual satisfactions in favor of inward, harmless ones; giving up the law of the jungle for the law of love. Caring for the minds and bodies (nama rupa) of all sentient beings.

The aim of meditation in the buddhist context is the development of wisdom, of clear seeing, through the practice of *mindfulness*, which is the key concept. From millenia of millions of monastics practicing meditation in the buddhist manner, arise two basic forms of meditation, namely tranquility (samadhi), and insight (vipassana). The aim of both of these is the same: wisdom (prajna).

Some of us speak of taming the monkey mind through the practice of attending to breath, to tranquilize the mind by watching thoughts as they arise and flicking them away, getting back to watching the breath. The tendency for beginning meditators is to get caught by past memories or future plans and suddenly find ourselves forgetting all about meditating. Persistent effort in bringing the mind back to the present moment is the fundamental practice. Just a gentle nudge, back to the meditation object, no judgment. This practice strengthens the ability to be present at all times, not just sitting still. And that is the point.

Keeping in mind that wisdom is the true aim of meditation, and that tranquility is a means, we turn to vipassana. When thoughts that contain genuine insight arise, we don't flick those off, we let them play out, not trying to hold on either, just seeing more and more clearly and presently. Mindfully.

Each of us has a different mix of samadhi and vipassana in their meditation. As we practice, one might expect both tranquillity and insight to increase, and episodes of forgetting ourselves to become fewer and shorter. Assuming, that is, that our lives in general reflect a commitment to the path, to non-delusion (delusion involves convincing ourselves that it is ok to be selfish).

Whether we spend ten minutes or all day in meditation, the entire point to practice is to be mindful *all the time*. To the point where practice is indistinguishable from non-practice.

There is nothing competitive about this. It is buddhist doctrine that there is no self involved. The buddha expected us to love each and every being as a mother would love her only child, through all sickness and ill temper. If our bodies are taken by robbers and cut apart limb by limb, the buddha says he expects us to have nothing but love and compassion for the perpetrators, in real time.

Aspirational, yes. In the end, though, we are expected to extinguish even the desire to be manifest in form. As in christianity, who loses life preserves it. As in sufism, where we are exhorted to "die before you die."

In sum, surfer dude, "progress" in meditation involves sharp focus on what you are trying to do, and maintaining that focus. It is just one part of a healthy spiritual diet. A very important part. Until you seriously meditate you have no idea what real insight is. Insight that comes and goes at random is very different from insight which is maintained mindfully throughout the day. Even, perhaps, to the point where time itself disappears (jhanas).


aloha, aloha

[shiningstars]

Aloha aloha, nice new post!

Thanks,

shiningstars

[aloha]

Originally Posted by shiningstars

Depends on the stage of progress, and practice. For adepts, of course the change is "permanent".

shiningstars

Buddhists speak of "the three marks of existence" which are anicca, anatta, and dukkha, that is, impermanence, non-self, and suffering.

Speaking of impermanence, one might say that change itself is permanent, but nothing else.

Most practicing buddhists, being practical, tend to downplay or deny the idea that these marks are metaphysical realities, but let's think about them in that way for a moment.

All philosophy is metaphysics, to begin with. Through meditation we are trying to gain the fruit of nibbana, which is free of all attributes and clings to no metaphysics, seeing truth in emptiness. In this pure seeing there are no objects, no time, only the quantum soup, same as the womb. No consciousness as we know it, no memory; only Presence.

The marks teach us that any object (dhamma also means object) is impermanent, has no more self than a bubble, and is characterized by suffering.

It is easy to see the metaphysical reality of impermanence. When you look at objects themselves, each has an origin and an end.

It is harder to see that objects have no selfhood. Attributing a "self" to anything violates the law of economy, occam's razor: we have no need of an added self to explain behavior. There is life, but no liver of life in addition. The idea that there is a self in control of anything is clearly false when looked at directly, consciousness is mainly reactive. Society has an interest in holding people responsible, and coerces people to believe in a self that may be coerced.

Suffering is the most difficult to see as a metaphysical reality. How can a rock suffer? We create all objects out of our own suffering. There are no actual objects, only the soup; everywhere we "look" we impose order on the soup, and this order is a result of our delusions, our desires. A hungry man sees food, or the way to food. A gallup world poll determined that most of the time, most of the people on the planet are thinking of more or better employment, thus projecting a jungle world of objects related only to acquisition. When food is secured, we seek mates. When we have food and mates, no worries, we begin to think about world peace. At every level, our suffering is imposed on the apparent world (aka space-time).

Permanent change is happening happening happening all the time. There is no time for anything.

And yet, time and space are only a projection, a metaphysical construct, scaffolding for concepts. Beyond concepts we are free.

Deep within our leaf-like character is the sap of the tree of all living being, or at least that thin green film coating planet earth. This "life" is also brief, a mere three billion years so far, perhaps a few more billion to go if we are lucky.

We are more than pond scum, at that. 'We are stardust,' we are the sun itself, sunshine combined with starborn carbon is what we are. All our limitations are self-imposed. Suffering, impermanence and lack of a self are metaphysical characteristics of "ordinary consciousness." Heraclitus (the obscure) said that "To god all things are beautiful, good and just, but human beings have supposed some things to be unjust, others just." To clear vision everything is as it must be, perfectly true.

Which is to say, of course, it sucks!


aloha

[aloha]

Originally Posted by Ground

responsible or irresponsible ... who decides?
Why not call it 'irresponsible' to pretend that there can be attainment of any permanent change by means of meditation?
On the other hand who would call it 'irresponsible' to advocate temporary vacation? From the common perspective of ordinary mind vacation may be a nice recreating experience although only transient and so is meditation.

Gregory Bateson, a non-buddhist, gave lectures in the seventies to buddhists at chogyam trungpa's naropa institute in boulder, colorado. Bateson was famous for telling stories that had no apparent connection, perhaps having five or six balls in the air at once, always letting the audience try to figure out what he was getting at, something about perceiving a world of relationships rather than one of objects (tools).

On one occasion he was discussing professor adelbert ames jr's optical illusion experiments. It is difficult to take gregory out of context intelligibly, but in this example he is relatively self-contained.

Ames would set up an illusion on a table, gregory explains, and he would show the subject at the outset the nature of the illusion, how turning a crank would move an object in relation to another object, and looking through a hole on the side of the table, the eye might see one ball passing through another, or doing something similarly impossible.

Ames walked gregory through the procedure personally, and when looking through the aperture, the ball would do something that he knew was impossible, and knew from prior knowledge was an illusion, but nonetheless the eye saw the illusion time and time again. A hand pressed through the curtain would try to grab the ball and always miss. Being scientists, they kept going with this. After about 75 repetitions, gregory was able to make the correction and grab the ball, even though it still appeared elsewhere. Ames' further experiments, he was told, determined that after 140 repetitions or so, the illusion broke down and the subject's eye would see what was actually there, even through the aperture.

Gregory, of course, would stop there. The buddhists looked at him silently. He added, helpfully, that he didn't know if it was important, but that ames always made a point of showing you the illusion beforehand, so that you knew the truth. The result might be different otherwise, he said.

aloha

[Gem]

Originally Posted by aloha

Replying to surfer dude...

Key to meditation is context, bra. Gem speaks of retreats and minimum amounts of time expended, which gives us something of one person's context for meditation, but everyone is different. Some people might benefit from ten minutes a day. I suspect that the western penchant for achievement leads many meditators to overdo meditation greatly, especially in the formal setting, competing with each other and taking pride in how long they sit, or even how uncomfortable it is. If your meditation is boring or filled with fantasy, try shortening the time. It should be a peaceful respite and/or an insight fest, not a tedious exercise in developing spiritual muscle.

10 minutes is at the 'better than nothing' level. My main training was an Eastern tradition. The reason retreats are quite grueling is because there is so much do and so little time. Physical discomfort is quite important initially because the practitioner comes to know how highly reactive they are to the physical sensations. Later on, though, this changes and pleasure, the pursuit of pleasure, and the clinging to it becomes the sticking point. When the subtle motion becomes intense and relentless it's important a practitioner is well aware of how their personal reactivity disturbs them and is well grounded in their balance of mind. I guess since this thread is based on Mantra, though, I'm not in the right place, and it's my mistake.

In buddhism, the context to the practice of meditation is given by the fundamental insights of the buddha, that is the dhamma, and association with those who practice it (triple gem: buddha, dhamma, sangha). These are the four noble truths: 1) life is generally unsatisfactory (e.g. death, old age, sickness; not getting what you want); 2) this condition is due to desiring (things to be other than they are); 3) extinction of desire brings the end of dissatisfaction; and 4) there is an eight-fold path to the ending of desire/dissatisfaction. These truths cannot be stressed too much, they are the essence of wisdom. The eight-fold path is a context for meditation. The path involves keeping moral prohibitions of the obvious sort, living an honest and upright life; thinking, acting and speaking in a kindly and wholesome manner; and on this basis developing mindfulness through the practice of meditation. It involves renouncing outward, sensual satisfactions in favor of inward, harmless ones; giving up the law of the jungle for the law of love. Caring for the minds and bodies (nama rupa) of all sentient beings.

That's not quite it. Mindfulness is the ability to observe without personal involvement, judgements, reactions and so forth. It basically means, as J. Krishnamutri put it, "I don't mind what happens". One doesn't renounce the things they find pleasurable or deliberately seek pain, but rather, one doesn't become compelled by their desire for pleasures and their strong aversions toward unpleasant experiences. Of course, life is to be enjoyed under a basic attitude of 'this will soon pass'. The point it, experiences good or bad can bring superficial happiness or unhappiness, but 'satisfaction' as Buddhists might my use that word is completely independent of the personal experiences a person might have.

The aim of meditation in the buddhist context is the development of wisdom, of clear seeing, through the practice of *mindfulness*, which is the key concept. From millenia of millions of monastics practicing meditation in the buddhist manner, arise two basic forms of meditation, namely tranquility (samadhi), and insight (vipassana). The aim of both of these is the same: wisdom (prajna).

Some of us speak of taming the monkey mind through the practice of attending to breath, to tranquilize the mind by watching thoughts as they arise and flicking them away, getting back to watching the breath. The tendency for beginning meditators is to get caught by past memories or future plans and suddenly find ourselves forgetting all about meditating. Persistent effort in bringing the mind back to the present moment is the fundamental practice. Just a gentle nudge, back to the meditation object, no judgment. This practice strengthens the ability to be present at all times, not just sitting still. And that is the point.

Keeping in mind that wisdom is the true aim of meditation, and that tranquility is a means, we turn to vipassana. When thoughts that contain genuine insight arise, we don't flick those off, we let them play out, not trying to hold on either, just seeing more and more clearly and presently. Mindfully.

Each of us has a different mix of samadhi and vipassana in their meditation. As we practice, one might expect both tranquillity and insight to increase, and episodes of forgetting ourselves to become fewer and shorter. Assuming, that is, that our lives in general reflect a commitment to the path, to non-delusion (delusion involves convincing ourselves that it is ok to be selfish).

Whether we spend ten minutes or all day in meditation, the entire point to practice is to be mindful *all the time*. To the point where practice is indistinguishable from non-practice.

There is nothing competitive about this. It is buddhist doctrine that there is no self involved. The buddha expected us to love each and every being as a mother would love her only child, through all sickness and ill temper. If our bodies are taken by robbers and cut apart limb by limb, the buddha says he expects us to have nothing but love and compassion for the perpetrators, in real time.

Aspirational, yes. In the end, though, we are expected to extinguish even the desire to be manifest in form. As in christianity, who loses life preserves it. As in sufism, where we are exhorted to "die before you die."

In sum, surfer dude, "progress" in meditation involves sharp focus on what you are trying to do, and maintaining that focus. It is just one part of a healthy spiritual diet. A very important part. Until you seriously meditate you have no idea what real insight is. Insight that comes and goes at random is very different from insight which is maintained mindfully throughout the day. Even, perhaps, to the point where time itself disappears (jhanas).


aloha, aloha