Re:

“but you are so confident you have nothing much to learn from us ….”

I never said anything like that. All I’ve been saying (primarily) is that K, R, N are speculative devices – & thus, basing your life on them is optional. Also, I am not sure who the “us” is that you are referring to – Buddhists? Sri Lankans? – I’ve learned a lot from both & work with both groups (or individuals that belong to both groups) & will most likely will continue to do so.

Re: the east vs. west stuff:

I do not believe in the east/west division. Humans are humans, most adapt to their time & place, some don’t, & some change things about their time & place to benefit themselves & others better – happens all over the world – not something unique to “the east” or “the west”. As I’ve said before, I do not see a significant different between the east & the west – some things have been better in the “east” at some points in time, & other things have been better in the “west” in some points of time – at this point in time both the “east” & the “west” largely follow – or try to follow – democracy & capitalism related developments, & struggle with changes, individual vs. groups conflicts, etc (except in Muslim gov areas, which are dealing with theocracy vs. development struggles). Any differences between “east” & “west” are mostly cosmetic, & are there largely because some people choose them/benefit from them or do not yet know how to change things for the better – a temporary situation.

– S

RE: “Then why did Prabhakaran die the way he did?”

Prabhakaran died the way he did because, after 25+ years of war, the SL gov/military finally developed the capability to capture & kill him. Very simple. There are far more, hmmm, what’s a good term to use here – perhaps less evil by human behavioral standards warriors who have died in far worse ways in the history of human warfare – karma or any other speculative device most likely does not have anything to do with how a warrior dies in battle or because of warfare.

A good way to illustrate this point is to ask why 3 year olds who have not done any evil activity die of hunger in various parts of the world. The believers may write off such deaths to karmic influence. But I would say that 3 year olds die of hunger because they do not have enough food, the society that they live in is not capable of producing, or importing, & managing the food supply well. And once those skills are mastered, then kids won’t die of hunger in those communities – very simple – no need to pin the blame on speculative religious devices such as karma.

I do not know if this is a real “Eastern” proverb, but I think I heard it on a TV show ones (attributed to “the East”): “do things & things will get done” 🙂 So, whether killing a military dictator or feeding a starving child, both require just the mastery of skills necessary to accomplish the job, not meditating or praying to ancient wise men (unless of course such activity is tied to developing the skills necessary to do what needs to get done).

– S

Ordinary Lankan,

In my view, the experience of meditation is not unique to any particular culture. But in history different cultures interpreted it differently. Even today it is given a religious spin by all religions, in their own individual ways. And non-religious people like me interpret the experience as I have.

However, the physical world is actually real to most of us. No amount of ‘escaping from reality’ is going to ‘change’ reality (all I can do is change how I perceive reality from the ground up, for me). When I open my eyes I still have taxes to pay, go to work etc.

So, while I recommend it to all I do not recommend it as an alternative to reality – only as a means of helping make a better job of it.

But I can see how a person taking up this avenue ‘for the purpose of escape’ finds the submersion into ‘nothingness’ exactly what he seeks (‘nothingness’ = my interpretation through my experience). It is perfect for a forest monk, for instance.

There are realists and there are dreamers. Both are planted firmly in the world of their choosing.

Where we have a conflict, when there is one, is when we (some of us) use the ‘dreamer’ philosophy to explain things that a realist can explain more reliably (or what a dreamer can explain when a realist cannot, and vice versa). Or the religious-political front that uses the dreamer’s experiential conclusions to drive a realist’s agenda in the real world, with real people dealing with physical things.

So OL, you and Sujewa are actually not in opposition – as long as it is remembered what ‘world’ is being discussed – the real one in the physical sense (Sujewa), or the real one that lives somewhere inside us (yourself), in our minds or the ‘universe’ as it’s called these days in New Age spirituality.

Excellent piece. I think that’s precisely the kind of philosophy that anyone can contemplate seriously. However, please notice that your explanation made *no use whatsoever* of grand claims without reasonable evidence. i.e. Physical rebirth, cosmic karma etc. Your entire post was a sensible piece with sensible reasons to think that way. Unfortunately, most of this debate has been about insensible claims with insufficient reason.

RE: “western style thinkers find it difficult to accept introspective Indian style meditative approaches to self-discovery.”

I simply do not agree with this east west dichotomy. There are things that makes sense, and things that don’t. There are many people who will accept these things if sensible reasons are provided to investigate them.

For example, watch this video by Sam Harris, where he provides a stellar defence of exactly the kind of meditative experience you talk of: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ox1aN3Bbi-s&feature=related
As I mentioned earlier, this guy spent several years meditating for 18 hours or so a day and talks about the transcendence of self in much the same way as you do.

The point is, talking about these kinds of things do not and *should not* require us accepting things in the absence of evidence and reason. Yet this is precisely what most Buddhists do. I would like to see more people following these different paths to understanding and awareness and all of us having an honest and open discussion about it. I would personally like to see more scientific studies into the nature of these meditative experiences. However, I do not think it necessary to humour those who make cosmic scale claims and believe in dogma with a shameless level of gullibility and a complete absence of reason, and who still expect to be taken seriously for it. Such thinking only gets in the way of finding truth and meaning because they think it’s already been found and there’s nothing more to do.

I hope you have a better understanding of my own position on this.

Once again, thanks for a very nice and thoughtful post.

you say –

“I think meditation just gives the mind a break from normal activity.”

the key words are “I think” –

unless you listen to those who have meditated and are going to be open to their experiences – and in this thread BM and I have done that – we will be pitting what you “think” against our experience – cannot proceed. I have made this point over and over again – in prose and in verse …

just for the information of everyone – I dont really call myself a buddhist the way you label me … that I dont find helpful – I have USED buddhism and find meditation a true guide – but I find many other religions and also non religious thinkers like Da Vinci quoted below of great help.

the thoughts put down below take you further into meditation – if ONLY you would pause to let something different into your heart. Btw – I have found in reading Gandhi and Churchill that the latter simply could not relate to the former. western style thinkers find it difficult to accept introspective Indian style meditative approaches to self-discovery. so I believe – remember i believe when I say i believe – not when you say it 🙂 that you follow the western approach – which is simply different – not really inferior to the Indian style. In some ways this thread has perhaps showed you to be somewhat stubborn in a Churchillian way … just leave some room to doubt your own conclusions – and I will do likewise

In meditation we shift from reactive to pro-active mode. A shift from reaction to action. It is NOT, as viewed from outside a shift from action to non action.

And meditation operates from thought moment to thought moment. It follows that what we refer to as life is just one moment in time. The appearance of continuity obscures the reality of rise and fall. We are in fact born and we die every moment. This is the conclusion from a minute observation of the stream of physical events and mental events that we call our self. The self turns out to be a momentary bubble. This is scientific observation – except that in the process of observation the observer becomes merged in the same reality to disappear altogether. There is no thinker – just the thought. No actor – just the action.

Karma is the extraneous force applied through our ignorance. It takes the form of craving or aversion and strings a set of loose beads into one circle. It is an integral part of our mental energy that keeps grasping from moment to moment. Ignorance and the false imagining of a solid self that continues from moment to moment is what ensures our bondage. When we realize that there is no self the beads are freed and we are free to live from moment to moment without the burden of this heavy self.

Then why did Prabhakaran die the way he did? He was responsible for many killings so we may not be able to pin point that it is karma for x killing or y. We need to find the reason – or karma within his own consciousness. It follows that one of the key components of karma is our own consciousness. It is not the only factor. Pl remember the doctrine of dependent origination where events are shaped by a combination of events. But within that combination the course of action and behaviour of P himself was decisive. In my view he was the key determinant of the way he died. Others we know die of traffic accidents due to no fault of their own. Here again you must apply the teaching of dependent origination. Karma works thru a combination of conditions – the previous actions of the individual have a force that may be more or less. There is an interactive aspect as well. I am only trying to set out some principles – a full explanation requires study and meditation – a process that at least some agnostics are not prepared to undertake themselves. At this point we get stuck and must agree to disagree.

Obsessive desire and hatred is a refusal to let go of what has ceased to be in fact. It is a refusal to die with what has died and be reborn again. This holding on is a conflict with the way things rise and fall in actual life. It is a conflict that is normalized by our habitual pattern of clinging to a personalized existence with its self driven and self defined objectives. We thus try to hold on to our sense of self, our relations, our time, job, house etc etc when these things don’t exist except on a moment to moment basis with absolutely no guarantee of continuity. This is why Leonardo Da Vinci said “to learn to live – is to learn to die.

Ajahn Chah – the great Thai meditation master summed up the dharma with the following questions – WHY DO YOU EAT? HOW DO YOU EAT? HOW DO YOU FEEL WHEN YOU EAT TOO MUCH?

This applies to both food for the mind and food for the body. If we don’t observe moderation – if we either make it too little or too much we suffer. Samsara is basically that – either too little or too much. I know you dont buy into suffering – but feelings of happiness and suffeting are both subject to the 3 laws

transience – instability and breaking up – no self

as i said I am not a flag carrying buddhist – but these three insights are unique to the Buddha in that they formed the core of his teachings – the concepts are very useful – if you would like to gain something from B.

but you are so confident you have nothing much to learn from us ….

all the very best – dont know how I got here today – but thanks I learned a lot here –

Re:

“so meditation is an inside out process”

All thought, planning, etc. are inside out processes (if you follow through with the planning).

“– objective fact becomes subjective experience due to our acquired conditioning – we learn in meditation to de-condition the mind –”

I think meditation just gives the mind a break from normal activity.

“to de programme it and remove the accretions that had got attached through what we feel is many lifetimes of mindless living”

This idea of lifetimes of mindless living is purely speculative. As we know, rebirth cannot be proven, and, meaningfulness or meaninglessness of life is a matter of human perspective, there is no clear answer re: this matter offered by life.

“next point is that we proceed from bad karma to good karma and finally NO karma as we realize the truth of selflessness.”

This all depends on what you mean by karma & whether you believe karma exists.

“so at the mundane level people will learn not to acquire bad karma and then store good karma – this can also be a selfish pursuit as we know. meditation is really the bridge out of karma – ”

Many nonsensical religious terms & ideas (or stuff that makes sense only as symbols), but it probably means well 🙂

“with karma we created a little world for our ego – this small self – by letting go of karma we rejoin the big world with our big selves – a journey from heena manaya to abhimanaya to use our terms”

I am not sure how this is some kind of a special religious thing – any learning, any education, any acquisition of new knowledge usually helps people grow. Anyway, probably makes sense (what you say using the religious term karma, etc.) to the believers 🙂

Anyway, though I do not see a lot of value in meditation (beyond relaxation, lowering stress, etc.) or following Buddhism (an ancient set of ideas with very limited use & with speculative items at its core), if it helps you lead a peaceful life, I am all for it* OL 🙂

(* and by “it” i mean OL following Buddhism, meditation, etc.)

– S

RE: “Therefore I don’t think it is reasonable to say that K, R, N are purely speculative without having made some attempt to gain knowledge of the method described to gain direct understanding of these concepts and applying that method first.”

Based on my readings of history (since the introduction of the Buddhist K, R, N concepts 2500+ years ago, significant proof of effects that can be attributed to K, R, N do not apppear in historical records that I’ve encountered), and my direct experience (not able to see rebirth or karma in action in the world, also not seeing any Enlightened people/people who’ve attained Nirvana), K, R, N appears to be speculative or appear to be a set of ideas that are used for teaching & maintaining a way of looking at the world and living in the world (also, for many Sinhalese in Sri Lanka – part of a community/national organizational tool, identity building & maintanance tool, for centuries).

However, I am not arguing that K, R, N ideas are without value. They have value/use for humans just as the idea of heaven & hell have value/use, or any sets of ideas that prevent people from doing some horrible things (such as the concept of a creator god who punishes the wicked) have value.

However, truth – of the what actually exists/what is real & affects the living & the use of those facts to control human behavior/encourage positive human behavior – is more important & valuable, in the long run, than fantastic stories/fictional or speculative devices that “trick” people into behaving a certain way, I think.

Following the Eight Fold Path or any other set of behavioral guidelines that promote responsible living (of which there are many, in virtualy all cultures, and also individuals can construct their own) is a great idea. However, belief in speculative items such as K, R, N are not necessary for that.

Re: “Sujewa also argues that critical reflection / discussion should be with the “full engagement of the critical/thinking faculties” and suggests that meditation is somehow an escape into a passive non-verbal state. I feel this view misunderstands the purpose of meditation, which is to gain experiential understanding of the nature of our consciousness. Without this knowledge, how can one have an informed discussion / critical reflection on the Buddha’s teaching on matters such as Kamma, Rebirth and Nirvana?”

First, I think meditation, though it can be of use to some people, is not essential for living a good life or a productive life. Also, I am not certain that meditation somehow offers any more experiential understanding of the nature of our conciouness than any other activity that we do – such as driving or watching a movie – all three activites use our consciousness – and all in different ways – I don’t see how one way (mediation) is more important than the other two. Also, the discussion here has not been about Buddha’s teaching on K, R, N (various interpertations of the teachings, was such and such actually taught?, etc.) but about whether K, R, N are a set of ideas only (most likely) or are real things that exist in the world and affect the living (outside the realm of ideas & outside the range of influence of believers who are motivated by the ideas).

So, to clarify – there is the idea of the thing – let’s say a giraffe, and there are people who like to talk about giraffes – let’s say a Wilderness Tour Guide, and then there is the actual animal – the giraffe itself. So, someone who has never heard of the idea of the giraffe nor have heard of or heard from the Wilderness Tour Guide may still directly experience the fact that giraffes exist by running into one. So, in the same way – the idea of K, R, N is well established – these are well known, well recorded ideas. The idea of the Buddha, including the possibility that he was a real person, is also well established, well recorded. However, almost no one, or none that can be verified by a non-believer, have directly encountered K, R, N. Which leads me to conclude the following; the giraffe is both an idea and a real thing, but K, R, N are most likely ideas only – used to teach a worldview and a way to live in this world.
So, the giraffe is real, but K, R, N are speculative (but still of use even if they are ideas only).

::

This discussion also brings up a couple of other interesting ideas/questions;

1 – could, at some early point in time, Buddhism have existed simply as a school of philosophy (material, earth bound, useful to this life only, not based on speculative things philosophy) and not an other world focused/lfe after death concerned religion (such as Christianity, Islam, or modern Buddhism)?

2 – Is Buddhism still useful if K, R, N are proven to be speculative? Or if it is proven that the Buddha never existed as a single person – that Buddhism is a set of accumilated wisdom – authored by many teachers over many years, centuries even?

(my answer is “yes” to both questions, of course 🙂

– S

Re. Meditation (my experience) Part 4: Glad it was useful.

Analysis
———
A little reflection on this post and the previous one on the self-hypnotic technique I learned two years earlier (1994 and 1992 BTW).

For me, the experience was identical in that in both cases I was in trance. Interestingly, the Wikipedia entry on Mindfulness
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness_(Buddhism))
the section titled “Examples from contemplative and daily life” describes almost word for word the process (script) that Paul McKenna uses in his hypnotic CDs – removing the constant mental chatter, letting go of thoughts, being aware of what’s happening around you but being detached from it, being aware of what’s happening within you etc. He uses these instructions when he talks you into trance, and it helps focus on what’s required.

It would help if we can establish definitively whether getting into trance is central to, and necessary for, mindfulness meditation? Can LT and OL comment?

A note on specifics
———————
SD, I’m sure you have figured out that the particular method used by my teacher (using a journey into the edge of the universe) is in itself not significant. In all probability, he has a bunch of different ones he uses for different people – I guess I looked like someone who will easily identify with an astronautical adventure. It could well have been a relaxing afternoon on a quiet beach on a warm day – Anything on which we can go into trance and detach ourselves from the physical and get completely immersed/absorbed into our ‘inner self’.

Note 2: when you have learned the technique you can practice it at any time. Even when walking, with eyes wide open. Not when operating machinery though! So it is not necesary to sit in a lotus position (no, I don’t mean sitting as if in a racing car!). It is not necessary to have a mantra, or count beads, though both these help the process of ‘concentrating on one thing’ in order to go into trance. However, there is a significance in touching a finger with your thumb (it’s called anchoring. look it up).

As you can see, this practice has come a long way since discovered by ancient people in possibly every culture (though they may have called it different things, gaving it different interpretations, mostly religious), and it is used in medical practice today in many different ways (described in the above Wikipedia entry), and of course in popular self-improvement programmes in the past 40 years (Paul McKenna is one, The Silva Method, books by Chopra, Zukav, Tolle put their own spin on it, and my favourite ‘Get Rich While You Sleep’!).

Repeating my warning (disclaimer!) – do not do this when in a negative frame of mind, or if having mental problems, depression etc. I’m sure these techniques would help a lot but safer under supervision in that case.

different routes to the truth I suppose …

Like the way the debate is moving – and I would like to pin point the buddhist contribution to public policy and the form it should take –

compassion must really be the true basis of public and social policy – when the Fabian Society worked for over half a century to establish the British welfare state after WWII – they were establishing a compassionate foundation – this provides the most substantive basis for consensus – and this is a strong contribution that true religions must make.

so meditation is an inside out process – objective fact becomes subjective experience due to our acquired conditioning – we learn in meditation to de-condition the mind – to de programme it and remove the accretions that had got attached through what we feel is many lifetimes of mindless living

next point is that we proceed from bad karma to good karma and finally NO karma as we realize the truth of selflessness. so at the mundane level people will learn not to acquire bad karma and then store good karma – this can also be a selfish pursuit as we know. meditation is really the bridge out of karma –

with karma we created a little world for our ego – this small self – by letting go of karma we rejoin the big world with our big selves – a journey from heena manaya to abhimanaya to use our terms

Fantastic post. This is the kind of detached, calm, self-scrutiny that anyone wanting to get at the truth would be interested in. It’s only through such honest, objective analysis of such experiences that we can establish a shared understanding of these phenomena.

As a side note, I would point out that Sam Harris too had spent up to 2 years of his life with meditation masters, practising about 16 hours a day. This is just for those who think that “westerners” are not interested in finding out the truth or reject everything offhand. We are all deeply interested in the truth, provided that it is discussed sensibly. All parties need to be committed to understanding it, being fully aware of one’s own biases, as BalangodaMan has done.

Many thanks for sharing your experiences, it has vastly improved my own understanding. I look forward to part 5!