Meditation

[charley]

The word “meditation” comes from the Sanskrit word “ma”, which means to think about, to consider, to ponder, to reflect.

There are an incredible number of schools of meditation that flourish throughout the West, as well as in the East. One of the key translators/interpreters of Buddha’s words was the Sanskrit scholar, Max Mueller (Müller) – who wrote in the 1800’s and in doing so brought what Buddha wrote about to the West. The fact is that he mistranslated the word “nirodha” as meaning suppression, instead of what it really means: “negation”. “Nirodha” was one of the Buddha’s 4 noble truths and a key aspect of the Buddha’s “teachings”, as they are referred to as such. Therefore, considering the influence of authoritarian thinking, most schools of meditation followed Mueller and others’ interpretation as to what the Buddha meant, and most schools of meditation offer many different techniques as to how to control, cease, suppress or end thought. No one bothers to explain "nirodha" or “ma” because it would mean that their schools would be soon seen as islands of deception themselves. “Ma” means to think about what is going on, what is happening around oneself, and to see into the nature of reality and see what is false, and put it aside; in other words, by the seeing of what is false, one has negated what is unreal. I must state here that the discovery of reality is the one of the reasons as to why one mediates. Thus, the important thing is to see into the nature of things, to have an insight into things. Thus, one may call this perception an insight vision (aka “Vipassana”).

Now, if one takes what is happening in the West, how do all these various schools of meditation find validation? All these different forms and varieties of meditation find validation in that they appeal to a variety of people, in other words to the varying conditioning of different people, and have only one result - that of reinforcing whatever conditioning exists a priori. Obviously, all these different schools develop a system. They have to in order to sustain and maintain their schools; and, obviously, each system varies according the kinds of people they attract. So, it is clearly seen that all these different schools of meditation have caused incredible damage, in that instead of freeing people from the conditioning they are burdened with, they encourage (albeit unwittingly) the perpetration of whatever conditioning the victim has. They have also caused damage socially in that all these monks are just guys who have joined - and live outside the real world in conclaves - are still stuck with all their burning desires and testosterone, and treat all women as garbage (kitchen support staff). Also, in all Buddhist countries, the population treats women as slaves, domestically and sexually.

Another problem involved with all these different schools of meditation is that they use concentration as a modus operandi for their versions of meditation. Now, one asks what is involved in concentration? Usually, it means that one is focusing all of oneself into one’s interest(s), whatever that interest is – politics, making money, one’s job, etc. Therefore, it is clearly seen that concentration has nothing to do with true meditation.

Unfortunately, most schools of meditation offer various methods: sitting in rather ridiculous postures, breathing exercises, the repetition of various Sanskrit phrases (for which one is usually charged a large sum of money); so, one states quite emphatically that all of these methods are nothing more than self-hypnosis.

One is quite aware that proper breathing has been proven by doctors to have beneficial affects on one’s health, but that has nothing to do with true meditation. Sadly, almost all of these schools start off by offering breathing exercises to many to their "clients" (please be aware that the word "client" actually means "dependent"), who do indeed experience an increased feeling of well-being, and this is one way that such co-dependent victims accept, conclude, and are caught in the guru's thrall - that breathing exercises and everything they are taught after that is part of meditation. So, you can see, that this thread is dedicated to debunking - through "negation" - all the false gurus and their darn schools of the assertions and affirmations that it is possible to "teach" meditation. In other words, what I am saying is that it is a false claim to begin with that one can even "teach" meditation.

As an aside, a long time ago, I asked someone who claimed to be a Buddhist and had been practicing Buddhist meditation for over 20 years about why he was into Buddhism per se, and he told me (point blank), that Buddhism tends to attract the intellectual, the narcissist.

I will be adding to this thread from time to time...

[charley]

There is only one human brain on this wonderful and beautiful earth. For the purposes of this particular/following discussion, one will use the expression human brain and human mind interchangeably (while, later on, in these posts, one will distinguish between brain and mind, because the mind is actually located outside the brain).

First of all, one can clearly see that what one person does and puts forth in this world can and does have an incredible impact and effect on the human brain ... of humanity. Someone like the Buddha had and still has an enormous effect upon millions of people. The same could be said of Mr. J.C. And all organized religions have affected the stream of consciousness of humanity, of the human brain. And, of course, someone like Hitler also had an impact on millions of people as well. There are countless examples of individuals across a broad spectrum who have affected the consciousness of the human brain.

In one way, one can say this human brain is a flowing stream of humanity’s consciousness. And, like any stream, one can throw a stone into the water, and the ripples will be felt by all. Of course, some people have a greater impact than others.

Obviously, the Buddha, who had freed himself from the stream, had an enormous impact, the ripples being felt like a meteor landing in the water... still, to this day.

On the other hand, someone like Hitler and all the other monsters also had an incredible destructive and negative impact on the stream of consciousness of the human brain. Closer to home, white supremacists, such as the KKK have done their share of damage to the human brain. As one can see, Trump has also played his part by adding to this conflict by using the fear of white supremacists of being overrun by m/woc, and changing their gene pool and culture, and their sense of security, thus fueling hatred - that ugly combination of fear and anger.

Now, historically, most people form groups/cliques/gangs/nations out of a feeling for a need of security which such formations give them. One has understood that such formations usually develop in teenage years - while at this age, this development demonstrates the immaturity of the clique members, who “identify” with the clique (also seeming to offer an opportunity for them to discover who they are, which actually is false, since the “identification” itself blocks such a personal discovery). When not properly addressed when younger, such behaviour will continue ad nauseum well past into adulthood. One has done considerable meditation on this need for security, and one has seen that the primary goal of the brain is to ensure security. The human brain requires security in order to function sanely, to grow and develop, to learn, etc. Without a feeling of security, the brain doesn’t function well. This is easily seen, right? Allegiance to such cliques promote, sustain, and nourish this feeling of security, and of course, the fear of losing this security, which fear increases the longer any one participates in whatever group they involved in, in any organized group.

However, reality is such that one sees clearly that there is nothing secure in the outside world. Everything is change. Moreover, people are changing constantly. Everyone is constantly adding to their own personal consciousness through experiences and such like.

It is a curious fact, that even after adherence to a clique, and confronted with the truth and fact of change, clique members refuse to see that reality. In other words, each human brain, forever seeking security, will lie to itself in order to protect and maintain this illusion of security. This is a deeply-seated fear that lies within the human consciousness. Politicians use this knowledge to maintain positions of power.

The problem of all cliques is that they unwittingly cause division in society, therefore causing conflict, which usually ends up in violence. So, it is seen that all cliques, all groups, in any form of organized group activity contribute unwittingly to the conflict in society - just by participating in cliques (in any organized groups), by the fact that they themselves separate themselves from the human consciousness of humanity on the whole. This is one of the reasons why humanity is in such a mess, why there are always wars happening daily on this beautiful planet.

Involved in all of this is the illusion that each member of society is an “individual”. Moreover, the human brain also encourages and fosters the absurd notion of individualism. However, the word “individual” actually means someone who is not divided, who has not separated themselves from others in any way whatsoever, in other words, someone who is whole, sane, rational, not separate...

Ya know, everyone is - at least - a bit neurotic, and has suffered some damage, some sorrow in childhood, to which such a person - by acting out the conditioning of that damage - also contributes to the conflict of the human consciousness. Further in life, people suffer sorrow through the loss of loved ones and other events in their lives.

Throughout the millennia, there has been incredible damage to the genes of the human brain – through generational damage, through pollution, through wars, conflict, separation, violence, abuse, etc. One can easily see this happening outwards in terms of simple things: increase in allergies, the alarming increase of dementia (even occurring at younger and younger ages), an increasing number of complicated and scary diseases (dis-eases), the introduction of gmo’s, pollution, etc. So, besides psychological damage, there are also external damages which further add to all that one is exposed to and affected by.

I will continue with this subject of the human brain in the second part.

[charley]

All human beings share the same characteristics. Everyone experiences fear, everyone experiences anger, joy, sadness. Loneliness, anxiety, hatred, rage, etc. are all part and parcel of the human brain’s experience – whether some have more or less of any such characteristics. All of the above are what define the human brain. No matter who one is, young or old, rich or poor, these characteristics define one’s humanity. Now, one can look around at the people you know or have met and see that there are many characteristics that differentiate one from another, which some would call the diversity which separates one from another. I am not talking of biological differences, such as height, or skin colour, or gender, etc., but of apparent psychological differences. You can easily see that X may be inattentive, Y may be vain, Z may be aggressive, A may be a liar, B may be a hypocrite, C may be analytical, or cold, or vindictive, D may be eccentric or unpredictable, and E may be arrogant, and F may be romantic or dreamy, G might be selfish, H might be greedy for money or information/knowledge and so on, or cruel, or whatever it is. And, most people have several of these characteristics. So, any number of these might apply in any combination to the people you know. The thing is to see that within you, “the seeing” of these characteristics within (as contrasted with “I” seeing – which will be further developed in later posts), that you may share some or these characteristics. It would not have to be exact, but to just get a sense of the similarity of some of them. It may be that you have less or more, but at least you can see (at least intellectually, partially), that these characteristics run throughout humanity.

[Please understand that labels are not characteristics that define humanity. Thus whatever labels that a person identifies with actually block a person's ability to know who they are. Also, understand that a label is usually something that someone else sticks on others, whatever label that exists, whether some organized group applies to itself or to others. So, the terms "Christian", "Muslim", "white supremacist", national and regional labels, and all the labels that come out of the organized religion of psychology which have found their way into the mindset of millions, and so on.]

Now, when you can sit quietly and see the truth of the above, the whole truth of the above... to see it at a glance within, as it were... the seeing of “what is” true, there will be an explosion inside, a release of trapped energy. This energy will course its way through every cell of your body, and heal any damaged DNA (mitochondrial DNA) that has lived under the illusion that “the other” is separate. These damaged cells will be healed, will be made whole as pertains to this particular insight. After which, there will be a “transformation” at the root, and one will never be able to cause damage or be abusive to another human being, because that would be like harming yourself. You see, when a person kills another person, they are killing themselves. (A word about abuse, for example: if you google “lying”, you will see that it rates no. 1 for every kind of abuse, whether physical, psychological, intellectual, emotional, etc. So when you “lie” to “the other”, you are actually lying to yourself, and harming yourself.)

So, when one has had this full insight, it is known as vipassana, and also known as “I am that”. Now, artists have been known to have some glimpse of truth, which when expressed lead them to fame, etc. But such a partial insight will not initiate the freeing of trapped energy, and while they may become famous for their art, their personal lives may very well be a mess, as there is no radical transformation in their psyche. Having said this, one hopes that at least some of you who read this may have a deeper understanding, at least an intellectual insight (although such an insight is still just partial in itself) into what this aspect of meditation can yield. Of course, meditation covers a broad range of subjects which I will discuss in later posts.

Insofar as I am concerned, I feel very strongly that without such a radical change at the root of one’s psyche, the movement of history will continue to run its course, its downward spiral. It is only this change, this particular transformation, that can affect those around you, because when you change, you cause a change in the human brain. Like a stone thrown in a lake, it causes ripples in the lake, and it affects others. No amount of words, actions, or energy expended in trying to change “what is” happening around us can wholly alter the course of events that are presently playing out around us; it is only when a person changes themselves that events outside of you will move in a new direction. Otherwise and unless there is a radical transformation of the psyche, events playing out can only be considered to be what is known as a “modified continuity”.

So, after having had such an insight, one has the sense of “I am you” as a new way of seeing and living in this world. It is not that Charley is X, Y or Z, but that there is a sense of ‘I am the “youness” of “the other”.’

Having had such an insight, one would not be likely to join any cult and would immediately see cabals such as practiced by Trump, Stone, Barr & Co. as pernicious entities, because they separate and divide humanity into “us and them”; and, because they separate and divide humans, they always cause conflict. During the past century, one could easily see as well that there has been a growing global tendency for people to separate themselves into smaller little gangs; there is the significant rise of the white supremacist movement (white nationalism), and a sad escalation in these incredible divisions, with their resultant conflict and violence. As I see it, there has been an incredible degeneration and deterioration in the human brain, which is almost contagious... like some virus which seems to infect so many people globally.

For example, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is part of this trend, initiated by the British prior to Israel’s independence by the Brits’ insistence on taking a census of people in that area - differentiating for the first time a separation of people in that area into Jews and Arabs, while previously and for 100s of years prior to this moment, these peoples had lived relatively peaceably without making much ado about their backgrounds. This turning point has marked a rather ugly descent there into the unbridled conflict which continues to this day.

Please note that the expression which I used above, “what is”, is central to many Eastern ideas, because it opens a door to truth, and therefore wholeness.

It would be wonderful if you, the reader, could see this, even intellectually (in other words, partially).

[charley]

Firstly, as a small child, you were taught mathematics. The first thing you were taught was simple arithmetic - what numbers are. You were told that the number 1 was called an “integer”. You were also told (and probably don’t remember) that the number 1 was a whole number. You were also told that the number 1 was to be referred to as a rational number. So, this was your first introduction to the word “integer”, meaning whole, rational. From this word “integer” is associated the word “integrity”, which means wholeness, rationality, sanity.

Secondly, and further, there is a secondary meaning implied in integrity - the understanding that the means are the ends. I will explain. As I have read elsewhere, when you take a bucket to the well to fill it with water: if the bucket is dirty, the water you draw from the well will end up becoming dirty - the water you draw will be unfit to drink, it will be toxic. This means that when you use untoward means to get something, the means affect the ends, the end result. Therefore, it is clearly seen that the means define the ends; in other words, the means are the ends.

Now, there are always those kinds of people who have an agenda; and, of course, having an agenda, they would be very fearful of revealing what that agenda is or of anyone discovering what that agenda is. (You may all know the old story of the young kid who saw that the emperor wasn’t wearing any clothes.) Having an agenda that they hide/conceal from others is usually the trademark of someone who knows perfectly well that if others were aware of what their agenda really was, they would be unmasked as the most charming and disreputable people for who they are. Usually full of clever words, such people lie; and, later, when found out, they rationalize, justify, and make endless excuses regarding their progress as they move to get what they want. Moreover, such people never apologize for whatever they get caught with. Their behaviour is akin to the dirty bucket, and constitute the means. It is always interesting to see that such people always think that they can get what they want “by any and all means”. Of course, what they think/feel that they want to achieve is the ends.

And, so, as they progress to their desired goal, they cause a lot of damage, because when using untoward means, they ignore the consequences of their means. In other words, they always cause conflict. And, that is why a person who uses dirty means to get their ends met always causes conflict among others. In other words, they are inherently destructive.

[Please note that the word “progress” actually means - what it originally meant (before those in power altered the word so as to be more palatable to the masses) - entering into the enemy’s camp fully armed, whence its associated word “aggression”.]

It is always interesting that such people - by their cleverness with words - usually attract followers (especially followers who are messed up and needy), who will unwittingly (that is, unwisely) support them because of their conditioning - of their original damage which they had suffered in childhood. Please note that without support, such disreputable people would be found out much earlier. (Remember the old story of the emperor who wasn’t wearing any clothes, and the kid who spoke out the truth - speaking truth to power.)

Most criminals require accomplices. The thing which happens when the gang of criminals is caught is that accomplices (even though their actions in the crime may have been found to be minimal) can be sentenced almost as heavily as the perpetrator of the crime. So, even though the accomplice may protest that they themselves didn’t use untoward means themselves, justice doesn’t see it that way; because, had it not been for their support (however minimal), it is highly unlikely that any crime may have been committed. Insofar as I am concerned, any person who supports anyone who acts in an untoward way is as culpable and as toxic as the perpetrator.

To summarize, such a toxic person will use any and all means to achieve their result; they will slander people, use ad hominem attacks (calling people names), they will try and usually succeed at sabotaging discussions, by using the classic straw man argument (bringing up ideas that have nothing to do with the main subject of the discussion, just to distract others). They will use manipulation, domination, and influence to try and modify another’s understanding of any situation.

Moreover, they consistently draw on opinions to form conclusions. Instead of relying of facts, they prefer opinions, and using the fear that others have of being insecure, of losing security. Moreover, they can even misinterpret facts.

Such people have no problem in muddying the waters (obfuscation), making the issue so complicated as to make others feel inferior and feeling unable or unsure about how to respond, and thus engendering confusion and conflict wherever they find themselves.

It is their pleasure to bait others, to bully them, all to puff up their big ego. Curiously, it naturally follows that they are incapable of restraining themselves.

In general, they always leave a large number of broken people and considerable damage in their wake.

In other words, such people have no integrity whatsoever. They are the toxic people your mama warned you about (or should have warned you about).

Thirdly, integrity also has another rather significant meaning, which derives from the above - that of saying what you mean, and meaning what you say.

Well, trust you have enough for now as to what to think about, to ponder about, to reflect on (all derived from the word "ma", which means to meditate). The word "ma" also provided the English language with another word "measure", which I will discuss in a later post.

Namaste

[charley]

Most people in the West who have access to the internet and who know nothing of meditation will google. Now, considering that such people (especially in the West) have already been “conditioned” to have a mindset that accepts authority as to “how to do” anything. The number of books and ideas disseminated in the West is mind-boggling. So, most people in the West will take knowledge as the means to find out “how to do” any and everything. So, what most people will do is either go to a bookstore, a library, or google information as to “how to meditate”, or even ask someone they know “how to meditate”.

It is a tradition in the East to be skeptical, to doubt, and to question authority. While in the West, the opposite has been inculcated from generation to generation - to accept authority, to put one’s dreams in a “leader”, and to accept what authority dictates.

I must state here that one should never accept anything that anyone states regarding meditation, including myself, unless one has experimented and tried it for oneself. Please always remember that meditation has originated from the Sanskrit word “ma”, which means to think about, to consider, to reflect upon, etc.

Now, one has recently googled the phrase: “how to meditate”, and this is one result:

First, from an online site:

that most impressive word: “mindfulness”

One heck of a word, enough to stun someone who has never heard of that word, and make them think: “Wow, they must know something that I don’t!” Impressive, right?

As an aside, this word/idea comes directly from the Buddha, who is supposed to have said: “Be aware, cultivate awareness, mindfulness.”

Now, mindfulness is nothing more than “the presence of awareness”, and is not something that one can cultivate. So, from now on, I will not use that all too impressive word, “mindfulness”, and will only use the words “awareness” and “aware”. Awareness itself is not a method, in the same way that your heart beat is not a technique to be manipulated, learned, etc.; in the same way, that breathing is not something that an infant must learn, etc.; in the same way that one is aware of some noise, some event, something happening outside of you, and is not something that one can learn. Awareness, like many aspects of being human, is a natural aspect of what it means to be alive. So, I am saying that meditation must of itself be a natural occurrence that cannot be taught or learned.

Second, I also saw the following statement online:

“...we’re learning how to pay attention to the breath as it goes in and out, and notice when the mind wanders from this task”

As you can see, the emphasis in that above statement which I took at random from an online site is on the breathing exercise, and not specifically on the thoughts. Moreover, as you can see from the above, in this technique, one divides one’s attention into two aspects: the breathing exercise and thoughts.

The problem is that all modern systems of meditation try and teach their students “how to” cultivate awareness - as a technique, a method, a system - and therefore, because it is a technique, they must use “concentration” to facilitate such awareness.

I must say here that when there is concentration per se, there is always exclusion, and as I have written about this previously, I won’t necessarily go into it again here at this moment.

Third, from an online site:

“When we pay attention to our breath, we are learning how to return to, and remain in, the present moment—to anchor ourselves in the here and now on purpose...”

The issue that I have here is the idea of the "I" living in the present. This notion has come about from the Sanskrit word “satyabhatana”, which means to live in the present, and it means a mind that is free from the idea of self, either of the past or the future. In other words, a timeless field.

The thing is when a person has an idea of self, that self has originated from the past, and is also imagining some future. Please note that when a person says “I am free” (psychologically), they are lying to themselves, since the “I” contains both the past and the future.

[As an aside, I will state here that the “I” is the self, also known as the “me”, the “i”, the Atman, the big or higher self, the little or lower self, the ego. Unfortunately, in the East and the West, people imagine that all these different words mean different things. The fact is that they all refer to the “i”, words themselves just being referents, and not the thing in itself.]

As you can see, all these techniques have the purpose and goal of not allowing thoughts to prevent the “meditator” from reaching some higher sense of consciousness which is supposedly to be in the “present”, the “here and the now”. That is why most of these techniques suggest some form of “letting these thoughts go”, and passing them by as one is progressing in these methods. So, as you can see and understand, the meditator has a future-projected goal. And, the moment one has a goal in the future, it is the activity of the self. You must understand that as long as the self is actively engaged in progressing along a certain method or technique in order to create some future self that can exist without a trace of the past and the future that there is something inherently flawed and fallacious in this attempt, because wherever you go, you take your past and future with you.

Which brings me to the awful and most dreadful subject of “becoming”, which is part and parcel of the “why” of all these techniques. For the purposes of this particular post, I won’t be going into the subject of “becoming” now in this post, but it will treat it separately in an entire later post relating to having an true insight into it as seeing “what is” false or true in it - in other words having an insight into the truth or falseness of “becoming”.

Fourth, as seen online:

“thoughts” as “distractions”

The main issue that I see with the above approach is that all the thoughts are originating from some part of one’s self, which most techniques ignore, or do not fully understand, or suggest that by separation from these thoughts (which, in the main, are also considered to be “distractions”), one can reach some goal, and in the same way as if one were running some business. Obviously, these thoughts are not from another planet, another person, some alien. They are from you. They are “you”.

Fifth, another ridiculous promise from another site states:

“Eventually, we will be able to stay happy all the time, even in the most difficult circumstances.”

This is an odd statement at best, since it is impossible to be happy at all times, unless you are taking happy pills - the dosage of which usually has to increased over time. But, the fact is that life happens, right? Tragedy can strike. On the other hand, when you are aware of being happy, the happiness ends. To understand this statement, you are well aware that when you are aware that you are angry, the anger ceases. So, what I am saying is that it is impossible to be happy all the time.

Sixth, a I have seen online:

"focus on your breathing and begin chanting your mantra"

Now, the Sanskrit word "mantra" literally means “reflect on not being, meditate on not being or becoming, and wipe away all self-centred activity". So, it is ludicrous to repeat some word, the meaning of which contradicts the very activity of chanting that very word. The repetition of such a word is an activity of the self, the self that chooses to use a word and repeat it, in the hope that the "i" can reach some goal... of oblivion!!! Really!!!????

Seventh, as I have seen online:

“set a timer” when one is to meditate or having a fixed time for meditation...

Now, most techniques suggest a daily routine of x number of minutes, a certain time-frame for meditation, in other words, a routine. This is ludicrous because it suggests that one uses time in order to reach some “timeless” state.

Insofar as I am concerned, the best moment to meditate is when there is a shock, a trigger, something that disturbs you, an important decision that is bothering you, etc. When one uses these opportunities to see “what is” happening inside of you at the same moment of the disturbance, you are using others as a mirror to see yourself, which is the only way to use another human being in a healthy, wholesome way.

So, I am saying that one can be aware of “what is” happening inside of yourself, at that very moment. And, the most that one needs is to be attentive. I have read that attention is considered to be the only virtue. So, what I am saying is: the seeing of these thoughts and attending to these thoughts, and then the following of these thoughts until these thoughts reach their source. In discovering and uncovering the source, which is always connected to some memory that resides within due to some conditioning, one is in a state of meditation. It would be like reading a map, or like reading a book that contains all the pages. Please understand that all the chapters of one’s self are interconnected.

The following of these thoughts to the source is of primary importance. Please understand that the word “discipline” is related to the word “disciple”, which literally means the one who follows. So, what I am saying is to be one’s one disciple, which, of course, completely eliminates the whole idea of needing someone else to tell you “how to meditate”.

Please note that there is no recorded case of anyone practising any technique of meditation that has led to enlightenment, which literally means “to be one’s own light within”.

There is an old saying in the East which says: “be a light to yourself”. The reason that it is so stated is that when one follows the “light” of another, it will only lead to darkness. So, be your own disciple and your own guru, and never follow another, psychologically.
___

Obviously, there are other ridiculous and illogical online statements made by so-called "gurus" that will tell you "how to meditate". And, what I trust you will get/understand/grasp from the above statements is that I am using the idea behind "nirodha" (that is: "negative thinking") to debunk the self-styled gurus that are trying to teach meditation as a method, a system, a path to achieve some goal - as if you are learning to succeed at running some business.

[C0LLETTE]

I am very interested in the writings and teachings of the fine eco-feminist, Vandana Shiva. I find she triggers reflection on deep-rooted beliefs.