On Aug 13, 2009, at 12:51 AM, Marek Reavis wrote:
Raunchydog, I understand the point you're making in your post re
Vaj, but it's an incorrect portrayal of my opinion of him.
It did take several readings for me to understand what he was
saying in the lines you quoted (below), but that was mostly due to
the combination of individual terms that I don't have the occasion
to use frequently, and the fact that I don't deal often with
philosophical and religious terms. Once I slowed down, however, and
put it together word-by-word, it was a very clear and complete
expression of his point of view.
I may not agree with that view (which doesn't mean that my view is
correct), but I have high regard for Vaj's learning and sincerity
and it seems apparent to me that he is both well-read in meditation
techniques and spiritual practices, and personally experienced in a
number of different applications of the spirituality he has
pursued. I regard him as an authentic guy.
Thanks Marek. It's not unusual (I've found) for people to be unaware
of the glitches that can result from introspective meditation,
irregardless of whether that's Buddhist or Hindu meditation or
whatever. But I've noticed in mostly in TMers and some hardcore
Zensters. Hopefully the system of meditation knows and recognizes
this propensity and allows for it in it's methods.
And of course in Hindu mantra practice not only do they recognize
that constant introversion creates a karmic separation by withdrawing
from the world, it has an entire vocabulary describing the process
and how to awaken an undivided openness, rather than transcending and
excluding, one becomes acculturated to transcending and including. As
I shared in a previous quote, the habit of withdrawing like a marmot
(or groundhog) is non-conducive to complete openness and unity:
"We should experience everything totally, never withdrawing into
ourselves as a marmot hides in its hole. This practice releases
tremendous energy which is usually constricted by the process of
maintaining fixed reference points. Referentiality is the process by
which we retreat from the direct experience of everyday life." (...)
Introspected meditation on some thing, what Patanjali would call
"meditation with props or supports" (e.g. a mantra) accultures one to
referentiality, it does not necessarily free one from it.
"We shouldn't make a division in our meditation between perception
and field of perception. We shouldn't become like a cat watching a
mouse. We should realize that the purpose of meditation is not to go
"deeply into ourselves" or withdraw from the world. Practice should
be free and non-conceptual, unconstrained by introspection and
concentration."
The Hindu tradition has a number of names for this technique of
imbuing the inner world of the Self into the outer world. A popular
one is bhairavi-mudra, '''the seal of wrathful shiva". It's a lot
like the traditional picture of Shiva, absorbed in the deep
meditation, while having his eyes still partially open on the
external world at the same time.
A problem occurs in commercial meditation methods when one's not told
or taught this, as people will just end up getting attached to the
meditation technique itself and the introspected state in particular.
Both are traps long known in the yogic traditions of India and Tibet
for many centuries.
