> > I only counter the notion here, that Japa during > > activity divides the mind. So I gave examples, > > puja, you said flying itself, bliss-technique, > > childrens technique, to show that this is not > > necessarily true. There are actually more examples > > from the TM movement... > > turquoiseb : > If one believes, as I do, that we all have free will > and that what we do is firmly in our own control, it > makes sense to become aware of the samskaric impulses > that *influence* our actions and our decisions... > So, you're thinking that we are free, and we can do as we please, and that we can cause change at will.
We are not responsible for our actions, there are no laws of nature. Would you please demonstrate this by going up to a very high mountain. Then take a look at the clouds up in the sky - now which would you trust? The earth at your feet or to float up to the clouds above? > Not to mention that as far as I could tell, no one > suggested "japa" (the repetition of mantras) as an > example of doing something concurrently with activity > anyway. It's possible that someone else brought japa > up, because after all we're dealing with a group that > finds it impossible to conceive of any meditation > practice that *doesn't* involve mantras. But I never > suggested such a thing, and don't practice it. > > Back in my original post, I only suggested that there > were mindfulness exercises that I sometimes perform > during activity, be that walking, working, or whatever. > Far from "dividing the mind," their purpose is to help > the practitioner interface more deeply in the activity, > by recognizing samskaric thought patterns as they arise, > and thus becoming aware of them more quickly, before > they become samskara-driven actions. > > If one believes, as I do, that we all have free will > and that what we do is firmly in our own control, it > makes sense to become aware of the samskaric impulses > that *influence* our actions and our decisions more > quickly, and thus more quickly avoid those we believe > to be negative impulses, and prefer those that we > believe are more positive impulses. > > I can certainly see how some who basically refuse to > perform such self-analysis would consider this "divid- > ing the mind." They tout "naturalness," which in this > context seems to be synonymous with "Doing whatever > the fuck my first angry impulse tells me to do." :-) My > experience is that this is basically a fine technique > for prolonging samskaras indefinitely and making sure > that they are never eliminated. > > That said, I'm not a big fan of "japa" myself, either. > I rarely use mantras when meditating, and am not likely > to ever do so during activity. Unlike many here, I don't > believe much in the "magical power" of mantras, period. > To me they're just nonsense words, a lot like repeating > "Duh" to oneself over and over, and often with the same > or similar effect. :-) > > Far more productive, in my opinion, is to perform a little > simple self-analysis, more along the lines of, "Oh. That > driver made a right turn from the left lane and almost > hit me. I can feel a surge of anger attempting to arise. > Do I have to allow it to? No, I don't. Instead of lean- > ing out of my window, shaking my fist at him and shout- > ing insults at him, I can simply DROP IT completely > and get back to enjoying my day." Then I DROP IT and > get back to enjoying my day. The next time this happens, > I don't even have to go through these thought processes; > the impulse to become angry arises, I recognize it early, > and I DROP IT. > > That in my opinion is FAR from "dividing the mind." It's > more along the lines of "using the mind" and one's will, > as opposed to not engaging the mind at all and falling > prey to one's first impulses. >
