Comment by cko | Hacker News Reader

Comment by cko | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Meditation is one of those things that people think they're talking about the same thing when actually they're not. It's not just one thing - different religions and traditions have completely different approaches. Sure, there are some key concepts common to all like "awareness" and "mindfulness" - but awareness and mindfulness of what? Christians might "meditate" on a passage in the Bible. Theravada Buddhists have the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. There are Zen koans. I have no idea on other forms but I imagine there are way more.

Even among Theravada Buddhist meditation instructors there are clear disagreements on what the experience should be, how concentrated the mind should be, etc.

For example, for something as simple as a pull-up there are questions like: what muscles are being worked? What is the proper form? Pronated or supinated grip? What pace and why?

If I read an article on any subject I expect to see lots of footnotes.

Meditation is something way more subtle than doing pull-ups, yet most guides seem to assume that there is one concrete definition in the learner's mind. Where did the prescribed method come from? What is the goal? To just put instructions or information about any subject without mentioning background or citing any sources is strange to me - is meditation so new, obscure, or insignificant a subject that it doesn't warrant a little more rigor?

TLDR: meditation is a bigger subject than most people reslize.

One reason meditation is so varied is that it's unlike most skills. You can't learn it by watching someone else, and teachers can't see if you're doing it wrong. Progress is only made through trial, error, and dialogue. This is quite different from any physical activity, where visual feedback makes errors obvious.

To borrow an analogy from Sam Harris: Imagine if looking at the stars required building your own telescope. Nobody could ever see someone else's telescope, or even the images from it. They could only listen to each others' descriptions. This would make research much harder and much less rigorous. But the stars would be no less beautiful. That's the state of meditation today.

True - meditation means different things to different people. It's obvious the author is referring to the "mindfulness" version though and is trying to do so in simple-as-possible guide form so as not to distract with all the depth and nuance you allude to. I think most people get that there are many different types of meditation. I appreciate the article's simplicity because when I was a once a beginner all I seemed to be able to find was less than simple school-specific (Zen, Shambala, etc) instruction. The problem with the school-specific teachings, IMHO, is that they are all mindfullness-oriented, yet each adds their own special ritual and ceremony which as a beginner you mistake as being essential. At least for me, I've converged on an intentionally Occam's razor style approach aimed at stripping the non-essential. The coolest thing about Bhudda's story to me is he just sort of figured it all out for himself and said each of us should do the same. I've figured out for myself, for example, that it is not necessary at all to sit cross-legged. It makes no difference for me yet standard teachings always strongly encourage it to the point that you feel like you are "doing it wrong" if you don't. Teachers will even say, "if you can't sit cross-legged it's ok..." but when everybody in the group is doing otherwise, the overwhelming signal is it is actually not ok.

I guess one thing I'm saying is the kind of folks drawn to try meditation are often the same kind of folks who will willingly dive down rabbit holes investigating the differences between the schools and entertaining themselves with koans, etc. all the while distracting themselves from actually getting started with the meditation itself. Can confirm; was one of these people. That's why I'd caution against trying to raise awareness of all this complexity to the beginners this guide is intended for.

I can't agree with you enough. Also, looking at all the comments, I'm amazed at the complete lack of discussion of love and compassion. Regardless of your personal beliefs, if you're not including either, you're doing it wrong.

Oh, and nothing is as perfect as you believe it to be.

Your comment is a breath of fresh air. Meditation really is very very complex. Primarily because there is the visible side and then there is an invisible side, and the invisible side is not only different in different traditions, but also it is supposed to be different for each practitioner.

Even if you focus on Muslim meditation traditions, there's a huge variety. The Chishti tradition considers a state of dance to be meditation (eg the twirling dervishes) where as the Naqshbandi tradition is more inline with the Buddhist side that involves sitting still and focusing.

> Sure, there are some key concepts common to all like "awareness" and "mindfulness" - but awareness and mindfulness of what?

This is perhaps the most fundamental difference and its astonishing how most "meditation guides" completely ignore this part. See, while a lot of people sell meditation as a relaxation technique, almost all of the original traditions have much deeper goals than this.

Using the example of exercise, there are a million recommendations you will get on not just how, but whether to do the pull-up or a push-up or jumping jax. If your goal is to maximize general health then you monitor your heart rate, breathing rate and duration and quietly ignore those people and their absurd arguments to get to the top of some advice pyramid.

In meditation you also need to ignore your mind imitating those people which is easier if you start by not reading all their opinions. If you really want to know how you are doing it is increasingly practical for anyone to buy an EEG.

" it is increasingly practical for anyone to buy an EEG."

That's a fantastic idea I had not thought out before (getting old - I've fixated in my mind an image of an EEG as heavy and expensive specialist tool). Any references where I could get one cheap :) ?

I'm a poor source of modern information like current consumer ones, and never did build my own.

I used to follow the openeeg mailing list, which has tapered off in the last couple years: http://sourceforge.net/p/openeeg/mailman/openeeg-list/ (http://openeeg.sourceforge.net/doc/)

building one yourself was usually around $200 in parts but there were always interesting ideas to do simpler devices. You will find references to consumer ones people were considering, and responses that are helpful for figuring out which specs matter. I would also look for the names of new projects people are developing and maybe some of the hobbyist communities that are still active and debating the minimum specs for a budget device today..

What is the goal? In my understanding it's to get rid of all this goal-seeking business for a moment. Which is a beautiful contradiction and the reason why you don't need a lot of literature in order to practice. If you try hard to do it right, you're doing it wrong.

That's one way to look at it. There are many other ways. In traditional Buddhism, for example, there are many goals like increasing stages of concentration, insight, etc.

I like Castaneda's wording on meditation - stopping the world and not doing. Well, it's not actually on meditation but the outcomes are very similar... or could be.

To perceive the world as it is and not as it's described to us. To experience it directly without any thought or language.

http://alangullette.com/essays/philo/stopping.htm

Reply on news.ycombinator.com