PDA

View Full Version : The Understanding that can Aid Meditation



silence_speaks
02 January 2014, 06:29 AM
Friends,
:) There have been a lot of threads on meditation here and here I would like to present something concrete and useful for people who desire to meditate.

The title explains my approach towards this. Even in this first thread, a sincere student would be able to get some useful clues!

Lets take a simple case study. Lets say I sit down with a mala for japa. And then start chanting a mantra which was given to me by my guru. Lets say , even as I chant the mantra, my mind does not stay with the mantra. So It goes away from the mantra and I bring it back to the mantra... This cycle goes on.

Lets now try to analyze this scenario to see if we can get some useful clues. If I present this problem to a modern day guru , he would say "You lack practice/ You need concentration etc" ... and that is absolute nonsense. Let me first explain why and then we will together see the solution to it. We do not lack concentration:- the mind functions in a certain way: when we are interested in something, mind is automatically concentrated and when we are not interested in something mind is not concentrated. This is a simple law of our mind. We have to recognize this. That's a simple law. When we are taught that we lack concentration etc, that's pure nonsense in the name of religion. It creates inferiority complex in the people who cannot do it and superiority complex in the person who can do it - and both are dangerous. There is nothing wrong with you, if you cannot concentrate on a mantra ... it just means you find it boring and that's OK!

So when the mind is moving about everywhere sans the mantra on which I have decided to concentrate ... it just shows that my interest is elsewhere.
Do we see this ?

If we like to watch a movie , we need not be told to concentrate on the movie! Please see. This is simple fact as it stands. When my mind wants to be elsewhere, but I am here ... that's called distraction.

so why is "This[japa or meditation]" not interesting while "That[something else] is interesting" ?

Friends , let me here note a point: a relative once told me "I hate movies" and I told her "someone hates meditation while you hate movies... how is it different ? The first person would suffer when placed in a meditation session while you suffer if you are placed in movie!! "!! Life, friends, is really strange ... if you love meditation... it will present you with situations that wont allow you to meditate and tease you. If you love partying etc ... life will tease you by presenting situations where you cannot go for what you want ! So that's life! A truly meditative person is not someone who has carved out a place or activity in which he is in joy. A truly meditative person is someone who is in perpetual joy irrespective of what circumstances life places him in. This is true liberation. So lets not think that a person who loves to meditate is superior in some way.

I hope I have succeeded in conveying some useful thoughts. In my next session we will together explore some more ideas which can be very useful aids in our spiritual journey.

Love!
Silence

yajvan
02 January 2014, 10:39 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté


when we are interested in something, mind is automatically concentrated and when we are not interested in something mind is not concentrated.

I find this directionally correct, yet in practice there are 'distractions' that occur even if one's interest is elevated. How so?
It is the difference between a rajasic mind, tamasic mind, vs. the sattvic mind. Now no mind is all one-or-the-other because the guna-s always come in 3's. But one can have a predominance over the others.
The rajasic mind is prone to movement, to action, to flight from here and there. Therefore remaining on one thing for a time is challenging.
The tamasic mind is in fact dull. To such an extent it does not know that it does not know ( that is the darkest). Yet this tamasic mind would be less of a candidate for meditative practices. Is it possible to uplift this tamasic mind? Yes. And uplift the rajasic mind ? Yes.

So, the notion of interest + the state/condition of one's mind and constitution play a role in one's overall practice.

iti śivaṁ

silence_speaks
02 January 2014, 11:29 PM
Dear Yajvan ji,
:) What you say is true, but if you dig down to the "roots" you find just one !

The best way to look at such scenarios [as we do in maths ] is to keep one variable "constant". The same person ... i.e., same kind of mind ...
1. in a boring lecture.
2. in his favorite movie.

in (1) the person is sleeping. In (2) ... the person is all joy.

? Whats the difference ?

There is nothing like a "Tamasic" Mind. A Mind OPERATING IN TAMASIC MODE is all that is there. The Same mind OPERATES IN RAJASIC MODE or SATVIC MODE at other times.


Lets redefine terms:
Tamasic mode of a mind is when its predominantly NOT INTERESTED. A disinterested mind.
Rajasic mode of a mind is when its is predominantly INTERESTED IN VARIETY. Distracted.
Satvic mode of a mind is when its INTERESTED IN "THIS - WHAT IS, NOW".

:) So when mind operates in tamasic mode , more often, then it may be labeled tamasic mind. But the same mind will quickly get converted into a satvic mind if it gets interested.
We see this very often. imagine a person who is predominantly intellectual. he loves to study - a physicist say. Now you take him away from physics and all study of physics and put a condition that he should not study physics ... and the next few days you will see him sleeping or dozing off in all other meetings. Reason ? His interest is elsewhere.

Infact if you read Bhagavad Gita... there are 4 different lifestyles suggested. Why ? A person who is interested in earning money ... if he does business , his mind operates in satvic mode. if he goes to vedanta classes, his mind would quickly operate in tamasic mode.

Love!
Silence

yajvan
03 January 2014, 09:45 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté



I find this directionally correct, yet in practice there are 'distractions' that occur even if one's interest is elevated. How so?


In any given day one can be the śiṣya¹ , bhakta , udāsīna or the pāpātman. It is not till one is the ātmamukhaṃ¹ that a continuous, unflinching, level of awareness is revealed that one's balance remains 24 hours a day.

iti śivaṁ

words

śiṣya - student; also the disciple
bhakta - devoted to
udāsīna - neither friend of foe ; indifferent
pāpātman - evil minded
ātmamukhaṃ = ātma + mukhaṃ

ātma = Self, or Being, some say svarūpa ( one's essential nature)
mukhaṃ = mukha = turning towards; facing

Webimpulse
03 January 2014, 12:03 PM
A truly meditative person is not someone who has carved out a place or activity in which he is in joy. A truly meditative person is someone who is in perpetual joy irrespective of what circumstances life places him in. This is true liberation. So lets not think that a person who loves to meditate is superior in some way.

I think I remember H. H. Sri Sri Ravi Shankar of the Art of Living saying something similar. I know SSRS isn't the most popular of gurus on these forums (which I am not commenting on, just observing), but it goes to show you even a stopped clock is right twice a day. ;) I don't think SSRS is a stopped clock, but you get the idea... :D

silence_speaks
04 January 2014, 05:11 AM
Dear Webimpulse,
:)

Well, there is a beautiful saying - I think its in yoga vasishta:

yuktiyukta.N vaco graahya.N baalaadapi shukaadapi |
yuktihiina.N vacastyaajya.N vR^iddhaadapi shukaadapi ||

युक्तियुक्तँ वचो ग्राह्यँ बालादपि शुकादपि।
युक्तिहीनँ वचस्त्याज्यँ वृद्धादपि शुकादपि॥

"A statement given to reasoning should be accepted even if uttered by a child or a parrot. But a statement devoid of any reasoning though declared by elderly persons or even by Sage Suka humself, should be rejected"

:) Our affiliation / dedication should be to the Truth : not to the person who says it. Its unfortunate that , most often, people are not seeking truth, they are seeking to get acceptance from a specific guru or set of teachers.

So the statements that I make here or elsewhere: convey a vision that can be got if one is open. A few statements may occasionally be found to coincide with statements of popular gurus :)!

Love!
Silence

Mana
05 January 2014, 03:05 AM
om gurave namaḥ

Dear silence speaks,

In my experience meditation is best performed as a passive flow used to bring balance to a rising force from out side, to regain the reigns which are otherwise held by mātRka and saṁsāra.

The example of the television is the complete opposite of this; a television will project saṁsāra into your minds eye with an efficacy that is quite formidable. Terrifyingly so, if indeed, you are conscious of that.

You see to my mind meditation has a directivity, a movement, a breath; if you sit and play an instrument or sing, ideally in improvisation within a structure, you are working with this flow to make something, perhaps it is even communicably beautiful.
By spending hours in front of the television, you are opening your mind to the impressions and saṁsāra of whoever wrote, directed or edited the emission; best you be aware of the chandas which is being used.
Meditation can and does change your predominant guna tattva and your life's path.

To my mind the goal here is to have an awareness of this and work with that, perhaps with a guru, but it is absolutely not to hand the reigns over to someone that you don't know, or to random impressions acting in such an accelerated fashion; Have you ever watched Fox News?

Just some food for thought mind you.

I do agree in principle with what you are saying as to the nature of meditation; but I feel that a little cation be needed here also. For example, what does the Television do to the Father son bond and the patrilineage?

mātRka can be very domineering and extremely aggressive at times.
That said, dharma can mislead also if it loses its sense of smell ...

Worthy of meditation.

Kind regards.

silence_speaks
06 January 2014, 12:14 AM
Dear Mana ji,
:)

Lets together analyze this carefully. Please pay a little attention to what I have to share here.

If I have a car and I know how to drive it, I can cruise through traffic as I want. On the other hand, if I do not know how to drive it and still get into it... I land up in an accident. I cannot blame the car for the accident. Neither is it intelligent to keep the car in the parking lot all the time. I have to learn to drive the car and then use it.

Mind is like a car. I have to learn to use it. If I do not know how to manage or handle my mind, life becomes an accident. A poor villager who has very few thoughts, knows very few things and he is comfortable. But then, a friend from the city comes to him and tells him a few things about the city life ... and now he cannot live in the village any more! This friend has simply fed a few thoughts. Earlier the peasant was innocent. Now he has thoughts and he does not know how to handle them... and he is in trouble.
But this does not mean that we should not have thoughts ! Please see... We should have thoughts and use them! We should know how to use them.

Lets take this statement:



By spending hours in front of the television, you are opening your mind to the impressions and saṁsāra of whoever wrote.


By spending hours before the television, what happens ? Certain thoughts are accumulated. Earlier I did not know that a special kind of mobile phone existed, now I know. Earlier I did not know something, now I know. Some thoughts are accumulated. Now if i do not know how to manage these thoughts ... they run a riot and i am gone ! But we cannot say here that one should not have those thoughts ... if not TV, someone else will push them on us! so if a person is trying to avoid thoughts, he would ever remain fearing all experiences!

Our thoughts are given to us. As a result of our childhood experiences, our parents, teachers, the television channels we watch etc ... we have been provided with various kinds of thoughts. And those thoughts are useful for us to interact with the world. Without those thoughts we cannot interact. At the same time, the presence of a thought need not mean that we are condemned to act in a certain way. A THOUGHT IS MERELY A PROMPTING! WE MAY OR MAY NOT OBLIGE!

Unfortunately we tend to treat our thoughts as commands ! Thoughts as suggestions are a privilege and as commands they are a problem.




For example, what does the Television do to the Father son bond and the patrilineage?


Does Television do something or excess indulgence in TV / Excess involvement with TV do something ? Please see. TV as an object is wonderful ... its the way we use it that makes it into a problem. Even as , a knife ... its wonderful if i use it for cutting vegetables, but the same knife may be used to cut someone's throat and then it becomes a problem. so what does a TV do ? Nothing. We use it. If I use to to get some useful information, its wonderful.

This is "EXACTLY" same for any instrument given to us.
and mind is an instrument.

do we see this ?

BTW guna traya vibhagam is done to show that you are triguna-athita ... beyond the three gunas . its this vision that makes living into meditation... not continuous manipulation of gunas! People get stuck with manipulation of gunas and life becomes a burden!


Love!
Silence

Mana
07 January 2014, 02:28 AM
Dear Silence speaks.

I do not wish to enter into a point to point debate and as an example you have side stepped many important points, such as chandas; interestingly, by altering mine.

Your car analogy, lets read this together:

Your Father is obviously a great first Guru when learning to drive; But, if you want to pilot Formula one you will need a more experienced teacher, and a more specialized schooling. I suspect though, that formula one pilots are born, rather than made, so this may take several lifetimes and the schooling is more directive than forming.

Now, and this is key: What if your father spends all of his time watching the television, who will put you on your initial path? What would your driving skills become in his absence; A car thief perhaps, or a getaway driver, as seen on TV?

What then if you are born into a formula one car (your analogy negates the difference that time and karma may make to the vehicle), but you never get any training; you would never get of the starting grid in such a machine with no support; or would crash on the first bend.

Kind regards.

silence_speaks
07 January 2014, 03:35 AM
Dear Mana ji,
:)

This discussion , or any of my other discussions are only some sharing of ideas. There is nothing personal , nor is there any attempt to twist your views. I missed the chandas part because I did not quite understand it properly. Can you please elaborate a little on that ?

What I am trying to convey is just this:
One should know how to manage one's mind - and not worry so much about the "Content" of the mind.

So watching TV is not bad. Addiction to TV is a compulsive disorder - inability to manage mind. That's a problem.

Finally, usually its incorrect to "Extend" an Example/illustration. We discuss ideas, not examples. Examples or drshtantas are given to illustrate the point... the point is what is supposed to be discussed. So the car example is to explain that mind management is needed ! Does not relate in any way to a formula one car !

Love!
Silence

Mana
08 January 2014, 04:55 AM
Dear Silence Speaks,

Order and disorder and the fluctuation between these two states happens continually in the field of conciousness, of the human super being; this is the integration and differentiation of knowledge.

As such to ascribe the status of "problematic" to any rhythmic reaction to this universal state of conciousness; this may imply ignorance of the non differential nature of knowledge, on behalf of he who is giving the classification.

Would the saint who spends his entire life performing japa be considered, in this light, to be suffering compulsive disorder?

Now Chandas, as I understand it, is a long wave frequency of super cerebral information. It is amongst other descriptions and phenomenon, the gramatic meter which has preseved the integratie of Sanskrt the Rk veda and vedas for so very long, when other languages have changed in the passing of time, its roots and its messages from the past are still intelligible. As such this low frequency information is travelling through time (our impression of time) so much very much further than more so than other offerings.
Chandas does not only exist in this manor; as suggested by the wise, everything emanates from sound, from om, from vibration.
Meditation allows us to tune into these lower frequency's or sounds, which are otherwise not intelligible. I am using the English word "sound" here but you must be aware that I imply; the tanmāntra śabda, which does not traslate well to the English word "sound" at all; it is not only heard with the ears, but manifests as a sub element of all mahābhūta and as such, a key component of ākāśa, a vibration of that ... Perhaps the higgs boson would be a better English description of this element, much intensive meditation is required to know what this English word means ...

These vibrations are not vibrations at all with out their rhythm, without chandas. We might like to liken this to the dance of netaji śiva, which does not happen without rhythm, nothing does, śunya!
Now why do I have an issue with this in regard to the television, you might well ask?
Simply compare the rhythm or the chandas of the editing in tv and films since they first started, and now ask yourself; what frequency is my mind dancing to here; Do you hear the longer wave length?

What if mind is as much created by its content, by it vibration and the frequency there in; then managing the content is to manage ones mind and ignoring such a kin to running away. Watching tv is not bad no, but if it unwittingly replaces other sources of vibration, it is surly best that we be aware of that, and to where those waves are taking us.

Citta, to my mind, is a very big field to see through ...

I do not understand your last paragraph at all, please, If you find my understanding of your model to be wrong, then correct my vision of your model; Rather than criticise fundamentally, the way in which I communicate; There are no points but only perspectives.

"drshtantas" drṣ here surly imply the root view or sight as in "drṣṭi", and "tanas" offspring; as in, resulting from a particular perspective.

To my mind, It is perfectly normal to extend an example to express a differing idea, to verify a perspective by moving it slightly ...

Kind regards.

silence_speaks
09 January 2014, 12:18 AM
Dear Mana ji,
:)

:) Mana ji, Please understand that I am not criticizing you or anyone here. We are discussing ideas and in discussing them there will be some negations and rejections - that's natural. At the end of the day, we may disagree on a few points -- and yet remain friends !

Meditation is not an altered state of mind! Meditation is to know that you are not the mind! And a person who is attracted to exotic experiences and states of mind will always see himself as mind - even as a person who is attracted to physical beauty will see himself or herself as the body! Meditation is to see oneself as untouched by mind! Because mind belongs to the realm of mithya. Before we discuss that further ... let me first accept that some of the axioms and statements of your post are not yet clear to me. So I will present my views on what I understood and raise questions on the terms which I did not understand. I will quote from your post for this purpose - I believe that also keeps the posts well structured.



Order and disorder and the fluctuation between these two states happens continually in the field of conciousness, of the human super being;this is the integration and differentiation of knowledge.
[QUOTE]

Q1) Whats a field of consciousness and whats a "Human Super Being" ?
Q2) Whats integration and differentiation of knowledge ?? Please elaborate.

[QUOTE]
As such to ascribe the status of "problematic" to any rhythmic reaction to this universal state of conciousness; this may imply ignorance of the non differential nature of knowledge, on behalf of he who is giving the classification.
[QUOTE]

Q3) whats a "rhythmic reaction of universal state of consciousness" ?
Q4) and whats "Ascribing status of problematic" to such a state ?
Q5) Whats ignorance of non-differential nature of knowledge ?

[QUOTE]
Would the saint who spends his entire life performing japa be considered, in this light, to be suffering compulsive disorder?
[QUOTE]

I'll Answer this... if the "So called saint" is obsessed and cannot stop doing japa ... he is suffering from an obsessive compulsive disorder! His mind dictates terms for him!
In the first place, why do japa at all ?

[QUOTE]
Now Chandas, as I understand it, is a long wave frequency of super cerebral information
[QUOTE]

Q6) Whats frequency of super cerebral information ?

[QUOTE]
As such this low frequency information is travelling through time (our impression of time) so much very much further than more so than other offerings.


Q7) What does this mean ? whats "Travelling - through time - of information" ? Whats low frequency information ?



Meditation allows us to tune into these lower frequency's or sounds, which are otherwise not intelligible. I am using the English word "sound" here but you must be aware that I imply; the tanmāntra śabda, which does not traslate well to the English word "sound" at all; it is not only heard with the ears, but manifests as a sub element of all mahābhūta and as such, a key component of ākāśa, a vibration of that ... Perhaps the higgs boson would be a better English description of this element, much intensive meditation is required to know what this English word means ...
[QUOTE]

Q8) How do you differentiate this from a hallucination ?
Q9) Why use a term like "Higgs boson" ? Is that to make it sound scientific in some sense ?
Q10) Why should anyone want to hear these low frequency sounds in meditation - albeit with the mental ear ?

[QUOTE]
We might like to liken this to the dance of netaji śiva, which does not happen without rhythm, nothing does, śunya!
[QUOTE]

How easily do you jump from one notion to another !!
Q11) What has Siva got to do with all these ?

[QUOTE]
Citta, to my mind, is a very big field to see through
[QUOTE]

Q12) You believe ? You Feel ? Or you think ? What is Citta ? How do you know this ?

[QUOTE]
I do not understand your last paragraph at all, please, If you find my understanding of your model to be wrong, then correct my vision of your model; Rather than criticise fundamentally, the way in which I communicate; There are no points but only perspectives.

"drshtantas" drṣ here surly imply the root view or sight as in "drṣṭi", and "tanas" offspring; as in, resulting from a particular perspective.

To my mind, It is perfectly normal to extend an example to express a differing idea, to verify a perspective by moving it slightly ...



You can give an example to present an idea. In doing so, the example ends with the illustration of the idea.
another idea can be presented with some other example.
One should be clear that the point of discussion is not the example. Example neither proves nor disproves a point. Example simply makes the idea clear. The idea has to be proved or disproved , not the example.

ameyAtmA
09 January 2014, 01:57 AM
Namaste

What I am trying to convey is just this:
One should know how to manage one's mind - and not worry so much about the "Content" of the mind.
Love!
Silence
So please tell us - how to manage the mind --
It is easy in ekānta (solitude). Go out into the world, including the so-called adhyātmic world, or satsanga, and the unpredictability of each situation, dynamic nature of events, a variety of mind-sets can all take the mind on a long drive.

Sometimes parking lots are not such a bad thing.

Thank You

yajvan
09 January 2014, 05:02 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté

Meditation is not an altered state of mind! Meditation is to know that you are not the mind!

I would say it a bit differently... that you are not the ego (ahaṃkāra¹). Managing the mind is like working with a thief for your best interest. Many promises are made, yet you will be taken advantage of in the end. Even king janaka came to this conclusion.

iti śivaṁ

1. ahaṃkāra - is the 'I' doer; this is self(me) awareness; differentiated awareness within the realm of objects and within the world some call tripuṭā ( the 3's )

yajvan
09 January 2014, 07:51 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté




Many promises are made, yet you will be taken advantage of in the end. Even king janaka came to this conclusion.



What then is one to do ? Some say , remove a thorn with the use of another thorn.

If one looks to the 1st chapter of patañjali’s yogadarśana (the yoga sutras of Patañjali), or the sāmadhi pāda , we get a good feel on what one is to do.

Another approach is that of self inquiry (ātma-vicara) - this is advocated by ramaṅa mahaṛṣi .
Are there othger ways ? Yes . I can think of about 112 of them¹. It still comes down to the capacity and capability of the aspirant. Who says so ? Patañjali (again chapter 1 one will find this pointed out).

So, what to do ? Begin, learn, practice; patience and persistence.


iti śivaṁ

1. 112 ways are the subject matter of the vijñānabhairava kāraka-s

Mana
09 January 2014, 11:46 PM
Dear Silence Speaks,

Yes quite naturally, a friendly discussion indeed, obviously we are of slightly differing perspective; this is of no matter, only of mind.

I could not agree more with you that meditation is not an altered state of mind. It is to my mind, and in my experience; the way in which one might harness and land a state of conciousness which has altered, elevated, spontaneously; So as to manage yama and niyama without unwittingly passing on to the next loca. A point which is most worthy of note as it can quite literally save your life, or perhaps better said would be, alter which loca you spend a large part of this or your next next life in.
A1) caitanyamātmā
A2) jṇānaṁ bandhaḥ
A3) spanda
A4)
So watching TV is not bad. Addiction to TV is a compulsive disorder - inability to manage mind. That's a problem.
It has been proven in certain other animals, that if you put a "better than life" example of, in this example, prospective mates, as an option into their existence; they no longer actually mate preferring the "better than life" fake offering over reality. If I recollect correctly this was shown with birds, but I am not entirely sure; you will have to take my word for it, that this has been adequately demonstrated. Is it not a illusion of Ahaṃkāra to think humans much different to this? For example: there less and less room for musicians in Western culture, people prefer CD's, comparing musicians to CD's; not the inverse. Paradoxical, as music (to play an instrument) is the most wonderful meditation.
A)5 Please refer to A2
A6) Brain waves, in universal conciousness; Time.
A)7 Travelling through time, our perception of, is simply life as we experience it. Sound beneath, or above, a certain frequency is inaudible to our ears; this does not mean that it does not exist, nor does it imply that we are not affected by it: Weather fronts are very low sound waves.
Chandas in Mantra are low frequency sound waves, if you put up a visual representation of a recording of a mantra; you can see this plainly ...
A8) I understand it, and it also corresponds to the reality I see day in day out.
A9) No its not to make this "sound" scientific. Why translate this into Sanskrit; If there are English words which mean the same? Incidentally evidence of the existence of the Higgs boson, confirms that A8) is just.
A10) They are the dream state and beyond. Also in correspondence with this; they are the subconscious; the heart rate; the pulse; the rate at which we breath. Please refer to brain wave length and states of conciousness and their corresponding effect on our regulatory systems.
A11) śiva is all of this; and that.
A12) Please refer to A1.
Wow ... your final question, Q13) reads like a school exam paper; and with that it appears to be a circular argument, I didn't do so well at school and prefer not even to attempt to answer this question.

I have previously mentioned that I dislike point for point debate as it takes me so long to write in this way. I am happy to discuss anything and everything but I feel that I must be honest with you in saying that I find discussion, as to the rules of conversation, to be futile, preferring instead to try and engage a flow; So much easer in spoken conversation.
I mean absolutely no offence, I am being honest. If there was not a spell check on my browser, you might better understand why.

With kind regards.

silence_speaks
10 January 2014, 12:16 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté


I would say it a bit differently... that you are not the ego (ahaṃkāra¹). Managing the mind is like working with a thief for your best interest. Many promises are made, yet you will be taken advantage of in the end. Even king janaka came to this conclusion.

iti śivaṁ

1. ahaṃkāra - is the 'I' doer; this is self(me) awareness; differentiated awareness within the realm of objects and within the world some call tripuṭā ( the 3's )

Dear Yajvan ji,
:) If you are not the mind you are neither lured by the promises nor can anyone take advantage of you. Coz nothing of the mind can touch you.
:)!! You being not thing mind, how can anything ever trouble you or take advantage of you ?

infact there should be a "you" to get hit by the thoughts ... the statement that you are not the mind ... to see that is to see that there is no "you" who can be hit by thoughts !

Love!
Silence

silence_speaks
10 January 2014, 12:23 AM
Namaste

So please tell us - how to manage the mind --
It is easy in ekānta (solitude). Go out into the world, including the so-called adhyātmic world, or satsanga, and the unpredictability of each situation, dynamic nature of events, a variety of mind-sets can all take the mind on a long drive.

Sometimes parking lots are not such a bad thing.

Thank You

Dear Ameyatma,
:) If I do not know how to drive the car, parking lot is definitely better :)!

Let me now get to the main point: how to manage the mind.
Before that you have to tell me : How does mind affect you ?
Lets do a "Step by step analysis" ... suppose you see something or something happens. how does mind affect us. Specifically, I would want you to elaborate on a few points :
1. Does the presence of thought affect us or the absence of an object ?
2. A thought is supposed to be momentary, how is it able to touch you or trouble us ?

Lets see if we can do this together.

Love!
Silence

Mana
10 January 2014, 12:32 AM
Dear ameyAtmA,


... Sometimes parking lots are not such a bad thing.


Quite, and walking a more agreeable option.

Kind regards.

silence_speaks
10 January 2014, 01:10 AM
Dear ameyAtmA,



Quite, and walking a more agreeable option.

Kind regards.

:) a nice way to avoid accidents if you do not know how to drive the car.
:) so if you do not know how to use the mind what will you do ? keep it thoughtless :D LOL!!

ameyAtmA
10 January 2014, 03:48 AM
It is easy in ekānta (solitude). Go out into the world, including the so-called adhyātmic world, or satsanga, and the unpredictability of each situation, dynamic nature of events, a variety of mind-sets can all take the mind on a long drive.

Sometimes parking lots are not such a bad thing.
Taking a sātvic scenario for the sake of simplicity:

A sādhak attends a day-long satsang of kathā with a strong resolve to maintain maun (silence) and keep a low profile. They get there. The morning session begins where a friend-associate comes and sits next to them "Hi!" You just smile. Slowly this friend asks you to read the sanskrit on the big billboard-like poster behind the speakers ' dias . Since the kathā hasn't yet begun, the speaker isn't there, and this is a good request, not jalpa (chatter), you agree. Slowly a few whispered exchanges during kathā , related to the kathā. After all, she is your friend .
In the afternoon break, a group is singing bhajans so beautiful, and your intention is to listen, but suddenly a person turns up out of nowhere and starts asking intrusive questions "Who is your Guru, Ishṭa Deva, ...." and much to your shock and surprise, they keep digging for personal information and spiritual experience. As if they know something already. The sādhak first resists, saying, experiences should not be discussed . The person convinces them that Kṛṣṇa says it is OK if the listener has faith and devotion . So they agree, but keep telling the curious one "Let us go out, it does not feel good to speak in the hall even if it is break time , only a few people are here and no one can hear us" They do not think it matters and insist that "we sit here" logic: the bhajan ladies cannot hear us anyway.
The evening session has a very very non-stop-talkative friend- associate with some common spiritual interest sitting next to you, and somehow, you end up whispering philosophical sentences in each otherś ears occasionally. Now the katha is over, but these two are continuing whispered discussion, and the katha-police walks up and catches you!
(but neither the morning friend, evening friend, nor the afternoon' s Curious George). "Talking during kathā is a sin" he sayṣ.

What will the mind' s reaction be?

A] This kāya-mana-buddhi is like that Adi-shaktiś tornado-whirlpool, and it messed up. Despite good intentions . But wait, I am not the doer ! This prakṛtī (nature), shakti (energy) is the way it iṣ. It has acted . No use getting angry on this little kitten who spilt all the milk . Perhaps, knowing how vulnerable she is, it is better not to attend for the rest of the week, since it disturbs the environment ("can't take her anywhere").
[Mind content and serene, no lamentatioṇ . Just apologizes to the kathā-police and goes home, never to returṇ]

B] Apologizes to kathā police, and keeps beating itself up for messing up! How could I be sooooooo stupid and give in to "bad" sanga ? It is my fault, I should not get affected by otherṣ. There is no excuse. I am terrible. Regret, lament, make resolutions to control the mind next time, and doubles japa or meditation in that regarḍ.

C] Gets upset and says -- well, they did it! I did not want to talk at all! It is all their fault! Shrugs .

Mana
12 January 2014, 03:01 AM
Dear ameyAtmA,

You write beautifully; it is a real joy to read you. I appreciate greatly the sentiments that you have raised.
I must admit though, that it is very difficult for me as a Western European to be able to find any adequate response from those listed. I can not imagine this scenario either in the local church, nor in the local psychiatric centre; both of who claim to be the predominant temple.

Kind regards.

Mana
12 January 2014, 03:24 AM
Dear Silence speaks,


:) a nice way to avoid accidents if you do not know how to drive the car.
:) so if you do not know how to use the mind what will you do ? keep it thoughtless :D LOL!!

Do we know what mind is? To my mind, it emanates from chandas, pace, pada and it is fed by the senses ...

We all have a natural rhythm which flows from deep within, it is before mind and under buddhi; we hear much of the desires of a person, from that rhythm; desire most certainly raises the pace.
To neither need nor wish to pass walking speed is simply indicative of a steady flow of heart, the seat of the mind; where as, senses such as vision are its kingdom.
If our thoughts become agitated by desire, the sediment raised will certainly mask this most eloquent gait; from our selves, but not from others.

Where is mind?

Kind regards.

ameyAtmA
12 January 2014, 08:54 AM
Thank You silence. Let me just point to post#21 which was made a few days ago, but has just showed up now. When I made that post, your [this] post had not shown up :)
Post 21 gives a scenario and shows how the mind need not be affected by the dance of prakṛtī because "I am not the doer, She is, She dances" , at the same time responsibility has to be taken to make sure the environment/surrounding is not affected by this little kitten of triguṇa.


Before that you have to tell me : How does mind affect you ?
Lets do a "Step by step analysis" ... suppose you see something or something happens. how does mind affect us. Specifically, I would want you to elaborate on a few points :
1. Does the presence of thought affect us or the absence of an object ?
The presence of thoughts AS WELL AS the conscientious righteous saṃskār that the environment should not be affected by prakṛti associated with this body even though I am not the doer .


2. A thought is supposed to be momentary, how is it able to touch you or trouble us ?
If I am sarvātmā with firm lack of kartā-bhāv, i.e. firmly fixed in the consciousness that I am not the kartā (doer), then the thoughts are not me and should not affect me. However, again, the environment or universe should be disturbed to a minimum because of this little local kitten called prakṛtī that somehow spilt the milk and got scared. (The poor thing did not even drink the milk). Therefore, there are two choices

1] Do not take little kitten anywhere, keep her home (keep car in parking lot)
2] Train the kitten so that even if others are influencing her to act, she stays firm in her resolve. This IMHO is a circus of increasing sattva and decreasing ego.

Please note that this is an effort, not for the local ego (ahaṃkār), but to make sure the universe is not negatively impacted. Perhaps this is why yogis lived in caves, not necessarily for themselves, but for others.

It does not matter that the prakṛtī kitten got blamed for somebody else' s fault - which is simply yet another kitten . What matters is how it affected the entire satsanga of kittens . Since I am ONE, all kittens are MY Kittens :) so I do not favour one over the other, but it is about regulating the classroom.

praṇām

silence_speaks
13 January 2014, 12:00 AM
Dear ameyAtmA (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/member.php?u=6160),
:)
When the friend prompted you to speak, why did you speak ?

Question: Are you compelled to speak or is it a choice ?

Love!
Silence

silence_speaks
13 January 2014, 12:01 AM
Dear Mana,
:)
If there is a natural rhythm and a flow, what "Sees" the flow ?

Love!
Silence

ameyAtmA
14 January 2014, 01:31 AM
Dear ameyAtmA (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/member.php?u=6160),
:)
When the friend prompted you to speak, why did you speak ?

Question: Are you compelled to speak or is it a choice ?

Love!
Silence
The mind has a choice, but the situation is too dynamic for some minds [This is just a case study by the way.] -- given the ingrained (or programmed/embedded) saṃskār of not "hurting others' feelings" plus, thinking this little responding is harmless, and one thing leads to another till they have completely forgotton the morningś resolve in the dynamic situation for that day. Some minds are vulnerable and get influenced by others, more so if they are really detached from the situation (this may sound topsy turvy but this is how it is). If you are indifferent, dispassionate (udāseen) about the world, you are not involved, hence not alert enough, and your attitude is "WHATEVER" , hence you just go with the flow. Dumb, I know.

Also, had the mind any idea about this rule of "no talking even one word in the hall" (even if no one hears you) , it would not speak. Now, it is a lesson learned, but unfortuntely you never come across the same situation twice. Next time the protocol may be different and you may not know it until its too late. As if the only way to know the protocol is to break it.

May I ask something ? Why not simply disconnect from everything, if I am not this body, mind, intellect, world, etc. etc.? If it is just a movie, why get involved in it, and when possible, why even participate? Just keep the car in parking... till it rusts and breaks :)

yajvan
14 January 2014, 06:19 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté

I am in hopes we got to the part where "The Understanding that can Aid Meditation " will be fulfilled.

Perhaps I was in the ~car~ that passed up this part. For me and the ~car~ (code for mind) , I would prefer to be without one. Mind is just more baggage.

iti śivaṁ

silence_speaks
15 January 2014, 12:04 AM
Dear Yajvan ji,



I am in hopes we got to the part where "The Understanding that can Aid Meditation " will be fulfilled.



:) This statement of yours is like the criticism of Congress/BJP against AAP !! :) LOL!
Yajvan ji, if you have studied what I have said with an open mind ... and not colored it with your already existing notions ... you should have got it by now in this post itself! The very fact that you still wait for it to be fulfilled means you have not been reading what I said!



Perhaps I was in the ~car~ that passed up this part. For me and the ~car~ (code for mind) , I would prefer to be without one. Mind is just more baggage.


And LO! in that "Preference" to be without one, is the mind !! :)
Mind is a baggage if you carry it on your head.
Who asked you to carry it on your head all the while ?
Satvic mind, rajasic mind, tamasic mind ... all those notions and ideas ! who asked you to categorize people or yourself into all these and then try for a satvic mind as against a tamasic or rajasic one ?
Its all these efforts that make you feel that the mind is a baggage!

A Shadow is neither a trouble nor a baggage. One neither tries to get rid of it, nor hold onto it! This entire world, along with mind ... is no more than a shadow [Mind is a shadow ... Annamalai Swami]!

And LO! If you have been attentive, here also is something profound enough to aid your meditation in a "Big" Way!

Love!
Silence

silence_speaks
15 January 2014, 12:14 AM
Dear AmeyAtma,
:)

The mind has a choice, but the situation is too dynamic for some minds [This is just a case study by the way.]



:) Lets zoom more closely into it.
a) Thoughtlessly can you respond ?
b) If there is a thought, must you respond ?
c) How can a thought trouble you ? How can it push or pull you ?





May I ask something ? Why not simply disconnect from everything, if I am not this body, mind, intellect, world, etc. etc.? If it is just a movie, why get involved in it, and when possible, why even participate? Just keep the car in parking... till it rusts and breaks :)


:) If you have understood it as a movie ... why would you want to move away from it ? The very fact that you want to move away from it, detach from it or remain separate from it means you give it some reality ?

If a person knows his shadow to be a shadow and not a ghost ... does he try to get rid of it or produce it ? He is fine whether that shadow remains or is gone. He himself neither tries to move away from it nor move towards it!
The very fact that a person is trying to bury the shadow means he treats it as real - a ghost!

Love!
Silence

ameyAtmA
16 January 2014, 09:27 AM
Nice to see you back here, Silence :)
Dear AmeyAtma,
:)


:) Lets zoom more closely into it.
a) Thoughtlessly can you respond ?
Yes, that is the problem

b) If there is a thought, must you respond ?
No, but I guess it is a "natural reaction, reflex or response" which happens in case of "avichārī" (impulsive) minds - that also has a deep root in this respect, kainkaryam and regard for others where the mind has forgotton itself ---- No amount of meditation can get it to SNUB others - it feels equivalent to being rude.


c) How can a thought trouble you ? How can it push or pull you ? Sometimes, the mind is a child - who is full of joy and harmless , but others want to put unnecessary restrictions on it -- this is where the ego comes in :) So a thought can be trouble only and only because of ego.


If you have understood it as a movie ... why would you want to move away from it ? The very fact that you want to move away from it, detach from it or remain separate from it means you give it some reality ?

If a person knows his shadow to be a shadow and not a ghost ... does he try to get rid of it or produce it ? He is fine whether that shadow remains or is gone. He himself neither tries to move away from it nor move towards it!
The very fact that a person is trying to bury the shadow means he treats it as real - a ghost!

Love!
Silence

Very True! You are right Silence. It is this ingrained saṃskār to give utmost importance to each and every being, that is misunderstood and importance is given to the egos instead. Actually many of these beings are simply shadows not ghosts, but the ego-personalities are given so much importance in the mind that it thinks they are satya, and that all the interactions that take place are satya. Taking a rope to be a snake.
Plus, expecting [positive] acknowledgement from other shadows is also a function of the ego.

Thank You so much for your wisdom :)

praṇām

ameyAtmA
16 January 2014, 10:57 AM
Wait a minute...I do not move away from the movie. I just don't go to the theatre! I have a choice of simply staying home and not buying the ticket . This is not running away from anything. This is effortless and the most natural default.Your assumption is that I am IN the movie to begin with, which is not the case. I am happy at home.You lesson is well taken, noted, for situations where there is no choice but to be surrounded by shadow-characters.

silence_speaks
17 January 2014, 11:44 PM
Dear ameyAtmA (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/member.php?u=6160) ,
:)

Once Ego is known as shadow and seen as shadow -- whether it continues or drops ... You remain Free.

Even so with expectation that others should understand. When something is taught its natural to expect that others learn. Why teach otherwise. Even if something is just shared [as in my case ], its shared with an expectation that others get it.

When Shankara wrote a commentary on Gita, he expected that it clears some confusion amongst people. :)

And yet, no expectation can bind, unless i take myself to be the mind! The crux of the point is ... if a thought is affecting me ... it means i have taken myself to be an entity in the mind !

The teaching "You are not the mind" is also at the mind but it serves to show that the mind is no more than a shadow.

"mind is a shadow" is Annamalai Swami ji's first statement of final talks ... and it ends with "There is no ego, so no question of killing it"!!
:)

Love!
Silence

ameyAtmA
19 January 2014, 03:54 AM
Even so with expectation that others should understand.
I was talking about myself, Silence, (expectation of positive acknowledgement from others in a function of ego) and not about the teacher :)

silence_speaks
06 February 2014, 03:08 AM
Friends,
:)

While some people are concerned about means to make their minds calm and relaxed, there are others who stop manipulating mental states, as they have discovered that irrespective of their mental states, they are ever fulfilled ! In other words, no mental state is able to affect their Self Abidance

Liberated living needs a fundamental paradigm change: instead of bothering about how to make the mind calm, see if you can bring in a certain aloofness to the states of mind - an attitude of I don't care, its not my business! This too a change in the mental outlook [a change in the buddhi], but without this shift in paradigm, one will find liberated living as almost impossible!

"I don't care, its not my business" is from Annamalai Swami.

This turns the aim of meditation topsy-turvy ! Instead of looking at ways to calm the mind ... one now says ... let the mind be thus and at the same time discovers his own Self as untouched by this. Right in the midst of mental turmoil ... without denying the mental turmoil ... one tells oneself ... I JUST AM! Mind cannot touch me!

When one is able to realize this ... thats called liberation...
Ashtavakra Gita says:
धर्माधर्मौ सुखं दुखं
मानसानि न ते विभो।
न कर्तासि न भोक्तासि
मुक्त एवासि सर्वदा॥१-६॥

Righteousness, unrighteousness, pleasure and pain are connected with the mind and not with the all-pervading you. You are neither the doer nor the reaper of the actions, so you are ever free.॥6॥

And make no mistake: This , if its told, its for the buddhi!

silence_speaks
19 February 2014, 12:34 AM
The way to true meditative living, friends
is not via lulling the mind ...
its by identifying the ingredients that cause agitation and facing them.

For example: suppose someone is afraid of darkness.
One way is to lull the mind by changing ... so that the fear in the mind is eliminated or temporarily forgotten.

Another way is to face the darkness. Face it incrementally and become comfortable with it.

The first approach is a stop cap approach ... like putting a patient under anesthesia. After putting a patient under anesthesia, the wound has to be operated upon. Otherwise, its not solving the problem. Similarly ... lulling the mind is only a short term solution...
one has to ultimately convert one's life into meditative living and for that its important that one has to face the ingredients of the mind that cause conflicts in it.

Love!
Silence

chandu_69
19 February 2014, 11:53 PM
Never knew it is that simple ;).


The way to true meditative living, friends
is not via lulling the mind ...
its by identifying the ingredients that cause agitation and facing them.

For example: suppose someone is afraid of darkness.
One way is to lull the mind by changing ... so that the fear in the mind is eliminated or temporarily forgotten.

Another way is to face the darkness. Face it incrementally and become comfortable with it.

The first approach is a stop cap approach ... like putting a patient under anesthesia. After putting a patient under anesthesia, the wound has to be operated upon. Otherwise, its not solving the problem. Similarly ... lulling the mind is only a short term solution...
one has to ultimately convert one's life into meditative living and for that its important that one has to face the ingredients of the mind that cause conflicts in it.

Love!
Silence

silence_speaks
20 February 2014, 06:13 AM
Dear chandu_69,
:) With the right understanding, its very simple!
With wrong understanding it appears very difficult.

Love!
Silence

Ajeet
25 April 2014, 06:16 AM
Jai Shri Maa

There are many ways to do meditation all are good however one that is simple is to watch your breath... Count 20 & then backcounting..

No need to go into the physics or the chemistry of the process.

I am sorry & please pardon me if my words hurt any of the learned writers here.

Jai Shree Maa.

Ajeet

yajvan
25 April 2014, 12:37 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté


Jai Shri Maa

There are many ways to do meditation all are good however one that is simple is to watch your breath... Count 20 & then backcounting..

No need to go into the physics or the chemistry of the process.

I am sorry & please pardon me if my words hurt any of the learned writers here. Jai Shree Maa.

Watching the breath is quite reasonable... more on this matter is offered here on this HDF string if there is interest: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2323

That said, I am of a different opinion on counting. This engages the mind and one is now paying attention to count vs. having the mind settle down : example: Am I on 19 or did I miss 19. Do I need to start over, or do I just start at 19 ? Am I going backwards or forwards ? Oh make a note , since I am on 15, remember to pay the rent which is due on the 15th.

The intellect is engaged and the ego then gets a chance to 'feed'. The balance one thought was occurring is now lost to mundane events.

We are concerned about ever-refreshing the awareness vs. counting numbers.


iti śivaṁ

silence_speaks
25 April 2014, 06:47 PM
Dear Ajeet ji,
:)
Observing breath is a means to calm the mind ... its a method that is used to Alter the states of mind.

I am here , in this article, not speaking of altering the states of mind. I am speaking of the Truth that you are not the mind. Altered states of mind are good subjects for psychology study.

Vedantic Truth is "You are not the Mind" ... and as long as a person is trying to alter the states of mind to see himself happier or calmer ... he is perpetuating the notion that he is the mind ...

This is not my statement ... this is said by none other than Annamalai Swami , the direct disciple of Ramana Maharshi.

Love!
Silence

saswathy
28 April 2014, 09:47 PM
Dear friends ,
Mind is prakrithi . Just as nature has got different seasons and different changes mind is also subject to the changes which reflect in different moods . No person is free from the changes either internally or externally .What all given in the spiritual and philosophical scriptures is only the reflection of the experiences of those who gave them . IT need not be the absolute truth . By saying that I don't mean they are false accounts . They are true for a given time and place . Thus all statements are qualified statements . Keeping this in the view point and background we have to proceed in the meditation .Like in the arrow and target game , the concentration just goes and hits the point sometimes and sometimes it misses the target . Even when Kundaline raises and reaches Sahasrara also , it doesn't stay therefor ever , it comes down . So we haveto leve the mind freely and make it a practice . Just as a child who goes out and plays for some times and comes back at the end of the day to eat and sleep , mind left to wander , comes back and gets settled for a time being at the conciousness and again goes back to the outside world .Other wise we don't find all rishi , munis sages and siddhas again and again gettig involved in the worldly matters , though for the benefit of humanity .