Alright then,
David writes:
I used to practice conventional meditation
and writes of the Budda
And so he finally decided to practice the rare meditational technique
In the interest of clarity, I would state that the only "type" of meditation I have ever understood as meditation is that work of dismantling the mind's sicknesses as described in this oldest extant description of the Buddha's experience. So in the framework of Buddhism, it is the only "convention" I know.
But that's alright; we can use your words. I have also rejected what you call "conventional" meditation, and I have stated with plain language and simple implication (again and again) that it is not about 1. breathing/the breath 2. zoning out 3. getting a buzz on 4. reaching altered states 5. peacing-out 6. transcendental this and that 7. escape of any kind.
In turn, I have stated in plain language that it is about the
work of coming to know the nature of one's own mind -- its sicknesses and tape-loops and obsessions and justifications; and its conceptual entanglements that base themselves upon these. Not by category or received acceptance that this is happening, but by the actual
seeing of one's
own. I have not described this work as relaxing or peaceful in any way, even if keeping to your even-breathing will help calm and concentrate you as you
see, get sick of, and eventually uproot these things that stand before one's sight, preventing them from seeing what is right in front of their faces (reality). I have also stated quite clearly that it takes a long time, and few since the Buddha's exceptional experience have disagreed.
again:
I used to practice conventional meditation
when I was younger (in my early twenties). But then I began to experience numerous altered states of consciousness in all sorts of circumstances, no matter what I was doing - mainly as a result of my constant intellectual striving for ultimate understanding, which was, at that point, my way of life. And as my mind was already pretty relaxed and focused to begin with, I saw no need to continue (formal) meditating.
This appears to tell us that the "altered states of consciousness" were the result of the "constant intellectual striving for ultimate understanding," and so does not speak well of the "constant intellectual striving." And when you say your mind was "already pretty relaxed and focused," you are skipping over the the
cleaned mind, that, what you call the "rare" type of meditation is aimed to achieve.
As for "formal" meditation, I have not said one word about the necessity for postures, time-frames, chanting, proper locations -- in short, nothing about these little accouterments usually associated with people who approach meditation from (and for) the
form and not their own contents of their own minds.
Kevin is more direct in addressing that which I've put here in front of our faces as meditation, and so I can more directly see his rejection of the Buddha's experience this way:
All these demons must be dealt with, but they can't be defeated by rooting them out one by one in some kind of painstaking effort.
But the cart is still before the horse here:
Once their illusory nature is realized, and if there a determination to do anything about it, the demons and little sicknesses vanish.
You describe here the result of learning the nature of one's own mind without first looking at its actual contents (meditation).
and here (the cart is also before the horse):
Yes, it was only right at the very end that he worked out how to meditate. Then he was enlightened.
One last time: The purpose of meditation is to
learn the nature of one's own mind. Once one is sick-of, able to stop ruminating in the little sicknesses, obsessions, tape-loops, and justifications (the "past/future"), one can begin to see the present more clearly, and once one can see what is right in front of one's face, one has arrived to, has a chance to stay in, reality.
If one cannot see what it is in front of one's face (for example, the direct manner I have described meditation), then one must be suspicious that there is still a little sickness, obsession, tape-loop, or justification soiling the view. Reject on these clean grounds (as Kevin has begun to do) and I will be able to more clearly understand you. Otherwise, I have to deal with someone else's smeared windscreen.
If it is not apparent yet, I will connect some dots: my original advice to NickOtani as philosopher is akin to the advice here, in going it alone. From the "entrails" up. There is, pardon me, a lot of shit down there to overcome.
As for the philosophy and the work of reasoning, I am up to my ears in it everyday! But where I see reality, is right in front of my face, and not in these rare and handsomely decorated rooms of reason in my mind. Goodness knows, though, how often I enjoy sitting in them :)
