Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Problem of Mindfulness

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 161 posts

Re: The Problem of Mindfulness

#141

Post by scooble »

Spearchucker wrote: post #110
scooble wrote: post #27

The main premise of the article seems to be that 'you are not your feelings' in mindfulness covertly introduces the idea of 'no self'. I don't find this compelling. If anything 'you are not your feelings' reinforces the 'western' picture of a self that has (but is not identical to) feelings.

So if we're not our body, and we're not our feelings (both are as transitory and regenerative as each other), then what are we? How do you define the self that is accountable for this body and these feelings?

I don't have a definition to offer. But that doesn't seem relevant to the truth value of the author's claim.

I can be ignorant of the nature of the self but still see that 'we are not our feelings' and 'there is no self' are not the same claim, or that the former implies the latter.

Re: The Problem of Mindfulness

#142

Post by gridlockd »

kr4 wrote: post #131
keymone wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s still not answering my question. How do I tell the difference between myself achieving enlightenment and merely having an opinion that I have achieved it? Things you describe are perceived subjectively, so they can also be victims to my brain deluding myself.

> How do I tell the difference between myself achieving enlightenment and merely having an opinion that I have achieved it? How would you describe a state of mind in which you remain thoughtless as long as you want? Thoughts will only arrive in your conscious mind when you summon them and you can hold a thought as long as you want. You remain perfectly peaceful, tranquil without blabbering and urges of the mind witho…

First of all, how do you know that all these people claiming enlightenment - exactly as you describe it - aren't all full of shit?

Secondly, let's say it's all true. Why is that so desirable?

> But an enlightened mind, perfectly in control cannot have delusion and ever lives in present moment

It's perfectly possible to live in the present moment and disregard the future even without meditation. That's not generally considered a good thing, though.

> Opinions and judgement are tools of a conditioned mind, ever fearful and constantly striving to ensure survival of the body.

Yes, your body has adapted to survival. What's wrong with that, why do you want to turn that off? You'll die anyway, are you really that impatient?

I guess if you're somehow in constant terror about the plight of existence, that might be a useful skill to have. Otherwise, I'd rather learn something else.

Re: The Problem of Mindfulness

#143

Post by skinnymuch »

apatters wrote: post #91
edejong wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with the mindfulness approach is that it only leads you knee-deep. Enough to enjoy the waves and the joy of water, but too little to start swimming. For example, I can still see you are not accepting your past self for what it is ("I thought I was insightful and deep before") or how the world is ("would be a FAR better place"). You are on a path towards awakening. Some of us have come to understand that t…

Now that Buddhists like you are coming in here and telling us to be more Buddhist and read and think Buddhist things, I think it's important to stress that anyone interested in mindfulness doesn't need to become a Buddhist. In fact there is a clinical application of mindfulness which is called cognitive behavioral therapy, it is proven through research to have great benefits for a lot of people, it is secular, and un…

CBT isn’t mindfulness. DBT is the one that incorporates mindfulness. CBT is specific analysis and can say it has mindfulness as part of it just as any introspection or analysis pertaining to your self does.

Re: The Problem of Mindfulness

#144

Post by proverbialbunny »

fsloth wrote: post #107
proverbialbunny wrote: post #70

The author has fallen into nihilism and has mistaken it for Buddhism and mindfulness meditation. Buddhism warns against falling into nihilism like this, but I suspect mindfulness meditation practices do not. Anatta doesn't mean no-self. It's a complex concept and is often mistaken. Anatta has two parts to it: 1) Reality is broken up and labeled as two kinds. There is the present moment reality, before it has been lab…

Thanks, explaining anatta as set theory is a great analogue.

You're very welcome.

For further reading of the abstractions that make up self, checkout The Five Skandhas (https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Five_skandhas)

As Hofstadter once wrote, "It's turtles all the way down." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down)

<3

Re: The Problem of Mindfulness

#145

Post by kr4 »

gridlockd wrote: post #142
kr4 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do I tell the difference between myself achieving enlightenment and merely having an opinion that I have achieved it? How would you describe a state of mind in which you remain thoughtless as long as you want? Thoughts will only arrive in your conscious mind when you summon them and you can hold a thought as long as you want. You remain perfectly peaceful, tranquil without blabbering and urges of the mind witho…

First of all, how do you know that all these people claiming enlightenment - exactly as you describe it - aren't all full of shit? Secondly, let's say it's all true. Why is that so desirable? > But an enlightened mind, perfectly in control cannot have delusion and ever lives in present moment It's perfectly possible to live in the present moment and disregard the future even without meditation. That's not generally c…

> First of all, how do you know that all these people claiming enlightenment - exactly as you describe it - aren't all full of shit?

Exactly as in any other field of expertise. Through your practice, knowledge/experiences you gain from that practice. Mere reading the books doesn't take one far in any field.

> Secondly, let's say it's all true. Why is that so desirable?

Who says it's desirable to everyone? It's individual's choice. If you get pleasure in learning something else, feel free to do that.

But someone might also want to go to the source of pleasure so he can maintain state of pleasure at all times regardless of circumstances outside, meditation is one sure way to that. Just like a hard core engineer may want to know how the whole thing works down to transistor, some people eventually get this desire to experience their whole being down to one's soul and even the super soul. Such people aren't satisfied being mere servant to the needs of body or mind for whole of their lives. They want to experience the eternity if there's such a thing. It's an arduous but a rewarding journey, with wonderful experiences at every little milestone on the path. But this thread isn't an appropriate place to write details about them.

Btw if you are thinking meditation or enlightenment means withdrawal from the world, or becoming something inert or passive, or stop enjoyment/learning, then you've not understood it correctly.

Re: The Problem of Mindfulness

#146

Post by gridlockd »

kr4 wrote: post #145
gridlockd wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, how do you know that all these people claiming enlightenment - exactly as you describe it - aren't all full of shit? Secondly, let's say it's all true. Why is that so desirable? > But an enlightened mind, perfectly in control cannot have delusion and ever lives in present moment It's perfectly possible to live in the present moment and disregard the future even without meditation. That's not generally c…

> First of all, how do you know that all these people claiming enlightenment - exactly as you describe it - aren't all full of shit? Exactly as in any other field of expertise. Through your practice, knowledge/experiences you gain from that practice. Mere reading the books doesn't take one far in any field. > Secondly, let's say it's all true. Why is that so desirable? Who says it's desirable to everyone? It's indivi…

> Exactly as in any other field of expertise. Through your practice, knowledge/experiences you gain from that practice.

But as you said, you're not quite there yet. How do you know that what you described is really achievable? What else can you do but take other people by their word? Some people claim that through meditation, they could literally levitate. What's to stop anyone from just claiming something that's impossible to prove wrong?

It's not that I doubt meditation can have profound effects on one's psyche and well-being, but at some point I just don't don't buy it, like when you speak of a "constant state of pleasure". I don't think that's physically possible, at some point the receptors in your brain will need time to recover.

Re: The Problem of Mindfulness

#147

Post by edejong »

apatters wrote: post #91
edejong wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with the mindfulness approach is that it only leads you knee-deep. Enough to enjoy the waves and the joy of water, but too little to start swimming. For example, I can still see you are not accepting your past self for what it is ("I thought I was insightful and deep before") or how the world is ("would be a FAR better place"). You are on a path towards awakening. Some of us have come to understand that t…

Now that Buddhists like you are coming in here and telling us to be more Buddhist and read and think Buddhist things, I think it's important to stress that anyone interested in mindfulness doesn't need to become a Buddhist. In fact there is a clinical application of mindfulness which is called cognitive behavioral therapy, it is proven through research to have great benefits for a lot of people, it is secular, and un…

It was not my intent to convert anyone to Buddhism (in any of it’s hundreds of mostly peaceful substreams). I am merely pointing out that mindfulness requires a wider context.

Re: The Problem of Mindfulness

#148

Post by dang »

chewz wrote: post #96
sshekhar wrote: post #11

The word mindfulness itself is a poor translation of the Pali word 'Sati'. The Pali word actually means 'remembering to be aware of the objects that your mind is attending to'. There is no word in western languages to capture that phrase and hence word 'mindfulness' was used to convey in a confusing manner what 'Sati' means. I have been meditating for 1 hour to 1.5 hour every day for several years and I finally got i…

You should consult therapist as you are in danger of harming yourself.

That crosses into personal attack, which is not allowed on HN. Please don't post like this.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: The Problem of Mindfulness

#149

Post by rick22 »

raincom wrote: post #103
sshekhar wrote: post #11

The word mindfulness itself is a poor translation of the Pali word 'Sati'. The Pali word actually means 'remembering to be aware of the objects that your mind is attending to'. There is no word in western languages to capture that phrase and hence word 'mindfulness' was used to convey in a confusing manner what 'Sati' means. I have been meditating for 1 hour to 1.5 hour every day for several years and I finally got i…

Whats the Sanskrit equivalent of 'Sati'?

It is a Hindu religious practice of taking the life of a Hindu widow after her Husband dies( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sati_(practice) ). The central idea is to prevent remarriage with other caste men and preserve the purity of caste system.
Post reply on HN