Bigthink - Idea Comments Feed

Comment on: Re: What is human nature?

Bigthink — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:39:12 +0100

Yes, yes, yes. This is why I incorporate meditation techniques from Sri Chinmoy (focusing on a heart quality) as well as teachings from Paul Muller-Ortega (who is trained in TM) along with Benson's RR approach. It is a "hodge-podge" to be sure, in my class. But, it has a nice effect.

Peace and love.

Marla

Comment on: Re: What is human nature?

Bigthink — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 23:11:15 +0100

Maria, yes it is serendipitous! May you enjoy all success with your yoga and meditation!

You may be interested to know that although Herbert Benson claimed in the 1970s that his technique achieved the same results as Transcendental Meditation (taught by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi), the actual results achieved by TM are 3 to 4 times greater, as shown by two subsequent meta-analyses (Journal of Clinical Psychology, 45, 1989; and Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 1991). Dismissive of several thousand years of Vedic tradition, Benson rejected the importance of mantra in combination with technique. Worse, he didn%u2019t even get the technique right. Unfortunately, his Harvard credentials have obscured these critical elements in the minds of many a novice meditator. Thus for many spiritual seekers, mild relaxation and its attendant benefits is as much as they ever experience. But the benefit of Transcendental Meditation is not merely relaxation but higher states of consciousness. (See: http://www.truthabouttm.org/truth/home/aboutdavidorme-johnson/higherstatesofconsciousness/index.cfm). In matters of spiritual development the Harvard cardiologist is no match for the Himalayan Master.

Comment on: Re: What is human nature?

Bigthink — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:05:51 +0100

Rajarr,
How serendipitous that I came to these posts. I was just reading an article about Herbert Benson's relaxation response and meditation. The study states that:

"Meditation is a conscious mental process that induces a set of integrated physiologic changes termed the relaxation response."

So, not only is meditation a mode of self actualization, it is also foundational to physical health.

I studied Cognitive Anthropology, emphasizing child language, child faith and cross-cultural religious education. It wasn't until I started yoga and meditation that it all came together.

Comment on: Re: What is human nature?

Bigthink — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 05:29:58 +0100

Cobrateen, not that you abandon science for meditation, but use meditation to restore the missing element in science, then science can come to fulfillment.

As to whether Transcendental Meditation is a science: Science is systematic study through observation and experiment. TM is systematic because the technique is specific and repeatable. It is observation, not of an external object, but of the observer himself. It is subject to experiment because the meditative state has physiological correlates that are measurable in the lab, and its effects on mind, body, and behavior outside of meditation are also measurable. Over 600 research studies have been conducted at more than 200 universities and research centers (including Harvard, UCLA, and Stanford) and published in more than 100 journals: http://www.mum.edu/tm_research/bibliography.html

Imagine sitting comfortably in your room, closing your eyes and, through a simple mental technique, diving into your own mind and experiencing the silent, unbounded reservoir of creative intelligence at the basis of your thinking process. Imagine then coming out of that ocean of consciousness, mind expanded, body refreshed, and sitting at your computer, booting up your favorite video game, and playing it better than you have ever played it before. Why better? Because you are Unbounded Awareness, the greatest knowledge/action hero that ever lived. Doubts? Learn TM and conduct the experiment yourself. . . :-)

Comment on: Re: What is human nature?

Bigthink — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 01:49:36 +0100

So if I understand what you are saying Rajarr, you think we should study the mind through the lens of meditation instead of the lens of science? In other words, you think we should trade in one possibly useless lense for another possibly useless lense?

Comment on: Re: What is human nature?

Bigthink — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 04:36:15 +0100

The more I watch Professor Pinker, the more I enjoy his intelligence. On the question of human nature: One of the paradoxes of modern psychology, which is the study of the human mind, is that it relies on a human mind to conduct the investigation; since the nature of mind is not yet understood by the researcher, the nature of his primary instrument of research is unknown to him. That is akin to an astronomer not knowing whether the lens through which he looks is a telescope, a microscope, or a kaleidoscope. Nothing conclusive can be known by such ignorance. What the psychologist must do first, before he can understand what a mind is, is understand what a mind is%u2014he must complete his research on his instrument first; then only can he use it to conduct conclusive research on his mysterious subject. It is a conundrum, as the philosophers say, one which has deprived them, too, of a complete understanding of that most marvelous of marvels.

What is a way out of the labyrinth? De-objectify the mind%u2014take it out of the lab and into transcendental meditation, where the mind can observe itself through a process of self-referral. Mind is consciousness and capable of knowing itself. But the proper conditions must be met to allow it to do so. As the mind settles down in meditation, it arrives at its simplest state, where consciousness is awake in its own nature, devoid of an object. The experience is self-awareness accompanied by greater integration of brain functioning (mum.edu=research on TM), two sweet fruits of the science of Vedic psychology. As the upanishadic dictum goes, Know that by which everything is known and anything can be known by you.