420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
Comment
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
Meditation by Phoebe Goodforth - Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:45:31 EST ID:/XQxUE3u No.204775 Ignore Report Quick Reply
File: 1453218331804.jpg -(552057B / 539.12KB, 1920x1200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 552057
Hey guys I'm just starting to learn how to meditate. So far I can go up to 3 minutes and after that I can't focus any longer. But, I'd say I'm starting off good.

How many of you here meditate on a daily basis? In what way does it help you? What is your favorite type of meditation?

I'm learning sleep meditation and zen. I want to broaden my horizons and love myself again. With this meditation I hope to achieve a higher level of being and be able to like myself and have a positive outlook on life.
>>
Cornelius Wissleridge - Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:08:15 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.204777 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>So far I can go up to 3 minutes and after that I can't focus any longer.
What does that mean, exactly? Focus? What do you focus on for 3 minutes?

>How many of you here meditate on a daily basis? In what way does it help you? What is your favorite type of meditation?
I meditate daily because it's a great way to better organize and compose yourself. As far as types of meditation, I usually just get high and sit with my many cats. Stroking them is a second nature to me. I also sometimes talk aloud when I'm meditating on something really hard.

>I'm learning sleep meditation and zen. I want to broaden my horizons and love myself again. With this meditation I hope to achieve a higher level of being and be able to like myself and have a positive outlook on life.
I can't say for sure whether or not meditating can help you love yourself. That's totally unique for everyone.

Meditation should be natural, in my opinion. Your meditation sounds more like a mission than a lifestyle. Happiness isn't a mission, it's a lifestyle. Same with loving yourself.
I think if you really want a positive outlook on life and you really want to love yourself, then all you need to do is accept all of your own flaws and the flaws of your life and the world around you and try to understand why suffering and pain are necessary and important. In this world, I believe that a person cannot be happy until they settle their unhappiness. Once you've dealt with all the things that make you unhappy and understand why they're important you'll find yourself living in an entirely new world where death and decay do not scare you but progress and joy excite you. Happiness for the simpleton comes easy; ignorance is bliss. But for those whom want bliss without ignorance, they must first overcome all the things that bring the opposite of bliss.

I'm happy because I have suffered so much. My youth was bombastic; so much rage, so much hatred, so much mental anguish. And then came the physical anguish; before I knew it, I was crippled. An entire year flew by as I laid in my bed looking like a corpse, huffing gasoline and butane and stuffing my face with wasabi. So much screaming, so little human contact, no affection, no sex. But then one day everything just sort of clicked. I gave up on happiness, but not life. And then, I found happiness. Giving up on happiness and constantly trying to overcome my crippling physical pain showed me a new way of living; living humbly and piously. Soon I was thankful for everything in my life; the comfortable home, the clean water, the safety. And then I became thankful of other people; their smiles, their politeness, their usefulness to me in my time of need.

We humans take so much for granted. We are so unhappy because we do not understand the beauty of what we have. And sadly, it is an understanding you must experience, through pain; I do not believe it can be learned without the sensations, the experience, the feelings of pain and suffering.

Ever seen that episode of South Park about freemium gaming? Where Satan explains to Stan why everyone is miserable due to dopamine imbalances?
>>
Sidney Niggerway - Tue, 19 Jan 2016 16:50:51 EST ID:ENMEIEDX No.204780 Ignore Report Quick Reply
What does meditation have to do with philosophy? Try /spooky/
>>
Betsy Grandgold - Tue, 19 Jan 2016 22:11:18 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.204786 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204780

It has plenty to do with philosophy, especially eastern philosophy, and really nothing to do with the paranormal
>>
Fanny Gondletut - Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:47:33 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.204790 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204786
Excuse me while I meditate. I need to find that ghost in my house. That's what meditation is for.
>>
Jenny Mubblefire - Wed, 20 Jan 2016 21:22:36 EST ID:/XQxUE3u No.204804 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204790
Meditation is not about being able to see the paranormal you ignorant fucktard. It's about reaching a higher level of being. It is therapeutic for the mind body and soul. Especially people with mental illness such as myself. Don't knock until you've tried it.
>>
Ian Pullyshit - Wed, 20 Jan 2016 23:21:35 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.204806 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204804

The post was sarcastic.
>>
Phyllis Gavingback - Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:51:27 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.204809 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204806
Oh how I love a good LOL. But I mean I guess he's got a handicap or something so maybe he had a hard time distinguishing my sarcasm so I'm not gonna knock him for it.

>>204804
Lol dude I meditate daily and it has nothing to do with looking for ghosts. But would I call it 'reaching a higher level of being'? Maybe, but I'd word it differently. I see meditation as nothing more than a mental exercise that improves clarity and awareness. I'm sure it could help with mental illnesses and I truly hope it continues to help you with yours. I used to have a few mental illnesses, but then I gave up on my ADHD meds and started smoking a ton of pot and then a few years went by and I was suddenly a shit-load more neurotypical, which feels great because I can finally converse with other human beings in ways I thought were impossible 5 years ago. But now I suffer from an auto-immune disease; life can be a real bitch. Stay strong, my brother.
>>
William Nickleforth - Mon, 25 Jan 2016 01:31:21 EST ID:W0P1cCLo No.204853 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204809
The government wants you to be calm so that HAARP can work its "magic on my magic" <wink>

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rog8ou-ZepE
>>
Hannah Bardson - Tue, 26 Jan 2016 04:09:33 EST ID:RwWa1tSR No.204887 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I really want to start meditating again. I've been suffering a crazy existential crisis for 3 years and no matter what I think or what I do I can't help but feel terrified of life, death, time, history, space, etc. I think meditating into different planes of consciousness will help me appreciate all this.
>>
Angus Duffingbanks - Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:12:02 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.204890 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204885
Lol the guidance councilor? I love Clerks; really deep dialogue. It's funny, I was just chatting up my Dominatrix friend at a bar and I was telling her just a week ago how I went from a Dante to a Randal. But anyway, I mean I'd have to see some sources on that one. I consider meditation to be a good mental exercise so I find it hard to believe it's detrimental. Besides that, people meditate differently. Sometimes I meditate with no thoughts, sometimes I meditate with a ton of thoughts.
>>
Angus Duffingbanks - Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:48:42 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.204893 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204887
>different planes of consciousness
lol. Dude that's something I've only heard druggies talk about. I'm not gonna tell you that it doesn't happen, but I will tell you I've never had it happen (except for one time I was ODing on some research chemicals someone haphazardly gave me but I won't count that since it's drug induced and I was mentally obliterated).

So tell us about your existential crisis?
I'm terrified of the thought that I'll either cease to exist permanently at some point or will exist permanently.
But I mean Cartesian Anxiety is something common in first-world humans. It's literally something you just have to get over; it's not beneficial at all, and no answer you obtain (unless it's a false one) will make you feel better about it.
Maybe check out Absurdism, a concept written about by Albert Camus. I think it touches on a lot of things that you're interested in, mainly how to stem off this existential angst.
>>
Sidney Gickledane - Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:31:54 EST ID:r6hc42TD No.204895 Ignore Report Quick Reply
OP here.

I have still been practicing meditation. I am making some progress and now I understand why you guys say that I shouldn't have to actually focus and concentrate on one thought or emotion; let it happen and move on. A day or two ago while I was practicing I saw something with my eyes closed. It was a silver figure with shadows where his eyes should be. I know the meaning of it now. I'm becoming aware of myself and I think this will make me learn more about my inner-self. That silver figure meant that I am an open canvas which I think means that I need to start living life and get out of my comfort zone and become the person who I'm truly meant to be.

What kind of meditation do you guys practice?
>>
Betsy Grimridge - Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:58:26 EST ID:W3x70PbR No.204910 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204895
I don't meditate but I do sit down and face a wall for 20 minutes with my eyes almost closed nearly everyday.
>>
Polly Clenkinlock - Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:15:59 EST ID:yKLWUodd No.204911 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204893
Plato talks about different planes of conciousness.

Heigel does, kierkagaard, Nietzche, and Kant do as well.
When you start examining the contents of your conciousness you get cognition about cognition or metacognition even without drugs
>>
A Wizard - Tue, 26 Jan 2016 20:42:25 EST ID:/qIPrPet No.204912 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204893

Most traditional schools of magic forbid the use of many drugs during initiatory phases, BECAUSE they intend to teach methods to induce similar states of mind without the drugs, and don't want the students entering them out of order and then highbabbling the wrong shit and fucking up their heads.
>>
Wesley Gorringmare - Tue, 26 Jan 2016 22:46:16 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.204916 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204895

>I have still been practicing meditation. I am making some progress and now I understand why you guys say that I shouldn't have to actually focus and concentrate on one thought or emotion; let it happen and move on. A day or two ago while I was practicing I saw something with my eyes closed. It was a silver figure with shadows where his eyes should be. I know the meaning of it now. I'm becoming aware of myself and I think this will make me learn more about my inner-self. That silver figure meant that I am an open canvas which I think means that I need to start living life and get out of my comfort zone and become the person who I'm truly meant to be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makyo
>>
Martin Perringset - Wed, 27 Jan 2016 02:35:57 EST ID:wwj6NBm6 No.204919 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204895
>>204916
yeah op, it definitely sounds like a makyo although i never heard that word before.
ok, heres how you meditate: sit, close eyes. thoughts and visions will appear, let them go, new ones will appear, let them go. dont try to force anything, just let your thoughs pass, dont get carried away with them
>>
Walter Hurrydale - Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:20:10 EST ID:r6hc42TD No.204926 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1453900810535.jpg -(195936B / 191.34KB, 752x1334) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>204916
>>204919
That sounds right and scary at the same time. Thanks for enlightening me and giving me insight on this phenomenon. I know what to look out for now.

I guess what I saw was more like a ghost than demons. How do I leave this makyo if I am not paying attention to my mind and I end up back in there?
>>
Wesley Gorringmare - Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:46:00 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.204927 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204926

I doubt it was a ghost or a demon. I imagine they're just images from your subconscious, like a waking dream. That's a total guess though.

>How do I leave this makyo if I am not paying attention to my mind and I end up back in there?

Like the other person said, just let it go like you would anything else that enters your mind and move on.

My advice is to find yourself a legitimate meditation teacher (likely at some sort of Buddhist/Hindu temple, not a new age crackpot) and listen to what they say.
>>
Walter Hurrydale - Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:17:26 EST ID:r6hc42TD No.204929 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204927
I am practicing zen meditation. I've looked into reiki meditation a bit. Sometimes I'll practice meditating to Tibetan singing bowls music on YouTube.

You could be right. But, I've never seen anything like that before.
>>
James Migglechidge - Thu, 28 Jan 2016 07:54:37 EST ID:/XQxUE3u No.204942 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1453985677206.jpg -(169612B / 165.64KB, 640x1136) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
best meditation practice I've had yet. I was able to go for a longer time of meditating. Anyway, I started to see with my eyes closed, a beach and someone walking up to me along with being inns room with a long corridor. To each side were these beings who were blue and had a regular body. But, all of them had an elephants head. Isn't their some god or something that is similar to that? Finally, I had some other thoughts that are personal.

Overall, great experience. Haven't been stuck in a makyo since yesterday.
>>
Martha Brishsare - Thu, 28 Jan 2016 14:34:15 EST ID:wwj6NBm6 No.204944 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204942
here's an exercise for you, try to make sense of what you are seeing in this video: https://youtu.be/SCE-QeDfXtA?t=83
yes, youll see dogs, eyes etc. its not important. dont get stuck in the imagery
>>
Hannah Wollerhine - Thu, 28 Jan 2016 23:37:32 EST ID:wwj6NBm6 No.204948 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204944
i thought about it today and i think its a bit like this: the brain gives you suggestions on what to think based on how likely it is that you need to think those thoughts. similarly to googles word suggestion. it does this to be as energy efficient as possible. to not think about any of the suggestions seems for the brain to be waste of energy.
>>
Wesley Piblingbury - Fri, 29 Jan 2016 01:56:49 EST ID:W0P1cCLo No.204949 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204948
I think your the Dino unbeliever!!!
>>
Phyllis Sappergold - Sat, 30 Jan 2016 04:41:02 EST ID:+DzashRl No.204958 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204893
>So tell us about your existential crisis?

Well much like you, I find the thought of either not existing forever OR existing forever terrifying. Both are crazy concepts to me, and sadly, one of them is true. I just can't wrap my head around it. I know there would be no point to life if we just lived forever. Death gives us meaning, death is not the "end" but just a new phase in our energies. We were nothing for billions of years beforehand, and will cease to exist for billions of years afterwards. Our time on Earth is not even remotely a pin-drop in the overall life of the universe. We are SO insignificant yet we everything we do, the way we act, the way we perceive ourselves... we make ourselves out to be the centre of the universe. The most important thing in existence. Yet we are such NOTHINGS. Obviously this isn't a groundbreaking concept or anything, but I'm just so overwhelmed by how insignificant we are.

We live our lives. We feel these intense emotions, have huge aspirations and dreams, form long-lasting relationships, build families and change society... and it all means so much to us. It all feels so grand and important. But when I try to put us in the scope of the universe I find it almost impossible to quantify how insignificant we are. That image of the "observable universe" freaks me out. Like if planet Earth and human society and history is of this magnitude to us, can we even BEGIN to comprehend what life is like elsewhere!? Of course we can't. The very size of the universe is something we can't even fathom. Life is just something I can't fathom. And I know there's no point trying to grasp it because we as humans will never understand.

That's the crux of it I suppose. I can't stop thinking about how 2,000 years ago was actually a really short amount of time. How 3,000 years into the future will be a really short amount of time. And for that whole time, I will be a non-existant thing. And forever and ever. Oh god, I'm making myself anxious thinking about it so I might leave it here. But yeah... shit's crazy. I have friends who are totally ok with dying. Not worried at all. I envy them so much. They tell me "how can you be scared of nothing? Think of life before you left the womb, do you remember that? No? Well that's what dying will be, how can you be scared of that?" How can you NOT be scared of that? How can one go from something as beautiful and amazing as living life, to mere nothingness? My only wishes are for my parents to grow into their 80s at least and die peacefully, and for me to potentially live past 100 and die peacefully. I want to live my life as much as possible so by the time I'm old I'll WANT to die, I'll have had enough of living and want to enter my eternal sleep... That's all that keeps me from going insane really. The thought that if I lived my life as best as I can, when I grow old I'll want to pass on.

I feel a bit depressed now. Don't mean to hijack this thread but you did ask and I do like sharing it because I don't really have anyone else to talk about it with. I'm going to meditate now. I think tapping into that "nothingness" of your mind when you meditate, that will help ease my anxieties... Tuning into that formless energy should help one feel their place in the universe. I dunno. Time to give it a shot.
>>
Reuben Packlestone - Sat, 30 Jan 2016 12:14:11 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.204960 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204958

If it makes you feel better, I've heard plenty of older people talking about how they're "ready to go" and the like. You cling to life now because you're still young and haven't lived enough yet. So go live; the rest will take care of itself.
>>
Nigger Happerkodging - Sat, 30 Jan 2016 12:19:07 EST ID:fqcz0pLm No.204961 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204960
>I've heard plenty of older people talking about how they're "ready to go" and the like.
Yeah, because the agony of life is unbearable at that age. When everything hurts and you don't even have the luxury of thinking properly, death sounds like a good idea.
>>
Reuben Packlestone - Sat, 30 Jan 2016 14:49:39 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.204962 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204961

Not every old person has major physical or mental breakdowns though. I can't speak from experience obviously but I can't even imagine doing this whole life thing for 500 years. I don't think I'd want to.
>>
Nigger Happerkodging - Sat, 30 Jan 2016 15:12:41 EST ID:fqcz0pLm No.204963 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204962
>Not every old person has major physical or mental breakdowns though
They do, just not sudden ones. There are no strong old people. There are no sharp old people.
>>
Reuben Packlestone - Sat, 30 Jan 2016 15:26:22 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.204964 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204963

Well, yeah. But they can still be mobile and doing things, just not as well.

What I'm getting at is I doubt that maintaining the vitality and ability of a 20-30 year old would be enough to make people want to stick around for millenia
>>
Frederick Cobberfon - Sat, 30 Jan 2016 20:56:45 EST ID:fqcz0pLm No.204967 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204964
Well I'm 20-30 and I want to stick around for millenia, why wouldn't I?
>>
Rebecca Fangold - Sun, 31 Jan 2016 00:28:36 EST ID:nmUQgXEH No.204969 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204963
>>204967

Well no shit, it makes sense to you because you're 20-30. You're at your peak.

But when you're dying, sharp or not, you know it and whether or not you want to go you're kind of ready as its happening. Generally the only thing that makes people resist this is that they don't want to let down the people that are closest to them.
>>
John Cliffingstock - Sun, 31 Jan 2016 02:41:50 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.204972 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204967

Because you'd probably get bored eventually
>>
Frederick Cobberfon - Sun, 31 Jan 2016 12:03:38 EST ID:fqcz0pLm No.204977 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204972
So the argument against immortality is "You would get bored"
>>
Edwin Nicklefoot - Sun, 31 Jan 2016 12:23:34 EST ID:k5mSodoT No.204978 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204967

Because it isn't fair to the successor generations to have their ancestor lingering over their heads, hoarding the jobs and property and preventing them from getting a chance to rise and shine. We're already seeing this with the Baby Boomers not retiring/dying off, which in some cases is preventing their children from entering the workforce and property market in a meaningful way. The Boomers, having gotten into the market before the price rise, hold most of the property and most of the wealth, and refuse to give it up.
>>
John Cliffingstock - Sun, 31 Jan 2016 14:25:57 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.204979 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204977

Well, would you not? Living in your house, going to work, drinking on the weekends...1000 years. You could take 200 years to live and work in every country in the world for about a year but that would get old eventually too. You up for it?

And yeah we kind of need old people to die off in order for things to progress in any meaningful way. Imagine if we still had people who believed in the divine right of kings still kicking around. You want to deal with Puritans voting? I don't.

I think there's a reason we tend to die at about the time most of us are wrapping up being grandparents. We're not needed any longer.

Clinging to life at the expense of future generations is pretty selfish.
>>
John Cliffingstock - Sun, 31 Jan 2016 14:28:59 EST ID:7sJ/68Ak No.204980 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204979

Also without a relatively quick death there's little reason to do much of anything. Fuck it, why learn to play the piano now? I have 1500 more years to do it. It doesn't matter when or how quickly things happen and everything just stagnates
>>
Frederick Cobberfon - Sun, 31 Jan 2016 15:17:38 EST ID:fqcz0pLm No.204981 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204979
>Well, would you not
Boredom can't really exist when your potential is near infinite.

>You could take 200 years to live and work in every country in the world for about a year but that would get old eventually too
I'd much rather do that and get bored instead of getting just one chance in just one country.

>And yeah we kind of need old people to die off in order for things to progress in any meaningful way.
Alternatively, immortals could be the agents of progress. The above poster makes a good point about property and jobs, but if I were immortal, it would only be a matter of time before I became wealthy enough to simply give a home away every once in a while. Imagine if the youth of today didn't need to worry about rent or morgages? As for employment, after enough time alive I wouldn't even need a job to get by. Just save up for a few years, quit my job and share centuries of experience training and educating the younger generations.

As for voting, I think immortality would be amazing for democracy. The biggest flaw right now is that nobody can see beyond their immediate desires. After enough time on earth you begin to understand exactly how it all works.

The biggest argument against immortality is that it would see an insane inflation in world population, but that is not a problem we cannot solve. Make a law that immortals can't procreate, or a law that allows them another 100 years if they want to have children.
>>
Hannah Sunderfere - Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:04:51 EST ID:V/Li2TYu No.204982 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204981
Elders are just as much agents of progress anyways new ideas come from old people and old ideas as well as young people and nowhere(I.e. Not out of an old idea)
What is learned over time is a whole nother mechanism of thought as well and higher anticipatory capacity as well.

You get crystallized knowledge and it's up to your continued practice to keep the ability to have fluid intellegence active.
>>
Nicholas Sottingfield - Mon, 01 Feb 2016 01:16:26 EST ID:nmUQgXEH No.204983 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204981

Wouldn't it be the opposite? You wouldn't have the sense of time that you have in this reality.
>>
A Wizard - Mon, 01 Feb 2016 01:41:34 EST ID:OGmKKYhX No.204984 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204982
Whoa
-Neo the matrix
>>
Nigger Billinglock - Mon, 01 Feb 2016 07:53:14 EST ID:xWdZfKYd No.204989 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204984
you now know kung fu
>>
Fucking Chirryworth - Mon, 08 Aug 2016 20:09:48 EST ID:dqSZ8H/H No.206485 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204926


this image gives me good feelings
>>
Nigel Penkinspear - Tue, 09 Aug 2016 15:00:01 EST ID:hvs4h/ox No.206491 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204984
Neo is one spelled backward
>>
Simon Murdwill - Tue, 30 Aug 2016 16:30:56 EST ID:L/GJR7oy No.206663 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1472589056546.jpg -(18342B / 17.91KB, 388x480) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>204984
>>204989
>>206491
What if I told you that I am your father, Harry?
-Spock
>>
Samuel Hommlemure - Wed, 31 Aug 2016 19:40:40 EST ID:SjHOMJsR No.206676 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1472686840296.jpg -(20144B / 19.67KB, 320x240) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
The best part of being the one is that you can see Trinity's tits anytime.
>>
Jenny Chirrykeg - Fri, 02 Sep 2016 07:59:25 EST ID:1Q/GWSJx No.206678 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>206676
She was really more of an ass girl.
>>
Phyllis Demmleched - Sun, 04 Sep 2016 01:15:14 EST ID:0aDGMcny No.206691 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>206491
no its not, it's one with the first letter as the last letter...
Eno is one spelled backwards, you know, like the ambient music guy?
>>
Basil Feffingfoot - Mon, 05 Sep 2016 07:53:47 EST ID:KHq6GlIc No.206698 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>206691
Oh my god.... The matrix suddenly makes so much more sense
>>
Fuck Gandleforth - Tue, 27 Dec 2016 18:21:37 EST ID:/XQxUE3u No.207516 Ignore Report Quick Reply
damn its been a while since i made this thread (I'm the OP).

i understand meditation and zazen (study of the self) better than i did back then. I'm finally starting to understand myself and what it means to be in the present, in the here, in the now. don't dwell on the past because the past can't be fixed. as for the future, what you do in the now determines your future. stick with the present as it will bring you happiness. that is what I've learned about myself and life over the past year since i started doing this and still fixing most of my life with what i learn.
>>
Nigel Wevingwod - Wed, 28 Dec 2016 00:20:25 EST ID:XWuxdlQi No.207518 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1482902425710.jpg -(316737B / 309.31KB, 1101x1600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
tl;dr https://www.dhamma.org/en/about/vipassana

Yo, I know I'm late to the party but you should check out vipassana. I went to a meditation retreat when I was in college, we stayed for two weeks. And for two weeks we did nothing but sleep, eat and meditate. It was wonderful. It was also scary as fuck. We were not allowed to interact or even make eye contact with the other attendees. During my time there I felt awesome, but I also felt very disturbed. This retreat was nice though because we also learned a bit about buddhism, such as fun stories and whatnot. Food was also awesome, and the whole thing was free.
Anyway, the way we were told to meditate was to be in a completely dark room, free from any extraneous sounds. As you sit there, in a comfortable upright position, you're suppose to focus on the very subtle feeling of your breath from your nose on your upper lip. After days of focusing on just that sensation, you're suppose to start slowly sensing yourself from your feet up to your head, and back down etc. I mean, it's pretty complicated and I can't describe it in a good way, but the first part, about focusing on that breathing sensation, really helps. You're also suppose to clear your mind of any thoughts. But, the thing is, thoughts will arise. Think of all your feelings, thoughts, experiences, etc. as a large tree. This tree has beautiful branches, but it may have some rotten roots (awful thoughts, experiences, feelings, etc.). This form of meditation is suppose to help you remove these rotten roots so that you may live a more peaceful life. So yeah, awful thoughts may surface, but as they do you just keep focusing on that sensation on your upper lip, and those awful thoughts will be put to rest.
I met a lot of great people at this retreat. One girl said it helped her overcome her awful childhood. She was often told she'd never amount to nothing and was physically abused. Sadly I never really meditated after this retreat :\ I might start again though. My partner is deeply disturbed by his existentialist problems, and I'm not sure where to begin with helping him. He's extremely intelligent, and while he considers himself an Absurdist, he is deeply disturbed by the idea that the only thing that is true is Nothing. But yeah, hopefully we can start meditating again.
>>
Basil Fishdirk - Wed, 28 Dec 2016 14:54:30 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207519 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207516
In the words of the Zen master Linji, if you meet the Buddha, slay the Buddha. It sounds to me like you think you've met the Buddha, my man. I like you, I like what you're doing and I like your attitude, but I'm about to rip into you just for the fun of it.

>I'm finally starting to understand myself and what it means to be in the present, in the here, in the now.
If a human can't perceive what's around them for several milliseconds due to the simple physical truth that things like light and sound must travel to the receptors on the body and then into the brain to be interpreted, how can you say we live in the here or the now? The truth is we live in the then and the there. We are nothing but memories inside a human brain. We interact with the past that is just moments behind the present.

>don't dwell on the past because the past can't be fixed.
Why not study the past to better the future? Instead of fixing things, we can avoid them altogether.

>as for the future, what you do in the now determines your future.
Not if you're a Determinist.

>stick with the present as it will bring you happiness.
Do you have proof of this? I've found, in my life, that the only thing that brings happiness is pain. Lots of pain. Enough that you snap out of your pampered state of existence and start appreciating the basics of life, which almost nobody seems to do. When's the last time you were thankful, truly thankful, for your health? For your brain's capabilities? For your comforts in life? Your food and water? When's the last time you legitimately were happy just because of those things?

>that is what I've learned about myself and life over the past year since i started doing this and still fixing most of my life with what i learn.
Are you fixing your life? How does one 'fix' a life and when does it need fixing?
>>
Hamilton Shakestock - Wed, 28 Dec 2016 20:31:00 EST ID:/XQxUE3u No.207521 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207519
i only speak on what i went through during my adolescence. lots of emotional trauma. i really don't care if you think I'm an idiot. all i know is that now I'm alive with every breath i take and it feels good. knowledge is power in terms of what i can learn and process through everything else of what is of importance.
>>
Charles Pibberhedge - Fri, 30 Dec 2016 11:03:53 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207524 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207521
Haha bro did you not read my starting sentence?
> I like you, I like what you're doing and I like your attitude, but I'm about to rip into you just for the fun of it.
I'm just trying to expand your mind, man. Just trying to expand the box that is your philosophy by showing you its walls. Feeling good is a good thing, but will it last? I practice that concrete philosophy; the stuff that does last.

But let me ask you, why does it feel good to be alive to you? But also, have you any interest in replying to any of my previous statements/questions? Any thoughts on them from your own philosophy? Don't just let me take jabs at you; show me what you believe in and why you think it withstands my criticism.
>>
the flicker !FwnV7hV52I - Fri, 30 Dec 2016 15:52:19 EST ID:vano1wpA No.207528 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1483131139676.jpg -(421842B / 411.96KB, 1570x1536) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>207519
>We are nothing but memories inside a human brain. We interact with the past that is just moments behind the present
lol
>if you meet the Buddha, slay the Buddha
Rubes love this quote, they think it expresses a carte blanche blessing to say and do whatever antinomian swill comes to their minds.
>>
Cyril Miggleford - Sat, 31 Dec 2016 18:05:56 EST ID:/XQxUE3u No.207531 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207524
i understand that life is like a river; it can be straight and narrow like how good your life is going. but, then the bumps and curves we hit makes us unhappy until we get through it with the feeling of using everything you got and do what makes you happy. be happy, love yourself and block out all negativity that comes your way.
>>
Hugh Sebblelock - Mon, 02 Jan 2017 09:50:49 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207532 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207528
>We are nothing but memories inside a human brain. We interact with the past that is just moments behind the present
Do you not agree with this? And if so, can you provide proof of something else?
>Rubes love this quote
I don't know what to tell you, it's a pretty basic quote. It's a pretty basic concept, too. Like, imagine if someone comes up to you and says, 'Hey! Did you know I'm perfect? I finally hit perfection the other day!'
That's what it's like talking to someone who thinks they're enlightened. Obviously in these scenarios the person is neither perfect nor enlightened, and acknowledging the fact that perfection/enlightenment cannot be obtained even though both are strived for can simply be summed up by saying 'slay the buddha'. Slay the buddha is like the equivalent of saying 'stop thinking you've achieved perfection or anything even close to it'.
>>
the flicker !FwnV7hV52I - Mon, 02 Jan 2017 23:35:47 EST ID:vano1wpA No.207536 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207532
Your reading of Linji's aphorism is very weak. There are a few things wrong with it, mostly to do with its atextualism and ahistoricism.
>acknowledging the fact that perfection/enlightenment cannot be obtained
While an interesting take, Linji definitely did not have this in mind. As the abbot of a monastery, Linji would have been revered by his students as a living Buddha. A central doctrine in Chan Buddhism is tathāgatagarbha, which promises that Buddhahood is immanent in every sentient being.
>Slay the buddha is like the equivalent of saying...
Not quite. Linji's aphorism has a twofold significance, neither dimension of which you identified here.

When he says "逢佛殺佛, 逢祖殺祖" (Meet [the] Buddha, kill [the] Buddha; meet [the] patriarchs, kill [the] patriarchs), Linji on one level is paying lip service to a shocking antinomianism. Killing an enlightened being and drawing the blood of a Buddha are considered to be Ānantarika-karma, or among the most heinous crimes imaginable. The supposed karmic punishment for killing a Buddha is aeons of torment in the lowest of the hells. Remember that this statement was made in a lecture hall before the massed assembly of his students; with this utterly scandalous pronouncement, Linji is actually affirming his own (performative) Buddhahood! His audience expects that an enlightened master would not act according to the behaviors of ordinary men, and Linji happily plays into that expectation by signalling his freedom from the nomian boundaries of Buddhist dialectic.

The second layer of meaning concerns the Mahāyana doctrine of tathāgatagarbha. Linji, like most Chinese Buddhists, took it for granted that Buddhahood is originally present within all living beings. His aphorism also reminds the listener not to fall into naive dualism by "happening upon," or "meeting" (逢) the Buddha, i.e. by locating Buddhahood without as opposed to within.
>>
Emma Gessletit - Tue, 03 Jan 2017 09:05:08 EST ID:cU67cn3z No.207539 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207536
dank
>>
Esther Gendlested - Tue, 03 Jan 2017 09:56:55 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207540 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207536
That was a very nice history lesson.
That being said, my statement wasn't really off. I phrased things very differently than Linji would, sure, but the point is that a person cannot be a Buddha and that thinking a person is a Buddha is wrong, according to Zen. This was Wikipedia's take on the meaning on 'If you meet the Buddha, slay the Buddha.'

>Thinking about the Buddha as an entity or deity is delusion, not awakening. One must destroy the preconception of the Buddha as separate and external before one can become internally as their own Buddha.

That being said, I'm not a fan of religious philosophy like Buddhism. I love Siddhartha's work, and I enjoy the work of the 'Buddhas' of Buddhism, but I'm not in Buddhism and would never practice it. I'm no historian like yourself, I'm just a philosopher, and while I do like to see what my fellow philosophers think and say, such as Siddhartha, I would never follow any of their footsteps or use them as a point of reference so I rarely dive deeply into their works. I just snagged Linji's Koan to make a point to this other guy since he seems to be trying to be Zen or something, I thought it'd pique his interest into other philosophies.

I mean, the way I see it, we're all in agreement, that perfection, or Buddhahood, is something that can never be found. So the Buddhists think that Buddhahood can be found within; it's things like that that make me lose interest in Buddhism. A lot of these ancient religions and philosophies from the East have great philosophy within them and then they take it a step further into pure mysticism and bullshit, like when the Taoists were searching for immortality and the way Buddhists try to become Buddhas.
>>
Esther Gendlested - Tue, 03 Jan 2017 09:58:43 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207541 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Now that you've made it clear to me that mysticism is more richly within Buddhism than I originally thought, I think I will stop quoting Buddhism entirely. Thank you for that lesson.
>>
Martha Fabberchig - Fri, 06 Jan 2017 20:04:39 EST ID:2qUYj6UR No.207554 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207541

Food for thought; you're drawing lines in the sand.

Mysticism is a spook. Or you could call model it under Plato's theory of Ideas. You probably already understand that this idea is not a thing in itself. It exists in your mind. It's a box that you store certain phenomena inside. Your box labeled 'mysticism' is different from any other instance of personal mysticism boxes.

Given we're on an anonymous imageboard, I'll go out of a limb and parallel such boxes to the Zen concept of the gateless gate. Or the white light of the void in Tibetan Buddhism. Or sunyata. It doesn't exist. It's something you've created to subdivide the infinite. Have some William Blake, you cock-warbler:

>“If the doors of perception were cleansed every thing would appear to man as it is, Infinite. For man has closed himself up, till he sees all things thro' narrow chinks of his cavern.”
>>
the flicker !FwnV7hV52I - Sat, 07 Jan 2017 02:31:23 EST ID:vano1wpA No.207559 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207554
>gateless gate
I'll never understand this translation. Even someone like me, who understands only a few Hanzi, can see "gateless gate" is a misleading rendering of 無門關 ("Without-Gate-Barrier")
Of course, the name is a pun on the semantic reading of the characters in Wumen's name, who compiled the collection. Hence, the Wumenguan ("The Gateless Barrier").
>>
Molly Follergold - Thu, 12 Jan 2017 14:22:46 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207574 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207554
Food for thought; I'm already completely familiar with everything you've said to me, however, I am a man who likes to stand on the 'probable' side of probability. Concrete science is more probable than mysticism; althrough the absolutely correct answers seemingly can never be found, concrete science offers 'more correct' answers than 'esoteric' philosophy. Philosophy expands your mind, sure, but good probability expands your wallet.

And what in the fuck is a cock-warbler? And who is William Blake? Some sort of poet? I suppose I'll go look at his wikipedia page and see if I'd want to read him or not. That being said, I tell you now, I do not blindly idolize and follow the ideas of other men, and I often have little interest in reading their ideas beyond a certain point, the point where their ideas trail off into 'absurd' due to conflicting with something I know is concrete in science. I see men like William Blake as colleagues in the game of philosophy, and I cross-reference their science and proofs against my own on whatever subject they may be discussing. You see, I would never reference a philosopher, but I would reference their math and logic if it is sound and relevant to whatever it is I'm working on or discussing. Science and logic and probability are all I really care about in regards to philosophy.
>>
the flicker !FwnV7hV52I - Thu, 12 Jan 2017 15:12:56 EST ID:vano1wpA No.207575 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1484251976109.png -(354259B / 345.96KB, 1829x788) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>207574
Embarrassing.
>>
Matilda Trotforth - Fri, 13 Jan 2017 09:47:07 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207580 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207575
Random and pointless.
>>
the flicker !FwnV7hV52I - Fri, 13 Jan 2017 15:24:47 EST ID:vano1wpA No.207582 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1484339087920.jpg -(26370B / 25.75KB, 220x341) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>207580
This book awoke me from my positivistic slumber, I can recommend if you've not already read it.
>>
Hugh Pockbanks - Fri, 13 Jan 2017 17:32:40 EST ID:gXJXBtKQ No.207583 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Thanks op I'm going to start meditating again today. It helps me keep focus during other things, i find exercise way more effective for things like anxiety and depression. I like mantras because it gives me something to focus on rather than clear my head. Sometimes if i can keep up a good jog my mantra is simply breathe in and breathe out because I need to use all my focus to keep breathing otherwise I will stop running. Exercise while meditating is pretty fucking great afterward.
>>
Reuben Gidgelutch - Mon, 16 Jan 2017 11:07:36 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207606 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207582
Sure, I'll take a look. Thank you. I appreciate recommendations. I know I said I don't just take philosophers at their word, but if there's concrete logic within this book then I'm sure it'll help me revise my own philosophy. That's how I operate; I'm constantly looking for concrete contradiction so that I may expel it from my philosophy. But if a subject has no contradiction but a lot of proof in it's favor, then I usually uphold it as most likely to be true, until a contradiction comes along.
>>
Reuben Gidgelutch - Mon, 16 Jan 2017 14:44:09 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207609 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207582
So I haven't checked out Ludwig yet, I plan to, but first I wanted to ask you, are you arguing that we should be positivist or not positivist? Because I checked out Positivism and it seems very easily contradictable. Positivism claims that our external senses gather information with which we create positive facts from, yet when I studied Absurdism I'll never forget their stance on the senses; that the senses are unreliable. Descartes talks about how, in a dream he can feel the heat of fire, but he knows in reality he cannot feel the heat of the fire, his brain is merely being tricked. Knowing that the mind can be tricked into believing something unreal is real and vice versa, this leaves us realizing that senses are flawed and therefore cannot be our concrete grounding in philosophy even though, de facto, IRL, we live via Empricism, even though it's fundamentally wrong. It just so happens that it works out well for us. For all we know, though, really everything we know could be false, including the entirety of our own existence. We could be a brain in a vat being fed sensation, as they say.
>>
Thomas Mimmerfuck - Tue, 24 Jan 2017 23:48:53 EST ID:2qUYj6UR No.207636 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1485319733808.jpg -(137322B / 134.10KB, 600x400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>207609

How do your senses feel about pic related? If the guy calling you a positivist is right, you just got wrecked.

Here's another link you can ignore in your fumbling:

http://faculty.virginia.edu/consciousness/home.html

Read chapters 1.1 through 1.4, it will help you understand what the big kids are talking about.
>>
Priscilla Claywell - Wed, 25 Jan 2017 17:01:47 EST ID:nEopx2uI No.207637 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Gonna jump into some things here, even though you guys have already diced this up pretty finely:
>>207540
>>perfection, or Buddhahood, is something that can never be found
Perfection, by definition, is an unattainable quality in the real world because no set of physical particulars can ever match an ideal, just like no true perfect sphere can ever actually exist in nature. But Buddhahood is not the same thing as perfection, in terms of having enough or closely enough approximating some ideal quality. In fact, it is a conceptual razor beyond the intellectual loop that would lead one to forever obsess over whether something was 'perfect' enough or not. Relying on a translation of what the concept of Buddha really means will lead you astray, because it has no neat equivalent in other languages or in other figures in religio-philosophical traditions. Not to mention that the original concept as promulgated by Siddharta was then twisted by millennia of superstition and wishful thinking by dozens of cultures, you can view any translation of the meaning of Buddha with as much suspicion as you would someone who bases their interpretation of Jesus' ideas off a translation of his name/title (Yeheshua Christos literally means 'Saving guy who was anointed.)

>>Buddhists think that Buddhahood can be found within; it's things like that that make me lose interest in Buddhism...pure mysticism and bullshit
I need to ask, what your great quarrel with mysticism is? You reject Positivism, you acknowledge that Empricism is only a useful tool; where else have we to look for answers to the a priori problems of existence except our own consciousness? You use Descartes' reasoning; how can you characterize Descartes' philosophical program as being anything other than at least rooted in 'mysticism' if you are going to categorize any philosophy that operates on one's internal consciousness as 'mysticism'?

You say concrete science is more probable than esotericism, but you also admit Empiricism is false, not actually relating to reality. All our understanding of what is probable emerges from our knowledge of what is empirically the case; but as your Absurdists would point out, all sensory information is fundamentally suspect, and thus all assignments of probabilities are arbitrary. You can really really sense the sun for sure, but if you're actually a brain in a vat, those probabilities you were operating on actually have nothing to do with reality, no?

>>what's a cock-warbler
By definition, a cock-warbler would be one who sings softly in rapid succession of cock.

>>who's a William Blake
Jeez, only like one of the most easily recognizable poets and artists of the past five-hundred years? A foundation for people as diverse as Carl Jung and Aleister Crowley? The dude Aldous Huxley quoted in the title of his seminal work on the psychedelic experience which became the name of the famous rock group, 'The Doors'? Don't be so proud of your ignorance of a widely known fellow, when the google search bar is sitting at the top of your screen as you type.

>> I often have little interest in reading their ideas beyond a certain point, the point where their ideas trail off into 'absurd' due to conflicting with something I know is concrete in science
But as you have admitted, all empirical knowledge is suspect, so what you really mean is you stop paying attention to learning about something when it conflicts with what you already believe a certain amount. There's nothing wrong with that, everyone does it, but at least call it what it is.

Cheers!
>>
Reuben Divinggold - Thu, 26 Jan 2017 13:47:17 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207638 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207636
You clearly have no idea what anybody's talking about. And I have no interest in reading your Philosophy 101 webpage written by some random dude spewing rhetoric every philosopher like myself is already too familiar with.

>>207637
Well, you disagree with my notion that enlightenment and perfection are synonymous and both impossible, but then you don't actually explain what enlightenment means, you just keep saying that it can't be translated into English, which can't be true.

I'm glad you understand. But what you don't understand is that all of this makes sense. Do I reject empiricism as truth? Yes. But do I use empiricism to become closer with the truth? Yes. What I'm saying is, just using random numbers here, if truth is 100 then empiricism is 50 and mysticism is 1. Empricism and mysticism both stem from the truth yet neither can grasp the truth, but can grasp at least part of it. While it may be true that I'm a brain in a vat, I am experiencing something that is a sun, and that is a truth in and of itself, even if I am not aware of what's actually going on. My feelings and experiences are true subjectively, but not objectively. Empricism can be correct subjectively, but not objectively. We're imperfect beings, and our tools are imperfect, but they are tools, none the less. You see?

I take no pride in ignorance, I simply am usually uninterested in old philosophy. I find old philosophy fun, and poignant, but ultimately irrelevent in today's world. We need new philosophy. We need philosophy that can keep up with our evolution in the sciences. The things we know today are a world beyond what people knew 500 years ago.

I'm not a historian. I'm a philosopher. I philosophize. I write. I rarely read. But when I do read, I read extremely analytically, and I often find things others do not find.
For instance, take Descartes for example. His version of Duality is mind + body. My version, after studying his version and many other versions, is this; Qualia + (Mind/body). I believe my version is more concrete than Descartes significantly, only because I believe he did not understand that the human mind is based on the exact same biology as the body and therefore must be of the same substance (monism) where as qualia is something entirely different, something you can take away or insert that has no actual effect in reality, only to the qualia itself.

>At least call it what it is
I have studied logic intensely. When I read, sentences and paragraphs become nothing but chains of logic in my mind. And there are algorithms that seem to permeate everything, and then there are algorithms that seem to stand completely alone and are man-made.
Imagine there are 3 people, one saying 2+2 = 3, the other saying 2+2 = 4, and the final one saying 2+2 = 5.
You're suggesting that I accept every single one of them as correct. I am suggesting that, through the study of math, I can deduce that the first and last person are confused and erroneous, which the second one is not.
Can you disagree with that notion?

Or is your faith in mysticism strong enough for you to accept that 2+2 = 3,4, and 5 all at the same time? Do you even have faith in mysticism or are you just trying to fuck with me?

This conversation is somewhat interesting. I have no idea what you're philosophy is, though. It seems all over the place. Well, I'd sum up your philosophy as thus; 'Believe everything, reject nothing.'

I'm too interested in getting rich to spend time delving into philosophy that seems blatantly erroneous. I'm only interested in that which I know is real, and not mere confusion. I'm the person finding the philosophy that it seems no one else can find, or at least, it is not popularized or known about at all.
>>
Reuben Divinggold - Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:19:06 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207639 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Like, philosophy is philosophy, it's awesome, but that ain't life. I'm a human. I think and act like a human. Even if my philosophy finds the flaws in empiricism, it doesn't change the fact that it's one of my only tools that I must make use of.

Philosophize to high-heaven if you want, and live your life however you want, but what I want is money. What I want is happiness. And I've found those things through philosophy. And when I'm dead, my philosophy will vanish with myself.
>>
George Turveydock - Thu, 26 Jan 2017 18:45:18 EST ID:nEopx2uI No.207640 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207638
>>but then you don't actually explain what enlightenment means, you just keep saying that it can't be translated into English, which can't be true.
I didn't suggest that I was going to explain what enlightenment means, I suggested that it's not a very descriptive word to translate the term 'Buddhahood' with. The term enlightenment in English merely means understanding some deeper truth about reality without specifying what that enlightenment entails. Surely you can see that the 'enlightenment' referred to in the period of history known as the Enlightenment referred to something totally different (in its case, a scientific and cultural revolution) than enlightenment means in the case of trying to describe the enlightenment of Buddha. And that even if it were, it wouldn't be synonymous with perfection.

If you're looking for a thumbnail depiction of what Buddhahood entails within its own context, you can probably find a huge divergence of opinions, but what I would say it primarily references is the continuous ability to act on the awareness that all phenomena are transitory, that all transitory things lead to attachment to them, and thus all attachments will eventually be broken and generate suffering, so all attachment must be extinguished at the source, in one's own consciousness. Bodhisattva-hood is a related state where one who has this awareness is compelled to help others come to this awareness so as to free them from suffering as well.

>>the probability of empiricism and mysticism
Okay, that's fine, you're free to use whatever cognitive tools you like. I'm just saying that you are rejecting an entire branch of knowledge because of the source of that knowledge, and thus correspondingly assign it a low probability, and I'm asking why, since in your typology both empiricism and mysticism are based on subjective knowledge, you accept one and dismiss the other?

>>rewriting Descartes
But your concept of the body includes the brain, which is what you are characterizing as mind, and what you are calling qualia is what Descartes would have called mind, so your problem really arises from trying to applying modern definitions of the hard problem of consciousness (the mind/body problem) to a classical treatment of the problem. Not saying that you're wrong, just that you're not really saying anything different than Descartes was saying, you're just updating the terminology.

>>philosophical shadow-boxing
I haven't articulated a shred of my philosophy, I have just pointed out some factual, historical considerations about what you've said along with suggesting some inherent logical paradoxes in your original post. So most of the last section of your post is you just shadow-boxing with some imagined philosophy.

Everybody who is reasonably intelligent and has taken logic parses all language as logical algorithms, I think, so your approach to evaluating the truth of expressions is I think fairly standard. But you must recognize that all our synthetic knowledge about the world is built upon an unfathomably vast chain of logical postulates, assumptions, various data and biases of human perception all cobbled together. The errors people run into in understanding philosophies based in cultures other than their own, whether it be Western society looking at Eastern society or an empiricist looking at mysticism, is that so much of the actual meaning being imparted is corrupted by misunderstandings of definitions that it becomes increasingly likely that you will see something that initially doesn't make sense, and if you thus become overly skeptical, you might reject something out of hand that has genuine value, simply because you didn't invest enough time in actually comprehending what was being communicated. It happens all the time, in everything.

So no, I'm not asking you to accept that 1 + 2 = 4. I'm asking you how much faith you have that what you're calling a 2 is really a 2, when it might actually be a 3 because of something else you don't know, and thus the expression is actually correct?

Again, to counter your shadow boxing, if you want my philosophy on that slogan, I would prefer 'Have awareness of everything, utilize the synthesis.'

Have you considered there might be considerable wealth in things that seem erroneous to you? Again, I'm not suggesting any particular course of action to you, I'm just pointing out logical counter-arguments. There were a lot of people who thought the idea that people could fly was erroneous, and instead invested their time and wealth in horse-drawn carriages.

Moreover, if what you want is happiness, circling back around to Buddha, you won't be able to find it for long in transitory things. Eventually you will have to get down to the source of your need for happiness, which resides in your own consciousness. Inevitably, we all must deal with 'mysticism', we all must face our own interior self to have any mastery of our self, and not be enslaved by our passions.
>>
George Dummledale - Mon, 30 Jan 2017 16:08:39 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207656 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207640
>First paragraph
Yeah, I know all of that. Well, thanks for clearing that up.

>Why accept one and dismiss the other if both are imperfect? Why reject an entire branch of knowledge?

I know that all knowledge, either mystic or empiric, comes from something, not nothing. Like I said, I'd put empiricism at '50' and mysticism at '1', not 0.
Let's talk about logic. Do you believe in logic? Do you believe that things need to follow logical patterns?
It seems clear to me that logic is within everything real, but that humans are often erroneous when it comes to logic. Like, a mystical human will say, 'Oh I asked God to prove himself to exist to me, and then a bolt of lightning struck right next to me. That's proof.' where as a logical human would say, 'No, that's not proof, that's coincidence.' and then both of them would be stuck in a 'prove me wrong; you can't' situation, but there's a long history of coincidences happening IRL where as there's no real proof of God anywhere, so I'd have to accept the logical approach, that it's coincidence, than the mystic approach, that it is proof of God, only because one is more likely true than the other. It could be God, and the mystic could be right, but the probability is lower.

>Descartes
I agree with you there, but at the same time it's like, I think Descartes didn't know what qualia was, I think he thought qualia and thinking were the same thing, where as qualia is the experience of experiencing while thinking is a neurological feat accomplished via impulses in the brain, a physical object using physical means to create thoughts, while qualia still eludes science and philosophy to this day. But it is possible that Descartes just didn't have the terms I have but meant the same thing, but his writings don't seem to convey that.

> a 2 might be a 3
Good point. But if I see 2 rabbits standing next to each other and somebody tells me I see 3, I'll tell them they're wrong. But, that being said, I hand it to you, there are subjects more immaterial than rabbits.

>Have you considered there's a wealth in things that seem erroneous to you?
Yes I have. I don't even doubt it. But I am me, and that wealth must not be applicable to me.

Imagine you've got two men presenting you gifts and you can only choose one. One gift is a million dollars, the other is a cute kitten. I'd take the million in a heart-beat, because that's wealth to me. But maybe someone else would take the kitten, and it would make them happier than any million could. People are different like that. Wealth is subjective.

Don't worry about my happiness. I know my happiness is nothing more than good luck. I know it will die with my human body. But then again, that's only the logical assumption based on historic/empiric knowledge. Maybe I am something beyond what history has recorded. Maybe my happiness will exist forever, some way, somehow, and prove Siddhartha wrong. But that's less probable than the logical assumption, now isn't it?

>Mastery of the self, not enslaved by our passions
We're all slaves. I'm a slave. Siddhartha was a slave. You're a slave. Until the day we die, we are slaves to reality. Masters of nothing.
>>
Simon Dunnerpire - Mon, 30 Jan 2017 17:03:03 EST ID:nEopx2uI No.207657 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207656
>>a mystic human would care about a bolt of lightning from God
See, this is your real problem that more than a few people have tried to point out to you ITT. Your category for 'mystic' doesn't have much to do with what that term connotes for other people. Someone who believes in a supernatural, all powerful deity who has a habit of answering challenges from non-believers would certainly interpret the lightning that way, but that wouldn't make them a mystic. Mysticism refers to the branch of esoteric theory that is rooted in one's internal experience of one's consciousness and where you can get to from there. It is different from theurgy, which is what our hypothetical lightning believer ascribes to, the belief that the divine world answers to certain kinds of operations. You can be a mystic and believe in no kinds of omnipotent beings whatsoever -- look at the Jains. So again, mysticism is not the same as the belief in a deity, it refers to a class of psychospiritual methodologies for self-knowledge. Granted, they may often go together, but you need to logically evaluate them independently.

Of course I believe in logic. The one inviolable rule of the universe is causality, that certain effects follow from certain causes invariably. A belief in logic is not inconsistent with a belief in the validity of certain information gleaned from mysticism or any other source, it's just inconsistent if you have as part of your philosophy the belief that it can't be. You say mysticism is logically inconsistent and therefore you assign it low probability, but your perception of that inconsistency is based on your assignment of value of it's constituents; so again, I point out that what you may think is a 2 is really a 3, and so things that seem to be logical errors to you may not actually be. I'm not suggesting you know what you don't know or make logical valuations based on information you don't have, just suggesting that you shouldn't from that justification keep new, potentially value-altering information out.

>>Descartes wasn't aware qualia and thought are different
But are they really? I agree this is splitting the hair pretty finely. Sure, when Descartes thinks the thought 'I think therefore I am' that cognition is arising from an unfathomably vast web of neuronal calculations, of which Descartes is entirely unaware. What he ends up with is a pure subjective perception, 'that I think, and that therefore I am' which are pure qualia, but ends up with no perception of the stochastic analog computation which his brain took to generate it. From that angle, his 'thoughts' are in the qualia, not in the brain itself, so while he might not have had the tool of understanding neuroscience to really hammer the point home, I think he would directly suss the distinction you're making as part of his philosophy.

>>Maybe my happiness will exist forever and prove Siddharta wrong
You wouldn't really be proving Siddharta wrong -- Siddharta wasn't making something the case, he was pointing out an empirical fact about conscious systems. Any stimulus response system that seeks an internal homeostasis will eventually squelch the intensity of any positive signal in order to prevent long term burn-out -- I'm sure you're familiar with the research that shows happiness returning to normal quickly, even after say winning the lottery? But what Buddhism in particular, and other esoteric schools provide is an algorithmic machinery to deprogram that natural homeostasis seeking circuit. By sheer chance, you can also keep that system off balance, by constantly seeking new highs and even new lows, but my point is wouldn't you be more effective at it if you tried to understand how that system works itself, rather than leaving it to chance?

>>I am a slave
You are only a slave if you make yourself a slave. Reality isn't slavery, reality is a vista to perfect freedom for those who have eyes to see. The only shackles that exist -- and this is true for everything, in general -- are those that you directly or indirectly forge yourself.
>>
Sophie Sacklemutch - Tue, 31 Jan 2017 09:51:18 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207659 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207657
>Reality isn't slavery, the only shackles that exist are those that you forge yourself.
Try not breathing for the rest of your life. Let me know if you can just drop that shackle just because you so choose.
>>
Eugene Bloffingbury - Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:11:58 EST ID:nEopx2uI No.207660 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207659
What a childish response. Freedom is the capacity to do what you want, not do things that don't make sense. No amount of wishing the moon is made of cheese is going to make it so. If we were able to control our brain to force us to not breathe, then we would reap the direct causal consequence of not breathing as our mitochondria starve of oxygen and CO2 poisons our cells. We don't have the freedom to do that without drugs or brain surgery, but we do absolutely have the freedom to end our own lives in other ways, but no one has the power to override causality and cause something that has a fatal consequence to not be fatal.

You've confused the concept of freedom of action with an absurdist reading of reality where literally anything is possible -- it's not, certain things always follow from certain other things invariably within this universe. Pathetically weak straw man. Now who is the one who has an issue with things following logically?
>>
the flicker !FwnV7hV52I - Tue, 31 Jan 2017 16:42:05 EST ID:r0zk+gKe No.207661 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1485898925647.jpg -(665133B / 649.54KB, 2047x1957) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>207659
>>207660
Both of y'all is gay
>>
Eugene Bloffingbury - Tue, 31 Jan 2017 18:33:55 EST ID:nEopx2uI No.207662 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207661
You're using y'all incorrectly, it's a plural pronoun. 'Both of y'all are gay.'
Give a shitpost, get a shitpost
>>
Charlotte Passleforth - Wed, 01 Feb 2017 11:31:04 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207664 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207660
>What a childish response.
What a childish response to my effective yet simple disproof of your statement.
>Your only shackles are the ones you set for yourself.
>But you also have shackles that aren't part of your shackles, like mortality and human limitation.
>Freedom is the ability to do what you want.
>Except 'what you want' has to be in-line with reality and can't go beyond it.

Dude, you're literally replying to me in the fashion I'd reply to you. Like everything you just said is literally everything I wanted to say to you when you said
>Your only shackles are the ones you make for yourself.
But I didn't want to spend a lot of time on it so I summed it up as a simple logic puzzle where you realize that you're shackled by mortality.
Dude you are all over the place. And you keep trying to talk down at me, too, which is very off-putting seeing as I'm trying to have a mature conversation with you here but here you are slinging insults at the guy you're chatting with just because he gave you a short and sweet response rather than a long-winded post like this one.

>>207661
>Both of y'all is gay
Thanks for contributing absolutely nothing to this board and then shit-talking everyone else (all 2 people that frequent this board) for having a discussion.



I like how when I visit philosophy websites I see all these people saying things like, 'Thank you for having this discussion with me, I'm glad we're all here to discuss so and so topic, and thanks to the admins for letting me use their space. Here are my ideas and here are my proofs. I'd love a rebuttal."
But then I come here and it's just "You are pathetic." "You are gay." "Excuse me while I 180 my philosophy".
Where are our manners?
>>
Wesley Nenkinshaw - Wed, 01 Feb 2017 12:11:41 EST ID:Z08uqMmD No.207665 Ignore Report Quick Reply
There's several ways to meditate.

I'm fond of the one where you block all thoughts out and focus on your senses.

Or you block all thoughts and input out.

Or you chant a mantra and focus on the words.

You might find you can go longer with a different method of practice.
>>
Alice Hozzlehodge - Wed, 01 Feb 2017 15:12:18 EST ID:nEopx2uI No.207666 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207664
>>Dude, you're literally replying to me in the fashion I'd reply to you. Like everything you just said is literally everything I wanted to say to you when you said
Probably because what you originally said was an absurd strawman, so of course the flaws you were hoping to get me to accept in it are the one's I rejected accepting it because of, because it's a straw man. Ah, duh?

You have created a circular definition that is looking to place yourself in the category of 'slave.' You want something that is logically impossible in order to satisfy your conditions of not being a slave, and thus you have naturally found that you must be a slave. It is that logical knot that I am identifying as a shackle that you yourself have forged -- you demand something impossible to grant, and when it doesn't come, you assert your premise. You are now asking ME to accept that 2+2 = 5, and if it doesn't, then well I'm just a slave to math huh? I'm sure you're aware that any conclusion can be derived from an absurdity?

I'm talking down to you because you have been talking down to EVERYONE in this thread and you clearly think you're just the hottest shit, and in my opinion you need to be brought down a peg. It's just karma in action; you gave out talking down, you are now receiving talking down.

And I didn't really sling any insult at you other than calling your childish straw man what it is -- again, that's karma in action, you give out an absurd response to a reasoned argument, you get back absurdity. I don't see how I am all over the place, I'm responding to your statements as directly and expressly as possible, you just don't seem to like what you're getting back. It's a taste of your own medicine.

So either have reasoned arguments and discuss the material at hand like you're admonishing me to do, or stop quibbling with me over the format of my replies, and I'll try not to be as snarky if you give more smartass terse responses that intentionally miss the point of what they are replying to, friend.

>>where are our manners
This is a chan. Shitposts *are* our manners around here. I don't really like it either, but the second you become all white light on somebody is when someone will tear into you.
>>
Charlotte Moblingstut - Wed, 01 Feb 2017 19:23:58 EST ID:/XQxUE3u No.207667 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207665
I've been doing the block all thoughts out and focus on senses thing you first listed. i don't care for mantras even though it helps some people. the last one that you listed, block all thoughts and input out, does the input out mean to breathe in positive thoughts and breathe out the negative ones? id like to know if I'm right or wrong. any useful info you or anyone else can give me id appreciate it.

OP here. why has this thread been turned into a shitstorm? all this negativity and bickering like little school girls is annoying and stupid. i made this thread to have a friendly chat about meditation and philosophy. not a bunch a bull shit arguing about who's right and who's wrong. fuck off with that shit.
>>
Polly Dandlewill - Thu, 02 Feb 2017 10:19:28 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207673 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207666
Well, you've turned this friendly conversation really shitty real fast. And you're rationalizing it by trying to attack my character. Goodbye.

>>207667
>Why has this thread been turned into a shitstorm?
Sorry, OP, this board has a tendency of being filled with people who come here just to argue and then they get progressively aggressive because someone's constantly disagreeing with them, and then they whip out the insults and excuses, and then the thread turns into garbage. God knows I've seen it happen here a million times.

While some of us find joy in discussing philosophy, some of us clearly would rather fight than chat. Maybe philosophical discussion bores them but fighting with others doesn't.
>>
Polly Dandlewill - Thu, 02 Feb 2017 10:56:02 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207674 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207667
I'll tell you what though, if you wanna take this thread back on-track, why don't you tell us how your meditation's going?

I used to meditate a lot. Not so much anymore. I've found, though, that living an extremely wild life full of excitement and going-ons leaves you with a ton to meditate on when you get the chance. My meditations nowadays are significantly more effective than my meditations of years ago, the only difference being I used to have all the free-time in the world where as nowadays I have almost no free time and no time to be alone.
>>
Edwin Blackhood - Thu, 02 Feb 2017 14:59:28 EST ID:Z08uqMmD No.207675 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207667

What I mean is the goal is to focus on nothing, attempt to block out all thoughts and all senses. Some people can control their pain through this.
>>
Fanny Fidgeback - Thu, 02 Feb 2017 16:59:33 EST ID:BKJX7E+7 No.207676 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1486072773169.jpg -(59632B / 58.23KB, 594x396) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>207667

There's two main "schools" of thought here; the materialists and the spiritualists.

The materialists usually get triggered by people implying there might be something more to existence than what pure western secular philosophy can explain. The spiritualists usually get triggered by people calling their ideas about eastern philosophy bunk and humbug. Then you have the christians, but they don't show their face here often. Even /x/ got more of those.

I personally get triggered by people calling science reductionistic.

But hey, meditate to your hearts content. It's healthy effects are after all approved by science.
>>
George Greenwill - Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:26:44 EST ID:8gQk0rk7 No.207677 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207676

I don't have a problem with spiritualists, but it doesn't always mix well with meditation. There's documentation of people with minimal experience going on meditation retreats and coming back with psychosis.

I imagine these people go on a retreat to achieve a "higher state of being" and so bring these preconcieved ideas and expectations to the retreat, likely meditating on these ideas and expectations which only reinforces them, and come out of the retreat in their own world.

It of course can be argued that we are all in a state of psychosis built upon nurture, but some out there go too far out to sea, and they can't make it back.

I think that spiritual intent mixed with meditation is dangerous, not to mention that i don't believe in the spirit in the first place. Call my view skewed if you like, but that's my psychosis.
>>
Fanny Fidgeback - Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:34:08 EST ID:BKJX7E+7 No.207679 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207677

Maybe you're right, but meditation or its own sake is truly good for you. It trains your focus and concentration on several levels, meaning among other things you don't get easily side-tracked by brooding and negative thoughts. Scientifically it's a form of neural "programming".
>>
Hedda Pickwater - Thu, 02 Feb 2017 18:11:43 EST ID:9ieF26gP No.207680 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207674
my meditation has improved over the past couple months. no thoughts race through my mind and i become very relaxed as i go deeper. i see some visuals at times when i focus on my breathing. sometimes i feel myself becoming so relaxed that i start to get sleepy during the session.

meditation has helped me greatly with my life. i have a much more positive outlook on life and i feel totally confident in myself. i know as long i put my mind to it i can do anything i want to create, conquer. and achieve. I'm more sociable and a bit more outgoing. I'm working on getting out of my comfort zone so i can grow as a person. I'm going to see some old friends who i haven't talked to in years at the end of this month. can't wait to see them again. ill show everyone how much I've changed so they can see for theirselves the person that I've become. i use to be a weak little kid back then. the old me can't even compare to who i am now. I'm helluva a lot stronger spiritually and mentally. i'll keep growing as a person so i can be the best of a person that i can be.
>>
Phoebe Grimwill - Thu, 02 Feb 2017 19:18:53 EST ID:Z08uqMmD No.207681 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207679

I'm this >>207677 guy.

I also meditate, not as much as I used to. I use it to relax my mind.

I used to have racing thoughts all the time; being able to silence it with meditation helped me to get it under control and calm myself. I've also been drinking every day for some time. Not drunk, just drinking.

I don't have the anxiety behind those racing thoughts anymore. Not sure if it's because I got used to it, or because I killed it with the drinking. Sometimes I wish they would come back. I feel like it was a gift I didn't want and threw away.

Off track; my point is I think meditation is a good thing and very helpful to the mind and body. I just don't believe that spiritual meditation is psychologically healthy.
>>
Martha Bammlekeg - Sun, 05 Feb 2017 17:00:25 EST ID:d4DXKOh3 No.207689 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207676
I get triggered by retards (on both sides of the fence) that think the "West" has some kind of monopoly on "what you see is all that is" philosophies.

There are plenty of non-Western thinkers that think and thought that all that mumbojumbo about there being more to the universe than that exists (silly, I know) is bullshit.

Just like there are plenty of Western thinkers that think and thought that the universe has some nonsensical features that for some dumb reason do interact with the universe but cannot be seen or sensed.
>>
Reuben Wossleshaw - Mon, 06 Feb 2017 10:16:02 EST ID:VuUVzw1k No.207693 Ignore Report Quick Reply
anyone know how to go into a zen like state through meditation?
>>
Oliver Blummerham - Mon, 06 Feb 2017 12:39:34 EST ID:Z08uqMmD No.207694 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207693

I close my eyes, and focus on emptiness. Whenever I find myself thinking, I cut myself off like some rude asshole putting a hand in your face when you're beginning to talk.

Then I "un-focus" and basically blank out. It's easier for me to access now that I've done it before, and I can't really explain how to get there, and I'm not even really sure if we're talking about the same thing either.

But I basically focus on "keeping the bowl empty" and letting my senses run on autopilot.

There's some story about a guy trying to reach enlightenment, was carrying a bucket full of water and he/she could see the moon in it. Then (s)he dropped the bucket on accident, the water spilled out, and the moon was no longer in the bucket. Then enlightenment happened or something.

And so is my recounting of the great tale.
>>
Ebenezer Seckleduck - Tue, 07 Feb 2017 02:13:45 EST ID:VmiZdtYJ No.207695 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207693

Stop trying to make things happen.
>>
Martin Billingforth - Wed, 08 Feb 2017 20:52:02 EST ID:RllCzoxx No.207699 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207695
yeah you're right. i just need to go with the flow and it should come naturally, with some research on zen of course.
>>
Albert Feggleway - Sat, 11 Feb 2017 05:40:46 EST ID:DcOQa66d No.207705 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207693
Focus on your breathing. In, out, in, out. Like that. You might think a syllable when you breath out and a different syllable when you breathe in. The object of this is to still the mind. Don't worry about the thoughts. Don't even worry about the mind not being still. It's okay. You focus on the breath, and the mind will still. It takes great effort to hone this skill, but you can do it anytime and anywhere. If you like, you can count your breaths. It's as boring as it sounds. That's the point. You don't have to be entertained.

When you do this, you'll see the thoughts slowing down and becoming calm. Don't concern yourself with the thoughts. They will arise, and they will dissipate. Don't follow them. Let them go. Remain in the center of your meditation, your stillness. You will notice your mind feels much more focused as you meditate. You will notice the chaos that permeates the un-meditating mind.
>>
Albert Feggleway - Sat, 11 Feb 2017 05:43:56 EST ID:DcOQa66d No.207706 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207694
This guy's got it. There's this faculty you can train to stop thought. I don't know how else to describe it. You just tell yourself, "No." and the thought ends. It takes practice.
>>
Polly Cranningforth - Sun, 12 Feb 2017 11:12:09 EST ID:RllCzoxx No.207711 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207694
i totally understand what you mean. funny thing is I've done that for years without meditating. my mind would just go blank with no effort and my mind would feel "still" and no longer clouded and fogged up.
>>
Samuel Blashson - Mon, 13 Feb 2017 04:28:37 EST ID:SEionzr8 No.207712 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207711
Oh boy. Here's where you get problems. You think you're so cool because you achieved zen from your natural state, huh? You gotta move past that. That's just noise.
>>
Walter Brittingfuck - Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:54:45 EST ID:d4DXKOh3 No.207714 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207711
There's a difference between zoning out and not thinking.
>>
Archie Lightforth - Tue, 14 Feb 2017 12:03:24 EST ID:vjbkHLiA No.207721 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207712
>>207714
Meh. I'm wrong.
>>
George Hillywill - Fri, 17 Feb 2017 06:16:19 EST ID:n30Aw1pX No.207734 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207721
We're all wrong.
>>
Clara Challergold - Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:05:28 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207736 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207734
Nothing we know is entirely true, yet nothing we know is entirely false.
This I know absolutely.
>>
Charles Cinningwill - Fri, 17 Feb 2017 20:03:12 EST ID:YXMsMuFM No.207738 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1487379792322.gif -(683021B / 667.01KB, 500x263) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>207736

I had to think a bit there, but you're entirely correct. Besides the fact that your post kinda torpedo its own argument.
>>
Archie Smallfield - Sat, 18 Feb 2017 11:56:06 EST ID:EC7dMz6H No.207741 Ignore Report Quick Reply
OP here. It's been over a year since i started meditating and I'm a whole different person now. My life has changed so much and I've done a complete 180* with my life and myself. I have a new sense of self. Confidence and self esteem is through the roof and I'm just enjoying life. I feel forever grateful for many things that I use to take to granted. I'm focusing purely on myself for now. Nothing is getting in my way of my growth as a human being.

You all can criticize me, talk shit or whatnot. But, I know who i am and nothing will ever change that. You don't know where I come from. If you knew maybe you'd stop talking shit and think over how fucked up it was what I went through.
>>
Matilda Tillingman - Sun, 19 Feb 2017 05:08:58 EST ID:lSYmP405 No.207747 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207741
Just stick with it. It's pretty easy to fall off. You gotta keep doing it, even when it's hard. You're not always going to have the momentum you have right now.
>>
Broken soul - Sun, 19 Feb 2017 09:58:55 EST ID:1y88foLd No.207748 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>204775
I'm glad that you decided to "take up" meditation. But in truth the problem with trying to "meditate" to improve oneself is pointless. Meditation is a natural state of being, we are just too self invovled to realize this. That is the true point of meditation is to show you how futile it is. If you accept this and do it then you will return to a natural state and in essence be meditating all the time. One can only perfect something when he realizes that it's simply impossible.
>>
Clara Hottingcherk - Mon, 20 Feb 2017 14:38:51 EST ID:Ya59RsKY No.207752 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207748
That's just not true. The natural state of the human mind is to be completely possessed by flighty passions and unable to control the flow of the thoughts it generates.

Meditation is incremental practice to train the mind away from that state of chaos and to build control over the flow of thoughts. They're the opposite of each other. You also can't be meditating all the time, or you wouldn't be eating.

So I think either your concept of 'meditation' isn't what everyone else is talking about, or you're just full of shit.
>>
Betsy Blatherworth - Tue, 21 Feb 2017 09:58:50 EST ID:gp3VOCyF No.207754 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207752
Agreed

I feel as if the reason why people take up meditation is because they want to improve their quality of life. That's one of the biggest reasons why I started doing it.
>>
Nigel Nibblebanks - Tue, 21 Feb 2017 10:06:42 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207755 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207741
You know, OP, I've got some real advice for you.

This is something I picked up from one of my favorite Taoists, Bruce Lee.

Write things down. Like every day. Make personal notes to yourself like every day.

A big part of Bruce Lee's success was in his writing. He wrote every single day. He wrote about himself, he wrote about philosophy, he wrote about his ideas in life and martial arts.

I started writing a lot a few months ago and I can say that the results have been wonderful. We forget so much over time; the writing majorly helps reflect on the past, more so than memory can.
>>
Archie Backlewill - Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:50:53 EST ID:gp3VOCyF No.207761 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207755
Thanks for the advice. I use to write in a journal back then. But, I didn't take it seriously so it didn't last long. But, I'll give this another try. I'll write back here in a few days and make a summary about what my thoughts are written down on a piece of paper are.
>>
George Fuckingdale - Fri, 24 Feb 2017 09:46:26 EST ID:54PBc7Id No.207789 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207761
After a year or two of honestly trying to keep up with it, go back and read what you wrote. You'd be amazed at how many things spark your memory and get your ideas jogging again. You'll be amazed at how many things you've forgotten about.

Hope it helps with the meditation, man.
>>
Reuben Mocklewill - Fri, 24 Feb 2017 10:18:22 EST ID:3c2Sor75 No.207791 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207789
I've been meditating for a little over a year now. But, I know theirs more progress to be made. Going to start writing in my journal and stay with it.
>>
Wesley Clurringkat - Fri, 24 Feb 2017 12:16:39 EST ID:4+oWREai No.207792 Ignore Report Quick Reply
If you want to learn how to meditate and you dont want the philosophical baggage that comes with it, I recommend learning how to meditate from Sam Harris. It's very basic and has no mantras to chant or dogmas to holdfast. The rules are very lax so anyone can learn and do well at it. Like anything else, it takes practice.
>>
Nell Windlegold - Fri, 24 Feb 2017 18:34:38 EST ID:d4DXKOh3 No.207793 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207792
>Sam Harris

I haven't delved in his work on meditation, but I know that Sam Harris knows his shit. Thumbs up for your post mate.
>>
Ian Husslewill - Sat, 25 Feb 2017 08:45:38 EST ID:/XQxUE3u No.207796 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207792
i'll look into his readings. i wouldn't mind all the philosophy though. thats just something else that can broaden my horizons and make me grow as a person.
>>
Fucking Chevingworth - Tue, 28 Feb 2017 21:15:05 EST ID:3c2Sor75 No.207808 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I've been having great meditation sessions lately. I'm able to go for longer periods of time in a meditative state. On the average I can meditate for about 10 minutes until I open my eyes.

I'm able to go deeper. Lately theirs been a few times where when I'd be meditating in a chair on my back porch, I feel like I'm somewhere else. One time I thought I was at the beach and I could feel the sand under my feet. Then, I would feel myself going somewhere else. I felt like after thinking I was on the beach, I am in my driveway. Then I snap out of it. Crazy stuff.
>>
Henry Tootdale - Thu, 09 Mar 2017 12:41:19 EST ID:qurAhmpk No.207855 Ignore Report Quick Reply
How is everyone's meditation going? I'm doing good. more and more often I can feel the benefits of meditation seeping through my daily life which I'm happy about. I still have those experiences of feeling like I'm somewhere else and not in my house when I meditate. Good stuff right there :)
>>
Cornelius Fugglewill - Sun, 26 Mar 2017 16:00:40 EST ID:pQdbKKB2 No.207946 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Have any of you ever been to a Buddhist temple to learn the true art of meditation and Buddhism? I've been thinking about going and staying there for as long as I possibly can and learn a lot of philosophical teachings. For those who have done it, what's your experience?
>>
Matilda Brasslemotch - Sun, 26 Mar 2017 19:09:09 EST ID:Ya59RsKY No.207947 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207946
Well, it depends on what you mean by "Buddhist temple." If you mean any of the number of Buddhist centers throughout the world that exist specifically for outreach and to act as community centers, these are probably great places for you to go and learn, although in a lot of cases you cannot stay there.

If you're thinking of going to the Himalayas to bug native monks to unscramble your western psyche with months of vigorous mental discipline,Karate Kid style...either be prepared to be seen right through, or pay through the nose for someone to ignore how they see right through.
>>
William Grandcocke - Mon, 27 Mar 2017 00:42:01 EST ID:TZEgBuHq No.207948 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>207946

I haven't done it myself, but I would say that you should meditate and try to find a place locally and talk to them and learn with them and practice with them if you're interested in such things. I think reading the sutras has value too but that might not do much for you if you aren't approaching it from within the tradition. This is assuming you haven't done this already. If you have, then you should know someone who you can talk to about these things who would be more equipped to talk about these things.


Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.