Hacker News Reader

> One of the aims of mediation is to gradually understand that this self is really an illusion

Yes this is a standard Buddhist (and not even exclusively Buddhist) point, and I'd say it's basically correct, but the problem is that it can, and has been understood in dozens of ways. Some more profound than others, and plenty contradicting one another.

Let me give a fairly psychological interpretation. One of our major cognitive functions is to create and maintain an automatic, pre-verbal map of the world, at the center of which stands a mapped entity labeled "ME". Let's call it the "self-representation". This is in itself fine and dandy, and quite useful; it gives us a sense of being an integrated organism through time, and lets us say things like "yesterday I went swimming". More troublingly, it's also the subject of our self-esteem, and of most of our hopes and worries.

The map, with our self-representation in the center, is not the only thing in our awareness - we're also able to attend to stimula and feel our emotions in the here and now. The problem, and the only problem as far as radical Buddhism is concerned, is that our sense of being is most of the time entirely fused with this self-representation. It becomes the entirely of who I am to myself. (Hence Ramana Maharshi's super direct path: inquire within "who am I").

What meditation does, by slowing down the whole mechanism, is to allow us to feel that there is more to me, here and now, than this running self-representation. By insistently putting our attention away from it, we temporally and partially unfuse from the self-representation. We get little breaks from it, where it either it mostly just stops for a while, or it becomes something I see happening, rather than something I am. And if I can see it happening, I can also train myself to not give it so much importance.

The result is a much vaster inner perspective, and a sense of deeper presence - for a few moments at least. But, usually, the moment the meditator notices these changes happening, the most automatic reaction is for the self-representation to rise back up as the one who wants to own that. HEY, INTERESTING STUFF IS HAPPENING TO ME!!! And there you go go crashing again into stuffy ordinary consciousness.

Hence the usual advice you will hear from good meditation teachers: getting experiences if often easy, but not running after them can take years and years of practice.

That seems like a fantastic explanation -- can I ask a couple of questions, since you seem to be able to explain so well?

Because I've never found much success with meditation, but the split between present-experience and self-representation has always seemed... well, easy to me. This idea of them being "fused" is only something I discovered in discussions around meditation. But then that makes me wonder if I misunderstand it.

Conceptually, I can understand the present-experience meditation aims at as simply experiencing the senses. Which I'll do sometimes, especially outside in nature. It's nice. I've never had any trouble quieting down my thoughts, as long as I'm not in an immediately stressful situation.

But it's also never "changed" me in any way. It doesn't make me feel like there's "more to me", nor does it feel like it's some kind of desperately needed respite from my self-representation. I rather like the challenges of everyday life. Even if they're not "so important", it gives me meaning and purpose in a way that, well, I can't find any comparable meaning or purpose in focusing solely on present-experience.

So I guess my question is, am I missing some aspect of meditation? Am I misunderstanding something here? Because what I've been struggling to understand is why letting go of self-representation is seen as good or a goal. You're left with your sensory experience, but I don't understand what's meant to be so profound about that. It's never led me to any ethical realizations the way reading moral philosophy has, nor has it led me to any therapeutic realizations the way psychotherapy has -- nor do I really understand the mechanism by which it could. But I feel like I might be missing a piece of the puzzle?

Thanks for your kind words :) Now I really need to answer something, and it's not so easy based on the info you give.

I'll skip the standard religious answer to your question in terms of existential unsatisfactoriness - you can find that in the 1st chapter of any decent Buddhist book.

On the one hand, you could be someone whose mind is already fairly flexible, creative, open and not very compulsive, so you don't see much point in doing explicit work to make it even more like that. In which case, I'd say, just enjoy life and go with it!

The other possibility is that you could be (like many of us here probably) so deeply fused with your thinking mind that you have little experience or appreciation for the things consciousness can do beyond that.

Either way, maybe the point here is to remember that meditation is a tool among others, not a must or a panacea.

Do you sometimes feel a sense of awe? Exhilaration from music or some other source? Deep compassion for someone's misfortune? The thrill of riding a bike or some sense of flow from bodily exertion? The sense that time just stops in some special situations? The warm feeling of being part of something greater than you? A sense of mystery in life?

These are examples of things that most of us value when they happen, and yet they are neither happening at the level of the mental map (in the way that e.g moral philosophy is), nor reduced to bare sensory experience.

Deep meditation is about going deeply within yourself, and whatever you find along the way just becomes part of your journey of integration. There is no universal blueprint, bc the material you find yourself wrestling with is just whatever happens to have lodged itself in your unique psyche - traumas and all.

This should not be confused with the light meditation that has been popularized as "mindfulness" - that's a fairly safe technique that most everyone can probably benefit from having in their toolbox to help handle stress or bad times.

To the basic question "am I missing something", the only real answer is that if you feel curious, you can only know by giving it a try - thinking won't give you the info. If you were wondering about e.g learning to play the saxophone, you could get a pretty good idea whether it's worth your effort by listening to some on a cd. But this music is silent.

It takes at least 3 day immersive retreat, or (alternatively) a few months following e.g a weekly course with a bit of practice at home every day, to get a first feel for the space that meditation can open up, and decide whether you're interested in further exploring that.

Similarities and differences in perspective:

"...you were taught in [Jesus]... to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness." -- Ephesians 4:20-24

"[O]ur mind is trained to function this way in response to some stimuli" vs "our old self is corrupted through deceitful desires". The former sounds non-judgemental, but by saying that this realization should "lead you to develop new, more wholesome habits, in adequation with reality, which make you and others suffer less", it's implying that the previous habits were unwholesome (cf "corrupt"), not in adequation with reality (cf "deceitful") and made you and others suffer more.

I think insofar as psychotherapy is reluctant to discard bits of the "[old] self", the two perspectives would agree that it's a dead end.

I do have to say, personally I like the sound of having a "new self, created after the likeness of God" better than "realizing I'm just a bundle of habits, then replacing some habits with better ones." :-)

> I do have to say, personally I like the sound of having a "new self, created after the likeness of God" better than "realizing I'm just a bundle of habits, then replacing some habits with better ones." :-)

To me, the "new self vs old self" framing is just more abstract. You should do what works for you, but I think breaking down one's identity into a set of habits or responses is simply a higher resolution of the same.

Meditation and therapy aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, for people who have traumas, I would say both are necessary. Very few meditation teachers are trained in handling a psychological crisis and mental break downs happen often in retreats and self-led practice.

This very much aligns with my experience.

Meditation helps me be with what is and remember that I’m ok.

Therapy helps me permanently untangle the thoughts and feelings that lead to distress in the first place.

They both complement each other and provide benefits that can’t be found in either alone. Meditation seems universally useful. Therapy somewhat less so, but still a powerful tool. If you’re not dealing with trauma, a good friend/mentor can provide the same feedback.

To be clear, there are many types of meditation, each with its own goal (or none at all). Some of them are "merely" relaxation exercises, but that is also something that is very much needed in today's world.