Meditation equal spiritual development, Not!

Nei Jia: the Qigong and Taijiquan Forum Qigong and Meditation
1

Here is a thought.

Unspoken assumption accepted by most people is that through dilligent practice of meditation, qigong and martial arts, we not only become better mentally and physically, we also become a better person.

Read this.

"Biofeedback researcher and pioneer Elmer Green, formerly of the Menninger Foundation, part of the well-known midwestern psychiatric research and treatment center, has been involved for decades in investigating the mind’s ability to control bodily functions, emotions, and consciousness. He has conducted many experiments on psychically gifted individuals, Indian yogis, and a Native American medicine woman. In his estimation, paranormal abilities have nothing to do with spiritual development. For example, in the early 1970s Green conducted experiments on Swami Rama of the Himalayan Institute. Green found that the Indian swami was able to produce, among other things, an atrial flutter at will (a condition in which the heart rate flutters at four or five times its natural rate but doesn’t pump blood), create a difference in temperature between the left and right sides of the palm of his hand, go into a sleep brain pattern while staying conscious and able to report what was being said in the room, and give indications of psychokinetic abilities. The swami’s abilities, however, seem to have been matched by the size of his ego. In fact, Green recalls Swami Rama saying, “The greatest problem a person can have is ego. And nobody knows that better than I.” Says the professionally active, 78-year-old Green: “There’s a Hindu adage: `Go through the garden, but do not eat the fruit.’ Swami Rama enjoyed the fruit.”

Some of that forbidden fruit was sex with female devotees. According to a 1987 dissertation, a 1990 Yoga Journal article, and court documents related to two lawsuits filed against him, Swami Rama apparently chose to sexually exploit a continuous stream of female followers beginning almost as soon as he arrived in the United States. "

Link to the full article is below. It’s tard bit long and it’s about sexual abuse by so-called spiritual leaders so I extracted the part which is related to the main point. The site itself is also very insightful if you have interest in religion.

http://www.american-buddha.com/soul.betrayal.htm#SOUL%20BETRAYAL

Any comment.

2

Greetings..

The problem is not with sexual abuse.. it is the values we arbitrarily assign to sex.. odd, how we seek to be “one with Nature” then take a most natural act and demonize it.. the real issue is in prejudicial attitudes.. From a Tantric perspective sex itself is a gateway to higher consciousness.. That someone might exploit their reputation to acquire sex is a signature of the person, not of the system (ie: Meditation, QiGong, etc..). More concerning is the conflicts created by differing sexual values as viewed from diferent belief systems.. Like Lao Tzu said, let the people govern themselves, this applies to sex as well..

Why is it that the Guru or Master is chastised for their natural acts, and the student seen as victim? Each is capable of cognizant thought and ultimately makes an individual choice.. Sex between consenting adults is just that, no force, no coercion.. but, when someone’s feelings or expectations are not fulfilled they seek restitution (vengance)..

The Article referenced attempts to shift character flaws of the individuals to the systems they purport to teach.. again, i can point out as many authentic practicioners as someone can point out those with character flaws.. also, keep in mind that perfection is a high standard for anyone.. what is most evident is that the faithful and true practicioners go un-noticed, it is only the charlatans that get press and it’s not good press..

Question authority, think for yourself and.. if you choose to follow nature, be sure you understand ALL its implications..

Be well..

3

I think you are missing a point here. Since the article deal with sexual harrasements, child abuses and person in position of authority exploiting people under his care, the problem is hardly a matter of “the values we arbitarily assing to sex”. If you explore the site itself, people who are caught out are not just Chiristian clergy but also Buddhist monks and Hindu Yogi masters as well.

Anyway, as far as I know, these people’s meditative skills are higher than most of us in this forum ever going to achieve. But that didn’t stop some of them to engage in unethical, or in rare case, criminal acts.

4

such a sad truth, but true.

Fortunately, they are fortunately outnumbered by the good spiritual people. Karma is karma, magical (a matter of speaking) attainments doesnt equate to spiritual development. HHDL always says, the ultimate path to enligtenment is that of unconditional love for all beings.

Easy to say, almost impossible to do in samsara.

5

I didn’t read that article but I agree that meditation doesn’t help you spiritually. Meditation is great but it does not develop your soul at all.

Methods of prayer is what develops you spiritually. You can feel energy coming to the top of your head and tingle throughout the body with prayer and eventually see the Light…and ask the light to come to you for a small awakening or enilghtenment.

6

Spirituality/Enlightenment is an attitude or focus of the mind, a perspective of mind, NOT an experience, action or activity.

7

I dont’ agree but oh well. Everyone has their own ideas.

8

Spirituality/Enlightenment is an attitude or focus of the mind, a perspective of mind, NOT an experience, action or activity.

Can you prove this?

9

Originally posted by Scott R. Brown
Spirituality/Enlightenment is an attitude or focus of the mind, a perspective of mind, NOT an experience, action or activity.

???

10

These are not MY ideas. These are long established concepts that are pervasive in spiritual/religious teachings throughout the world. I have found that most who post on these BB are limited in their education upon these matters.

Yes, I can prove it!! I have formulated rational arguments and cited teachings from well known and recognized masters in the past to demonstrate the truth of this assertion. Most individuals cannot see the forest for the trees, however.

I have learned that individuals need to learn the truth on their own. The “Way” can be pointed to by myself and others, but the “Path” must be tread by each individual for himself.

Most individuals are trapped by the Matrix, so to speak. We are all bound in maya (illusion) by our preconceived notions and ideas about life and “Truth” and how we think things “should” be; this limits our ability to see (perceive) the “Truth” clearly and without distortion. Plato recognized this tendency of the mind to remain trapped by preconceived notions 2,500 years ago when he wrote, “The Allegory of the Cave”, found in the Republic. “The Truth is Out There!!”, but it must be directly apprehended with the mind without the obstruction of preconceptions. The actions and activities we perform such as rituals and meditation, etc. are tools we are to use to assist us in “Piercing the Veil” of illusion. The transformation is one of the mind; the actions and activities we use to assist us may be discarded when the goal is attained.

Just as a small indication that these are well-known concepts I will cite a few statements made by Hui-Neng, the Sixth patriarch of Zen. Comments that indicate this principle can be discovered in most religious writings no matter what the religious structure may be. Investigate, read and study for yourself.

“At that time Bhikkhu Yin Tsung, Master of the Dharma, was lecturing on the Maha Parinirvana Sutra in the Temple. It happened that one day, when a pennant was blown about by the wind, two Bhikkhus entered into a dispute as to what it was that was in motion, the wind or the pennant. As they could not settle their difference I submitted to them that it was neither, and that what actually moved was their own mind.”

“We can hardly classify the Dharmas into ‘Sudden’ and ‘Gradual’, But some men will attain enlightenment much quicker than others.For example, this system for realizing the Essence of Mind Is above the comprehension of the ignorant.
We may explain it in ten thousand ways, But all those explanations may be traced back to one principle.
To illumine our gloomy tabernacle, which is stained by defilement, We should constantly set up the Light of Wisdom.
Erroneous views keep us in defilement While right views remove us from it, But when we are in a position to discard both of them We are then absolutely pure.
Bodhi is immanent in our Essence of Mind, An attempt to look for it elsewhere is erroneous.
Within our impure mind the pure one is to be found,"

“To seek enlightenment by separating from this world Is as absurd as to search for a rabbit’s horn.
Right views are called ‘transcendental’; Erroneous views are called ‘worldly’.
When all views, right or erroneous, are discarded Then the essence of Bodhi appears."

“We should work for Buddhahood within the Essence of Mind, and we should not look for it apart from ourselves. He who is kept in ignorance of his Essence of Mind is an ordinary being. He who is enlightened in his Essence of Mind is a Buddha.”

“Bodhi is to be found within our own mind, And there is no necessity to look for mysticism from without.”

All citations are taken from the A.F.Price and Wong Mou-Lam translation.

These are enough for now. An argument can be made that all spiritual/religious traditions have their own methods, however at the core the inner transformation is always the same process; The direct apprehension of the “Truth” with the mind. The teachings vary based upon culture and the manner of expression by the teachers. All true teachings point to same goal and achieve the goal through the same process. There is only one process no matter how it is clothed.

11

Hmmm, I thought the whole idea of meditation was so that one can get to the truth without too much of philosopising.

Anyway, your argument indicate no method of distinguishing who got the Truth and who hasn’t. If you say those who haven’t got the truth won’t know the truth, that is totally circular way of justifying the truth. It’s like saying I know God exist because I believe s/he exist.

Duh, are we going to have looooong thread about philosopy?

12

You cannot prove spirituality through words. The univerise was created by someone or something much greater and the human mind cannot begin to understand how this place was created, let alone…use words to argue about enlightenment.

Eeven those zen masters or whatever… meditation is meditation, and will not give you enlightenment. Enlightenement comes from prayer to a higher power..being…whatever you want to call that person to give you energy . which will open all your chakras and a lot more.

but whatever, no point in this discussion, “proofs” references, blah blah blah

13

I neither formulated an argument, nor made a claim to distinguish between those who KNOW and those who don’t. I simply made a statement and supported it with statements made by a well known and highly regarded Zen master. There are plenty of men wiser than I who have sought to identify the characteristics of those who KNOW and those who do not; Hui-Neng is one of them, St. Paul was another.

One of the entertaining games played by Zen masters is referred to as Dharma play. A Zen master can always recognize another Zen master and the two will tease and joke with each other in an interplay of roles attempting to cajole each other into making a mistake and to test their understanding against one and other. Those who understand recognize those who do not understand and those who do understand. There are clear signs that are recognizable by all who have been able to pierce the veil of illusion; again, not my assertion, but one that is found in many various forms of spiritual literature.

Your assertion that it is a circular argument to say that God exists because I believe he exists is not entirely accurate. The argument appears circular based on this simple statement. However, if we understand that everything is MIND, then the fact that “God exists because I believe he exists” becomes a statement of fact rather than belief, wherein fact is defined as “true belief’ as opposed to “false belief”. This is because God is a projection of my own mind. My experience of God will be limited by my own preconceived notions conditioned by many factors including my level of intelligence, my level of study, my level of insight and my conditioning as a result of living within a /the Matrix. This is because my mind and perceptions will be limited by what I believe them to be capable of, which I learned, or have been told, from living within a system of thought that defines them for me, i.e. “The Matrix”. Even if I attempt to breach the walls (metaphorically speaking) of the Matrix, I will still be limited by my own preconceived notions or definitions of the new experience. If I encounter knowledge or experiences that do not fit in with my preconceived notions and beliefs I will have the tendency to react in a number of predictable ways.

1) I may discard the information outright if it challenges my worldview. If I have a need for security in my worldview I may not want to have my equilibrium disrupted. It is easier to just disregard any new information that causes me discomfort.

2) I may attempt to squish or fit the new information into my present worldview. To do this I must ignore certain seemingly contradictory facts in order to make the information fit into my present worldview and consequently lose or distort some or all of the information.

3) I may attempt to redefine my worldview taking into account the new information and thus provide myself with a new structure or Matrix with which I will now define my life and experiences. This method is most preferable however; I am still trapped within a Matrix or worldview.

This brings us to your assertion concerning meditation:

I thought the whole idea of meditation was so that one can get to the truth without too much of philosophizing.

There are many benefits of and purposes for meditation, but to address your particular purpose;

Yes, the idea here is to directly perceive the true reality without intellectual comment, evaluation or categorization. This method of meditation is designed to get us beyond the Matrix or structure within which we have mentally confined ourselves. We are training our mind to directly perceive the Truth. This is why it has been said that the true reality can be learned, but not taught. It can be directly pointed too, but not described. A description can only give a portion of what it is and that portion can be clung to unreasonably and cause doctrinal arguments that lead away from the Truth. We often confuse the description with the thing, but the description is not the thing. The description can confine us in the Matrix if we confuse the description with the real thing. The purpose of Zen, originally, was to point directly to the true reality in order to help the student free himself from the Matrix of definitions and limitation.

I have used the metaphor of an orange in the past. You can read about someone else’s description of what an orange tastes like, or you can taste it for yourself. Zen seeks to have each individual taste the orange for their self.

14

Greetings..

Truth is the experience itself.. not the words, labels and concepts we assign to it.. to quiet the mental chatter (monkey mind) allows the experience to by-pass the mental filter and impact the spirit/soul, becoming a part of “who we are”, rather than another entry into the mental filing cabinet.. That is the goal of true meditation, visualizations make good seers, chanting makes good chanters, etc.. but, the quiet mind is not troubled by preconceptions, it is present in unfolding experience..

But, to address the opening post.. i still assert that the article and the attitude it purports is a poor rationalization intended to advance someone’s agenda.. to assert that meditation or religion leads to abusive acts or flawed personalities based on high profile examples is a leap of logic.. statistical sampling of a large cross-section of practicioners may help shed light on the subject.. but, i suggest common-sense should readily identify the error of the article’s proposition.. Has such events and acts occurred? Sure. but, how many non-acts, how many genuinely improved spiritual beings have benefitted from the same paths..? It’s like watching a movie, we see the movie, we don’t see the director, the cameraman, the stage hands, etc.. If someone shines a spotlight on a negative aspect of something, try looking in the shadows for the whole story..

Be well..

15

LOL, if a slight breeze sends you reeling…can you claim to have any foundation?

Anyway, spirituality, enlightenment, have general meanings and specific meanings. The general meanings are built on an unstable context (foundation) and are only suitable for misleading people. The specific meanings refer to experience and activity. IMHO. :wink:

16

LOL!! I could ask the same question of your foundation. Your comments make no sense at all.

As for my statements, they are based upon well established principles of psychology, sociology and philosophy. It is easy to criticize what you have not educated yourself to understand. The lack of understanding a concept does not invalidate the truth of it.

The concepts of general and specific are a long established study of philosophers as well.

General comments or ideas are not for the purpose of misleading the ignorant. They are used to give an overall view and a wide spectrum of coverage that is designed to point in the right direction without providing precision.

The problem with generalization is, because of its breadth, it is easier to miss the mark and get lost in the confusion of information; thus missing the point. Its benefit is that it provides a larger picture or context within which to integrate concepts and ideas. We can see how specifics fit into and interact with a larger integrated whole.

Specifics have the benefit of providing us with precise definitions and descriptions. The result is a comprehensive understanding of details. The problem with specifics is that we can become lost in the minutia. Specifics confine the perspective to such a narrow view that the larger context and meanings (the holistic view) and how information is integrated into the larger picture can be missed.

Generalization and specifics are two necessary sides of the same coin. However, generalization can lead to confusion and the obfuscation of clarity while specifics can lead to narrow-mindedness and nit-picking. As with all things a balance between the two is necessary to provide one with comprehensive understanding.

17

Greetings..

Generalizations? Specifics?.. all in all, still the abstractions of words and concepts.. truth is derived from experience, one can describe their truth to me all day but until i experience it, it is an abstraction.. even then, if i experience it with prejudice i will miss its essential meaning..

Still, the thread begs the question does Meditation equal spiritual development. In short, no.. it equals nothing but meditation.. it is the intention of the meditator that effects purpose to meditation.. another question might be, does the the undesirable qualities of some practicioners invalidate the system of meditation? No, it only highlights the qualities of the individual(s)..

Can meditation provide a path to higher spiritual development? Of course, again it will only reflect the intent of the meditator. Canned philosophical arguements obfuscate the simplicity of direct experience.. it’s like using words to describe words.. one of my best teachers rarely spoke (he didn’t really speak english well), but through example and repitition he transmitted much. One of his favorite expressions was “talking isn’t doing, too much talk, not enough do”…

Be well…

18

Hi Bob,

We all experience truth with prejudice. We all have our own preconceived notions that color and filter our experiences. Thus the individual interpretations and expressions of our experiences remain abstractions. Our minds automatically categorize our experiences in order to allow us to understand them and to fit them into the context of our lives. The purpose of Zen is to realize the Truth directly without abstraction; a state of mind that very few attain. If we acquire this ability our experiences must still be communicated if we wish to share them with others. The act of communication creates this abstraction you wish to avoid. The purpose of communication is to share ideas and experiences. For the purposes of individual spiritual attainment and the realization of Truth, direct experience is necessary; to communicate, abstraction is necessary. Abstraction is part of the process of life and cannot be completely avoided nor should it be attempted. Abstraction is merely a tool we use to communicate and learn.

Your characterization of “canned philosophical arguments” as obfuscating direct experience is rather narrow-minded. Words communicate ideas, albeit imperfectly, and “canned philosophical arguments” are not meaningless just because one is not inclined to understand or accept them. Many people enjoy philosophical discourse and find personal benefit and growth from such activity. However, just because one is philosophically clever does not necessarily indicate spiritual understanding; in addition just because one has had a direct mystical experience does not necessarily confer any special authority either. Not all individuals come to spiritual matters in the same manner. To suggest that direct experience can be attained in a simple manner is simply not true; if it was easy than the spiritual attainment we are discussing would be much easier to accomplish.

I agree one can become lost in abstraction. The continual dissection and analysis of ideas, concepts and experiences “can” (not “does”) lead to the obstruction of Truth, however, any form or method one chooses to affect his spiritual development can be overdone and abused as well. Every Path has its pitfalls and can potentially create forms of obstruction the individual aspirant must overcome.

I agree with your points concerning meditation. An action alone does not bestow anything special. It is the purpose and intention behind the action that will affect the results. At any rate it is the transformation of our perception, our perspective, with which we view life, truth, etc., that is the root of enlightenment and spiritual development. Meditation is merely one of many tools that can be used to affect this result.

19

Scott R. Brown

Hi Scott,

Largely, i agree.. the issue i most often see is people willing to accept the experience of another as their own.. indeed, we must communicate with words, but.. the words are meaningless without reference to a similar experience.. words elicit recollections of similar experiences or describe experiences not yet obtained.. too often people accept the description of an experience not yet obtained and bypass their own encounter, the encounter that validates “their truth”.. An example of this was the analogy of treating Chi as you would water, during DanTien rotations try to sense the Chi as swriling water in a bowl, then releasing it in the appropriate direction of an intended application.. after repeated attempts the resulting experience was quite rewarding but my own analogy was more like swinging a rock in a sling..

As much as anyone, i enjoy good philosophical discussions.. but i don’t accept assertions without personal verification.. as long as we see “words” or rituals as pointers for our own experiences, then the discussions have merit.. “canned philosophical arguements” are just that, regurgatations of someone else’s account of their experiences.. spontaneous philosophical discussions force us to reach into our own understandings, to intuit or gain insight by removing the preconceived boundaries of classic philosophical rhetoric.. “narrow minded”? the intention was “open minded”, avoiding the well worn path of previous circular discussions..

Spiritual attainment? it is as easy as simply doing it, as difficult as “trying” to do it.. Unfortuneately, our mentors have brilliantly indoctrinated us to over-complicate our natural inclinations to the point that we struggle against ourselves.. Now, i may be off-base, but.. the direct experience has not been overly difficult for me to acquire (just quiet the mental chatter).. it is in the future use of that experience that suffers the manipulation of mental contrivances, that is the challenge i am currently considering.. how to recall the experience without the associated prejudice.. (aaarrgghhhh)..

Be well.. and, thanks for the dialogue..

20

Originally posted by cha kuen
[B]You cannot prove spirituality through words. The univerise was created by someone or something much greater and the human mind cannot begin to understand how this place was created, let alone…use words to argue about enlightenment.

Eeven those zen masters or whatever… meditation is meditation, and will not give you enlightenment. Enlightenement comes from prayer to a higher power..being…whatever you want to call that person to give you energy . which will open all your chakras and a lot more.

but whatever, no point in this discussion, “proofs” references, blah blah blah [/B]

I should point out to you that your approach to meditation is a type of meditative practice more commonly seen in judo-christain-islamic tradition and sharmaic tradition such as Shinto. Unfortunately, judaism and christianity has largely lost the tradition of mysticism but large majority of islamic sect maintain tradition of mysticism known as sufisim.

Main idea of sufisim is to attain the state of annhilation of self. Once this state is attained, whatever uttered by this person is considered to be divinely inspired. This could be religious or artistic. The most famous islamic poet in the West, Rumi, was a sufi. He produced incrediblely beautiful poetry in massive amount because every now and then, he entered a trance and start to utter string of poetry which his students recorded.

Most notable thread of this approach to martial arts is Ueshiba Morihei who founded aikido. He was involved in a shinto sect which empasised heavily on the aspect of shinto meditation. He also claimed that once martial artist attain this state, all his martial technique are divinely insipred which has no form or shape.

If you practice Buddhism or Hinduism, assumption is that divinity is withing each individual rather than without.

To be honest, whether you feel dinivity is coming from outside or inside is matter of semantic but that is my $0.02.