Dangers with mindfulness?

There are dangers with everything.
At least if you do it to the extreme.

Even to drink too much water is dangerous.

As a mindfulness practitioner, I think it's foolish to exclude Buddhist philosophy from the practice.

For me its not just enough to just meditate and let things like ethics aside.

You can practice mindfulness to be a good sniper.

So the intention with mindfulness is very important.

As, right view and so on.

But what about the first of the noble truth about Dukkha? That means, all conditional phenomena and experiences are unsatisfying.

Interpreters use to say that this is not a pessimistic view, as Buddha suggests a path to liberation from rebirth, and therefore suffering.
But what about if we don't believe in rebirth?

Well, I guess we can have the secular view, that mindfulness helps even in this life, though it's no miracle cure. Anyway It helps you to not drown in all the suffering in life, it helps you to not be stuck in your own thoughts.

It helps you even more if you follow even the seven other path's in the eight fold wheel.
Buddha as a kind of Doctor!



But what about dangers with Buddhist meditation in this life?

Seanglim Bit, a Cambodian writer, claims that the country is still haunted by the story of the Red Khmer's.  And one of the causes of the disaster was the Buddhist resignation towards existence.

As the reality as we see it is unsatisfying and  unreal, why bother with it?
Some Buddhist schools claims that the reality is literately an illusion. While others claims that it's the view of separate phenomena that is the illusion.

Here Robert Wright discusses, in an interview with Miguel Farias, the danger of (to much) meditation:
http://meaningoflife.tv/videos/31739?in=50:58&out=55:40  


 It can troublesome to come back from long retreats and meet the normal world with it ups and downs, harsh words and stressed people.

But if you practice in a moderate way it's not so risky, if you not have a latent psychos hiding inside;
here Farias talks about that;
http://meaningoflife.tv/videos/31739?in=13:54&out=17:18 

 For me, as a moderate meditator, I haven't found any of this troubles, but I have found some benefits, as an ability to not identify with troublesome thoughts and calmness in, for instance, queues.

I also find it very satisfying to not always identify myself with just "me".
The interconnections I'm in are more real than me as a separate individual.

And in meditation I can have a sense of that.

But then again I have to go back to the conventional world, where there really is a "me". And for sure I still find troublesome moments. Maybe I have found a way not to get lost in them, not to lament to much, as I know troubles will come, as everything changes.
When, for instance, my phone breaks, as it did in Vietnam, I can say to my self; "It's just a machine, don't cling to it, be pleased, because you can buy a new one - and it was not expensive".


In Sweden we have a saying; "Lagom är bäst".  That means - not to much, not to little is the best.

So maybe that's a good way to meditate.

And what about to be "lagom" Buddhist?


















Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cora Diamond on eating animals - with the help of Wittgenstein´s ideas

Image
Cora Diamond is a new name for me, even if she has worked as a professor in Philosophy in the states for a long time and is still  teaching at the university of Virginia, even she is over 80 years old. She has written a lot about Wittgenstein and that has helped her to express her view of the topic. Although she, like Wittgenstein,  has lived in a hut in Norway - and actually brought Tractatus with hes - she seems to be different and for sure more glad than W. Anyways, its W: s writings that interests her and especially his critics of metaphysics and ethics in philosophy. As it is said in Tractacus  : " Whereof one  cannot speak , thereof one must be silent." And of ethics philosophy should not speak - why? Is it like in Buddhism - its better to sit in silence and let know yourself, than to speculate about what will happen when we die? But for sure there ethical guidelines in Buddhism,  but the behaviors is often named skilful, not good (or bad). Another
Read more

I think, therefore I am NOT

Image
So Descartes was wrong. He said that he could doubt everything about himself except that he was thinking. That proved that he existed. The word "I" is the central point here. What does it mean? Perhaps we are sure that we know the answer. Is it the thoughts? In that case - where are you when you aren't thinking? Is it your job, your title? In that case - what happens if you loose your job or change job? Is it your house, your nation? Under my course to be a mindfulness instructor, the teacher, Ola Schenström, made us ask to each other; "Who are you?" After each answer the question was repeated by the questioner.We soon discovered that there were no end to the answers - or maybe an adequate end could be; "I don't know."Or maybe; "It seems I have no essence." Other thinkers have come to the same conclusions; Buddha, Sartre and more recently Damasio and Parfit. Sartre, for instance, has said that we are the sum of our actions. We ha
Read more

Wittgenstein and Buddha -buddies?

Image
Ludwig Wittgenstein, the famous philosopher, reflected in the posthumously published  book "Philosophical Investigations" about the picture above; Is it a hare or duck?  He meant that we make, or must make, a statement what it is. And I suppose he meant that we often or always has to interpret the world around us. But two different interpretations can both be right! Language and thoughts controls what we see.....   You can compare with the picture of a glass. Half empty or half empty?  Who decides? Yes, it's you... And whatever you say is right.  But you can be aware of what you think. That can say more of yourself than of the glass....  You can be aware of that you always do interpretations of things that happens.  If you have a pessimistic or a naive point of view, you can be aware of the view and your statements.  Buddha and Wittgenstein were both aware of that different persons uses different perspectives.  But Buddha spoke about the "right 
Read more