posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 08:22 AM
Originally posted by Silenceisall
reply to post by NorEaster
No one is advocating mindlessness and other such nonesense. The only thing that is being suggested is that we are not our thoughts, and that
identification with our thoughts is equal to living in a state of illusion. Thoughts are what our brain makes, so to get rid of thoughts would require
us to remove our brains--this is not what I'm saying.
The truth is that we are only our thoughts. Our thoughts define us and are the only surviving parts of us. Seriously. What else do we actively
produce besides our thoughts? Our bodies are 99.99999% space between spinning bits that are also 99.9999% space. Open up a person with a scalpel or
a chainsaw and you'll find the same thing - nothing but meat, blood and bones. There's no one inside there, and yet, when we think, we become more
than the sum total of what we are as red and gray fixin's with peach (or chocolate) colored wrapping.
Meditation seeks to "quiet the mind", and that's great if you're planning to then allow the mind to open back up freed from the distractions of
incoming stimuli. I look at the pupils of my eyes as if they are a membrane that divides the universe inside of me from the universe that sits
outside. Both universes are exceedingly vast, and both contain their share of amazing things. If I can reduce the outside universe's pressure on my
pupils to the point where the inside universe's pressure is greater, then what's inside can pour to the outside. I can create and express myself, as
opposed to simply responding to what other people are imposing upon me. This - to me - is the only value of meditation, but it is a brilliant
What I read on this board is that a person must achieve a mental state of no thoughts whatsoever, and that the goal is a mind that can sustain a void
of intellectual context - thereby ascending to the ranks of the static and unknowable. To me, this vacates the premise of what it means to be a
corporeal human being, and if that's the goal, then intelligent corporeal existence is nothing more than a challenge to overcome - which places
competition to the forefront of necessary attributes that a saint must possess. Of course, that clashes with any notion of compassion and
selflessness, since overcoming one's belligerent essence forces one to be focused relentlessly on oneself to the exclusion of all other concerns.
Just like Christianity depends on embracing the catastrophic ineptitude of an omniscient god, Hinduism (which is what this notion you embrace
basically is) depends on the aggressive disinterest in anything other than oneself, and in crippling the expression of one's own inimitable identity.
Both disciplines fail by contradicting their own foundational core premises with the nature of their core tenets. Kind of like getting their track
spikes caught in the starting blocks.
Oh, and yes, I know, I simply don't "get it". I get that a lot.