Meditation

[Musika]

Is there a role you play as a part within the whole?

In a very general sense, the role is simply that of a (hopefully) cooperative part.

Hopeful in the sense that the quality of the role depends on behaviors or attitides that help foster that connection.

For instance, if I simply say "I am a father", it tells of my role but it doesn't say anything about what sort of dad I am (in what way I am good/bad, effective/useless etc).

 

[spidergoat]

So now the mind (the engine room of desire) has just gone from impure to non-existent ....

None of this language can be precise. But yes, the mind isn't there. Thoughts are there.

Destroying the mind as a category is probably the most severe type of containment one could hope to attempt.

I'm not interested in restraining the mind. Let it do it's thing, I don't care. I know now the brain is just a thought producing organ, and most of it's thoughts lead to destruction.

I conceded at the start that the "mind as enemy" types of meditation offer a modicum of benefit.

I would say they offer no tangible benefit. Thoughts of benefit or loss are what keep us enslaved.

 

[Musika]

None of this language can be precise. But yes, the mind isn't there. Thoughts are there.

Tha language for these things in buddhism is very precise. Its there in their literature. In fact its probably the one thing you can rely on as a constant amongst all the various schools within it.

I'm not interested in restraining the mind. Let it do it's thing,
.

If you truly felt that way, you wouldn't label the mind impure

I don't care. I know now the brain is just a thought producing organ, and most of it's thoughts lead to destruction.

All the more reason not to just let it "do it's thing", I suppose.

Perhaps in this modern world, we have hang ups about the notion of "containing the mind" and feel as if we are blaspheming some unwritten social law.

For the record, the only problems with containing it is that its unsustainable. If however, its the only tools one has available, then by all means apply them .... at the very least, controlling your mind will work wonders for keeping you out of prison ( but then, if thoughts of freedom and entanglement are also to be abandoned, maybe even that is not such a problem)

I would say they offer no tangible benefit. Thoughts of benefit or loss are what keep us enslaved.

In that case, distinctions of freedom or wisdom and entanglement or ignorance are untenable.

 

[Bowser]

Apparently it has more significance for you than it does for me. Meditation is time to be. There's just pleasure in feeling, hearing, smelling, seeing. I hung a wind chime outside the front door a while back. The sound it makes is worth a million dollars.

 

[spidergoat]

Tha language for these things in buddhism is very precise.

That must be why they use metaphors all the time.

If you truly felt that way, you wouldn't label the mind impure

Just using your own language.

All the more reason not to just let it "do it's thing", I suppose.

No, just more reason to ignore most passing thoughts.

In that case, distinctions of freedom or wisdom and entanglement or ignorance are untenable.

I agree. It's all the same.

 

[spidergoat]

I suppose I meditated to understand the nature of mind. But one day it disappeared, and I seemed to function just fine without it. Better, even, like a great weight had been lifted. I even felt physically lighter, like floating an inch off the ground. Eventually, it came back, quietly at first, I could call on it to accomplish a task, but the spell had already been broken. A functional mind asserts itself only when necessary.

I find the metaphor of containment problematic, since it implies effort. But it takes less effort not to think. If you want to get precise, some thinking is, of course, going on, but it's subconscious.

 

[Musika]

That must be why they use metaphors all the time.

They use metaphors because their goals are grammatically negative (eg, nirvana, sunya, etc). As far as defining things of this world (mind, senses, intelligence, desire, purity, etc .... in other words things that have form and quality), they have very specific language (granted they also have a special philosophy to explain why these things have a lesser/partial/non existence .... according to which part of the buddhist apple you are biting from)

Just using your own language.

Its not my language. I didn't invent the notion of purity (of mind) within buddhism. And for that matter, neither did you.

No, just more reason to ignore most passing thoughts.

So some thoughts you do ignore and some you don't. Why discriminate?

I agree. It's all the same.

If that was the case, you would not discriminate in any matter.