On Apr 3, 2009, at 11:13 AM, raunchydog wrote:
What to do? Swami Rama is dead and Vaj has gone into silence
contemplating a body part. Since I can't get them to answer my
questions, I'll answer myself. Anyone can chime in. Inquiring minds
want to know.
I was out of posts.
A couple of questions for you RD, while we're at it:
Do you understand the difference between nondual contemplation and
introspective samadhi-style meditation?
Which represents "the highest first"?
Do you understand the different styles of samadhi in nondual
contemplation and introverted samadhi and the different results of each?
How are these practiced in the Vedanta tradition?
What are the advantages of each?
What are the disadvantages of each?
On Apr 3, 2009, at 11:13 AM, raunchydog wrote:
What to do? Swami Rama is dead and Vaj has gone into silence
contemplating a body part. Since I can't get them to answer my
questions, I'll answer myself. Anyone can chime in. Inquiring minds
want to know.
Q. If you had a chance to teach millions of people meditation or a
handful of monks contemplation, would you prefer teaching many or a few?
Why do the "millions" get the choice of meditation, but monks get the
choice of [Vedantic?] contemplation? Not a fair question since you're
offering two different things to different people. IF it is an
effective meditation method that can reduce negative or destructive
emotions and increase compassion, THEN it would be worthwhile to teach
it to others. The ideal principle is to teach methods based on the
person, not on the technique.
Q. If you prefer teaching only a few monks contemplation, what is the
relative benefit to creating a peaceful world compared to teaching
millions meditation?
Again, you're offering two different things to different people. You'd
be better off finding a good form of meditation that reduces negative
emotions and increases empathy and then as soon as people are able or
interested wean then towards non-dual contemplation (the principle of
the highest first).
A. Everyone wants a peaceful world but it seems to be in our DNA to
fight to establish dominance for me and mine. Although torn between
altruism and self-interest, TM makes it possible to resolve our
conflicts by finding common ground in the consciousness we share as
humans. Since nothing else has ever worked, if TM can create a
peaceful world, and I believe that it can, why not give peace a
chance? A few monks contemplating can help create world peace but
millions practicing TM will carry the day. If there's a better, easier
way to create world peace, I'd like to hear about it.
Unfortunately TM results in a form of meditation that tends to
activate the egocentric circuitry of the brain. What we need is
meditation forms that are not religious (like TM) and activate the
allocentric brain circuitry like Mindfulness Meditation which is free
or very inexpensive. When allocentric meditators are shown very averse
imagery, the compassion amplifying parts of the prefrontal cortex
"light up". In others, this circuitry simply shuts down and goes dark.
We don't need people who shut down when people are suffering and we
don't need people who just sit around and talk about themselves and
their "experiences" 30 some years after the fact. Therefore, if we are
interested in world peace, not world piece, we need people to be doing
meditation methods that are free or cheap, eliminate negative,
destructive emotions and increase empathy (i.e. enhance our mirror-
neuron circuitry)
Q. Do only monks practice contemplation because controlling the mind
is a difficult task that most people would bail on?
What makes you think monks only practice contemplation? What makes you
think that householders don't practice nondual contemplation? Vedanta
and Buddhist nondual contemplation are quite popular, although they
work best for people who already can calm their minds (through
whatever method).
Q. Do you think contemplation is superior to meditation? Why?
It ultimately depends on the capacity of the person. But yes, it is
according to Vedanta and Buddhism (and probably some other traditions
as well!). Having said that, if you have a deep enough technique, you
can be enlightened using any number of techniques, even introspective
samadhi--but such a technique has to really lead to bonafide samadhi,
not light trance or self-hypnotic states!
Q. If one practices meditation and experiences samadhi, after some
time of witnessing the duality of self and non-self, there is a
natural and spontaneous desire to unify self and non-self. Love
naturally draws the meditator toward unity, effortlessly. Seems to me
"Thou are That" would be the result in either meditation (easy for
many) or contemplation (difficult for many). What say you?
"Thou Art That" is one of the techniques used in nondual
contemplation, Vedanta style. It is not known to be taught
"spontaneously". Maharishi said many untrue or very misleading things.
It sounds to me like you fell for one since it appealed to you. It
told you "don't look elsewhere", "we have it all": the Mahesh Popeil
Swiss-Army meditation knife, and you believed it. It's never a good
idea to simply believe what we are told because the guy giggles and is
dressed like someone important. Learn to question authority RD.
