Mediataion, Some Answers

[zinnat13]

I have seen here at and and many other places on the net too, that people are by and large confused about meditation. They neither know what exactly it is nor aware of its methodologies. They are also unaware of its physical and mental impacts. Besides that, i also found that these so called formal meditation centers/sites also do not offer anything substantial or really helpful.

As i am personally involved in this, and quite seriously too, since last 30 years or so, thus thought that perhaps my experience in this field may provide some help to those who are also engaged in it in one way or other, or want to engage in it. And, those, who are not engaged, may be able to get the clearer picture of what actually it is, and what happens in it and why too.

Before i say anything, please realize that i am not trying to promote anything, especially any particular faith/religion. That is not my intention at all. My one and only purpose is to explain meditation, as a pure mental exercise, nothing else whatsoever. And, no religion/faith has any copyright on meditation either. Having said that, i may be forced to use some religious terminology while explaining some details, because of the non-availability any other alternative regarding that phenomenon.

It would be slow thread. I want to go in the details as far as possible and as far as i know, but slowly, step by step, otherwise it would not serve much purpose. I do not want it to be a monologue either. Posters are welcome to inquire further, question and even criticize. I do not know all, but certainly know enough to provide help, especially in the initial phases.

Next post will follow shortly.

with love,
sanjay

[AlexW]

Hi Sanjay,
Looking forward to reading your next post.
I am happy to discuss it as well.
Regards
Alex

[zinnat13]

Hi Sanjay,
Looking forward to reading your next post.
I am happy to discuss it as well.
Regards
Alex

You are most welcome.

with love,
sanjay

[zinnat13]

Before anything else, the first thing to learn is to establish direct two way connection between conscious and subconscious mind. Here is very simple method of it and this will help in many other ways too.

All one needs is 20 min in 24 hours for this.

When going to the bed in the night, do not sleep at once. Devote roughly half an hour to yourself daily. When one is going to sleep, after finishing all your work, he/she just to down calmly for some seconds there on the bed and close your eyes. Let some breaths go in and out smoothly then try to remember what you did during the whole day from waking up till the bed. Start from the event one, whether important or not. Then try to remember your state of mind while doing different actions, like whether you had a fight with your boss or employees, love or quarrel with you spouse, etc. Go in the details and try to see the motives behind your actions, examine your frame of mind doing a particular action, and, also try to judge whether your actions and intentions were right or not, and then sleep.

That is all one has to do.

But, please understand that though it looks very simple, but it is not. It would be somewhat thrilling for some initial days, but, sooner or later, that moment would come when your mind would refuse to stick to it and tells you quietly that let us bunk it today. And, if you fall in the trap, it would argue more profoundly next day for avoiding it by telling you that you have some more important things to think about, so why engage in this useless exercise. And, if you make a gap of some days, then you have to start all over again.

Just remember two things.

Never open your eyes doing so otherwise that system would not be activated and eat slightly less at dinner to avoid falling asleep immediately.

with love,
sanjay

[zinnat13]

I think that those who are interested, must have been read it by now, thus it is time to resume.

After reading my suggestion, the first question that must have been crossed to everybody's mind, is why do all this, in the first place? What is its purpose, why it is necessary, or how it can be helpful in any way? What it has to do with the meditation? Is it meditation, and if not, what else is meditation?

Let me address these questions to the best of my abilities: what i experienced in person, what i derived via those and what i learned through other sources.

The first thing that is required while discussing anything is its definition. One cannot know for what exactly one is looking after unless he has its that much clear definition, which is enough to recognize that particular thing.

Thus, first of all, we have to define meditation, but, the problem is that the meditation neither can be defined nor understood without understanding our mind, thus, we have to go though those details of the mind which are necessary to understand meditation.

As most of the intellectuals agree that mind is basically works in two ways: consciously and subconsciously, or we can say that our mind is divided into two basic parts: conscious and subconscious. Conscious part/working or the mind is that phenomenon, with which we mostly determine as ourselves. We have direct and total control over it. On the other hand, we consider that our subconscious mind is not in total control of ours. It rather learn/experience though conscious mind, derive conclusions autonomously, and impose those on the conscious mind. This theory is by and large true.

But, there are some more details, which are very pertinent here to understand both of the working of the mind and meditation as well.

The fact of the matter is that our subconscious is even more dominant over its counterpart that we assume. It is subconscious that takes most of our decisions, though mostly indirectly. The act of thinking/learning is mostly done by the subconscious mind only. Being in the direct control of the body, conscious merely implement the decisions of the subconscious. What we consider as habits, are nothing but the default/permanent decisions of the subconscious, and that is precisely what forms what we use to term as will. And, for whatever reasons, whenever conscious goes against those default/permanent decisions of the subconscious, we call it will power. And, that is precisely why it is called free will. It is called free only because it is still within the capacity of the conscious, but this does not mean that it very easy to implement, though the term free gives somewhat impression. Free merely means available, nothing else.

And, meditation is all about this will power. In simple terms, meditation is nothing but breaking that default dominance of the subconscious and making it listen to the conscious.

One more important thing to understand here is that though conscious and subconscious use to interact constantly, but it is mostly one way traffic: from subconscious to conscious. The duty of the conscious is mostly limited to inform the subconscious, what conscious has experienced through the body. Or rather, the system works in such a way that being in a kind of witness/spectator position, subconscious is automatically aware of the experiences of the conscious. Conscious cannot hide anything from the subconscious, but on the other hand, the majority of the working of the subconscious remains hidden from the conscious.


Again, meditation is all about removing this one sided veil and allowing conscious not only witness but also interfere in the working of the subconscious by converting this one way traffic into two way.


I think that is enough for one post.

with love,
sanjay

[AlexW]

Let me tell you how I would define a few of the terms you are using.

Mind:
Mind is a concept employed to point to the "collective of thought" - it is, truly, nothing but one thought arising now, and then the next and then the next. That these thoughts belong to an individual "mind" is pure speculation (so far nobody has found this entity "mind", have they?)

Conscious mind:
Is nothing but a thought talking about other thoughts (or about direct experience - e.g. the color of a flower, the sound of a car, an idea I had yesterday...).

Unconscious mind:
Is non existent. Thought either arises or it doesn't. That there is some kind of "storehouse" of unconscious/un-thought thoughts is simply fiction.
This doesn't mean that past conditioning, knowledge acquired via learning, can not result in certain automated (re)actions - but, to me, calling these conditioned reactions (and I am not distinguishing between mental and physical reactions - they are more or less the same) the "unconscious mind", is a misnomer. I would rather simply call it "natural intelligence" - a system reacting to stimuli, based on its programming.

Meditation:
Is simply being consciously present - it is the opposite of being lost in thought.
It could be described as the perfectly clear position of the untouched witness, in and as which all experience (including thought) arises and vanishes.
For me, meditation is not about removing a veil, and even less about interfering into anything, it is simply pure, unencumbered being.

[zinnat13]

Let me tell you how I would define a few of the terms you are using.

Mind:
Mind is a concept employed to point to the "collective of thought" - it is, truly, nothing but one thought arising now, and then the next and then the next. That these thoughts belong to an individual "mind" is pure speculation (so far nobody has found this entity "mind", have they?)

Conscious mind:
Is nothing but a thought talking about other thoughts (or about direct experience - e.g. the color of a flower, the sound of a car, an idea I had yesterday...).

Unconscious mind:
Is non existent. Thought either arises or it doesn't. That there is some kind of "storehouse" of unconscious/un-thought thoughts is simply fiction.
This doesn't mean that past conditioning, knowledge acquired via learning, can not result in certain automated (re)actions - but, to me, calling these conditioned reactions (and I am not distinguishing between mental and physical reactions - they are more or less the same) the "unconscious mind", is a misnomer. I would rather simply call it "natural intelligence" - a system reacting to stimuli, based on its programming.

Meditation:
Is simply - it is the opposite of being lost in thought.
It could be described as the perfectly clear position of the untouched witness, in and as which all experience (including thought) arises and vanishes.
For me, meditation is not about removing a veil, and even less about interfering into anything, it is simply pure, unencumbered being.

Alex,

What you are saying is a common intellectual position and you have every right to stick to it. But, what i am telling you is not any intellectual position based on what i have read or think but based on what i experienced in person and what i conscluded from those experiences.

To the points you raised-

Subconscious mind is very much present and anyone can realize it by using some mental tricks and analysis.
Meditation is not merely being consciously present But much much more than that. What you are suggesting is merely a starting point of meditation and it goes a long way beyond that.

With love,
sanjay

[AlexW]

What you are saying is a common intellectual position and you have every right to stick to it. But, what i am telling you is not any intellectual position

Anything that can be said is an "intellectual position" - it is based on the framework of belief one employs.
All interpretations result from, and are flavoured by, previously acquired knowledge.

what i am telling you is not any intellectual position based on what i have read or think but based on what i experienced in person and what i conscluded from those experiences

The same is true for me. I am not repeating book knowledge - I simply tell you my "intellectual position" about what I found over years of investigating direct experience (which includes sense experience as well as thought).

Subconscious mind is very much present and anyone can realize it by using some mental tricks and analysis.

If you require "mental tricks" to realise something then maybe this trick has been fooling you into believing it is actually real?
As you say you have found the "Subconscious mind", can you please let me know what it is made of? How do you experience it? Do you see it? Smell it? Or can you only think about it?

Meditation is not merely being consciously present But much much more than that.

Sure - it has a different meaning for everyone. To you it might be a tool to reach a certain state, to achieve something special - to me it is not.
To me it is simply being perfectly present (and not caught in thought world).

What you are suggesting is merely a starting point of meditation and it goes a long way beyond that.

Meditation normally starts as a mental effort, there is a "one" that is on a path to "perfection".
But perfection is not reached by the "one" but by seeing through the idea of there being a separate one in the first place.
And yes, I do understand the process of first calming the mind, making it one pointed, before it can actually come to rest on its own - this is the path of meditation, but the result is: "Simply being perfectly present now"
This being present is not something one does, there is no mental "doer" anymore, it is not an effort at all - it is simply being present.

If you use meditation to gain conceptual knowledge, to solve the mysteries of the "unknown" (or whatever else), then, to me, this is not meditation, but only a mental exercise.

[zinnat13]

What you are saying is a common intellectual position and you have every right to stick to it. But, what i am telling you is not any intellectual position

Anything that can be said is an "intellectual position" - it is based on the framework of belief one employs.
All interpretations result from, and are flavoured by, previously acquired knowledge.

I agree with that interpretation.

what i am telling you is not any intellectual position based on what i have read or think but based on what i experienced in person and what i conscluded from those experiences

The same is true for me. I am not repeating book knowledge - I simply tell you my "intellectual position" about what I found over years of investigating direct experience (which includes sense experience as well as thought).

Subconscious mind is very much present and anyone can realize it by using some mental tricks and analysis.

If you require "mental tricks" to realise something then maybe this trick has been fooling you into believing it is actually real?
As you say you have found the "Subconscious mind", can you please let me know what it is made of? How do you experience it? Do you see it? Smell it? Or can you only think about it?

I think that 'Tricks" may not Be right choice of word. I should rather choose "Experment". Anyone can experience it usinf very simple methodolohy. Let me tell you how I came to this conclusion.

when i started meditating and tried to focus on a particular thing, the mind refuses to stick to any particular thing for long. Then, the question arises, if i am willing to focus on one thing, who is this other one in my mind who is not following my will? If the mind is also mine like my other body organs, Then why is it not doing what i am asking it to do?

let us examine it from a differnt perspective.

Say, I want to hold in pen in my hand. As i think it, my hand pics a pen and holds it. The hand will hold it as long as i want it to hold. I think that it can do that for hours without any problem. But, if i also own my mind as much as my hand, why mind refuses to hold a particulat thought as lond i want it to hold? Why it does not stick onto my desired thing for long like my hand?

The only explanation that is possible is there must be something in the mind that is beyond my control.

Can you come up with any other explanation?

Meditation is not merely being consciously present But much much more than that.

Sure - it has a different meaning for everyone. To you it might be a tool to reach a certain state, to achieve something special - to me it is not.
To me it is simply being perfectly present (and not caught in thought world).

What you are suggesting is merely a starting point of meditation and it goes a long way beyond that.

Meditation normally starts as a mental effort, there is a "one" that is on a path to "perfection".
But perfection is not reached by the "one" but by seeing through the idea of there being a separate one in the first place.
And yes, I do understand the process of first calming the mind, making it one pointed, before it can actually come to rest on its own - this is the path of meditation, but the result is: "Simply being perfectly present now"
This being present is not something one does, there is no mental "doer" anymore, it is not an effort at all - it is simply being present.

If you use meditation to gain conceptual knowledge, to solve the mysteries of the "unknown" (or whatever else), then, to me, this is not meditation, but only a mental exercise.

For the rest of ypour points, I thnk it would be more appropriate to wait for some more posts.

With love,
sanjay

[AlexW]

when i started meditating and tried to focus on a particular thing, the mind refuses to stick to any particular thing for long. Then, the question arises, if i am willing to focus on one thing, who is this other one in my mind who is not following my will? If the mind is also mine like my other body organs, Then why is it not doing what i am asking it to do?

let us examine it from a differnt perspective.

Say, I want to hold in pen in my hand. As i think it, my hand pics a pen and holds it. The hand will hold it as long as i want it to hold. I think that it can do that for hours without any problem. But, if i also own my mind as much as my hand, why mind refuses to hold a particulat thought as lond i want it to hold? Why it does not stick onto my desired thing for long like my hand?

The only explanation that is possible is there must be something in the mind that is beyond my control.

Can you come up with any other explanation?

The explanation is, that there is no separate entity, no "me", that is actually in control of anything.

The "me" that is looking for control is nothing but a thought - but thought cannot control other thoughts, and, if you experiment in more detail, you will find that it also cannot control the body.
Body movement is purely reactive (not controlled) - it reacts to sense stimuli as well as stimuli presented by thought - it can learn to react to certain stimuli (sense or thought) with specific patterns of movement, but the movement itself is not controlled by the mind (or anything else). If it were, you would have to have full control over hundreds of muscles, coordinate their contraction - a task much too complicated for thought...

Also, there is nothing "in the mind" that is beyond "your" control, simply because there is no entity "you" in control in the first place.
Mind (or rather: thought) simply comments, it provides interpretation and meaning but it will never control anything.

For the rest of ypour points, I thnk it would be more appropriate to wait for some more posts.

OK, sure.

[RCSaunders]

Before anything else, the first thing to learn is to establish direct two way connection between conscious and subconscious mind.

Since there is no such thing as the, "subconscious," this is all nonsense.
-- No Subconscious: There Is Only Consciousness
-- Dr. Edith Packer's, Lectures on Psychology: The "Subconscious" Fallacy

[Veritas Aequitas]

Before anything else, the first thing to learn is to establish direct two way connection between conscious and subconscious mind.

Since there is no such thing as the, "subconscious," this is all nonsense.
-- No Subconscious: There Is Only Consciousness
-- Dr. Edith Packer's, Lectures on Psychology: The "Subconscious" Fallacy

You are too presumptive and you are insisting everyone must adopt your assumption, i.e. for every concept there must be some kind of real 'existent'.

Not sure with Zinnat's views, but in my case when I mentioned 'unconscious mind' I am not claiming there is an independent thing called a mind that is unconscious.

What is 'mind' is abstracted from the empirical evidence of human beings whose actions are mainly controlled by activities in the brain which on average has 100 billion neurons each with up to 10,000 connectors [synapses].
Can you imagine the combination and permutations of the neural connectivities that are triggering human actions?

What is the conscious mind is attributable to human actions represented by the respected neural activities which one is conscious of.
If one is conscious and has intention to buy an apple with supporting decisions the activities of the neocortex and prefrontal cortex, that is attributable to the conscious mind.

When one is asleep and dreams, that is the activity of the unconscious mind and this is supported by the relevant set of neural connectivity.
If one sleep walks, that is the activity of the unconconscious mind.
Thus there is a whole load of human activities that are triggered into actions in a person without the person being conscious of it.
In a way, these activities are triggered via a bypass of the conscious mind i.e. mainly the neocortex and prefrontal cortex.

A 2012 review of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies shows that subliminal stimuli activate specific regions of the brain despite participants being unaware.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subliminal_stimuli

In this case, subliminal stimuli activate the subconscious mind as represented by the related neural connectivities and the mental resultant.

Therefore you should not dismiss the use of the concept of the conscious mind and unconsciousness based on your limited bias.

As qualified above, the 'conscious mind' and 'unconscious mind' are valid and useful terms for psychology, psychiatry, neuroscience, cognitive science, meditations, etc.
The objectivity of this two terms are traceable to the respective active neurons within the brain which are the similarly centered for all individuals.

[RCSaunders]

Before anything else, the first thing to learn is to establish direct two way connection between conscious and subconscious mind.

Since there is no such thing as the, "subconscious," this is all nonsense.
-- No Subconscious: There Is Only Consciousness
-- Dr. Edith Packer's, Lectures on Psychology: The "Subconscious" Fallacy

You are too presumptive and you are insisting everyone must adopt your assumption, ...

Good grief, no. I have no interest at all in anyone else adopting my views. If everyone else wants to swallow the lies of the pseudo-sciences of psychology, sociology, and various other con-men, I really don't care. Believe whatever your teachers tell you too. It's easier then thinking for yourself.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Since there is no such thing as the, "subconscious," this is all nonsense.
-- No Subconscious: There Is Only Consciousness
-- Dr. Edith Packer's, Lectures on Psychology: The "Subconscious" Fallacy

You are too presumptive and you are insisting everyone must adopt your assumption, ...

Good grief, no. I have no interest at all in anyone else adopting my views. If everyone else wants to swallow the lies of the pseudo-sciences of psychology, sociology, and various other con-men, I really don't care. Believe whatever your teachers tell you too. It's easier then thinking for yourself.

OK, you are not insisting but philosophically your argument is immature and false.

How is psychology and neuro-psychology is con-game?

Psychology is the science of behavior and mind.
Psychology includes the study of conscious and unconscious phenomena, as well as feeling and thought. It is an academic discipline of immense scope. Psychologists seek an understanding of the emergent properties of brains, and all the variety of phenomena linked to those emergent properties, joining this way the broader neuroscientific group of researchers. As a social science it aims to understand individuals and groups by establishing general principles and researching specific cases.

Psychological theories are evidenced based and its theories are justified based on Scientific Methods thus objective.

Objectivity is intersubjective consensus and comes in a continuum from low objectivity and high objectivity depending on the testing methods that are used at its repeatability.

The difference between general Science and psychology is merely general science has a larger range of higher objectivity as compared to psychology with a lower range of higher objectivity.

True there are cases where psychology is abused at the fringes and that also happened with Science where scientists manipulated their evidences to justify their theory.

What is critical is followers and users must be knowledgeable of the limitations of each field either from general science, Einstein's Theory of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics and similarly within the various branches of psychology.

For you to dismiss psychology and sociology as con-games reflect badly on your intelligence competence.

[RCSaunders]

How is psychology and neuro-psychology is con-game?

--Neurology is a physical science. The study of the physiological brain and nervous system.
--Psychology is a pseudoscience that pretends to study by sceintific means (the examination and study of physical evidence) what cannot be so studied, because it cannot be seen, heard, felt, smelled or tasted or detected by any physical means--human consciousness has no physical attributes. Every single thing psychology teaches is simply made up.
--Neuro-psychology is a bastard science that attempts put over psychological nonsense justified by true science, neurology.

I don't care if you want to believe in psychology. I've provided links to articles that document both the history and nature of psychology, all of which you can verify for yourself. Whether you do or not, is your business, but I wish you luck in your delusions.