How Do We Know Whether We Are Involving Ourselves In A Lifelong Path Of Auto Hypnosis?

[rockyysdt]

Inspired by the life of Buddha and his teachings and by many subsequent authors, I seek my lifes meaning and ultimately enlightenment.

Trapped in this physical vessel and controlled by ego I travel through life experiencing many highs and lows.

For years I've battled with negative self talk and have made many wrong decisions and have avoided regular practice.

Despite this I cling to my vision and persevere that I may one day find my path.

A major factor in choosing this path is the offer of enlightenment through direct experience, rather than belief or faith.

This brings me to my questions which often haunt me.

Is it possible that our experiences of meditation and subsequently enlightenment are the result of auto hypnosis implanted during a very long process whilst in a susceptible state?

To avoid implanting thoughts, and experiences which may result from these, should meditation and self awareness practice be restricted to the technical techniques of achieving self awareness and not include what we will expect to encounter (as detailed in the many texts of Buddhism)?

Shouldn't Buddha's teachings come from within rather than be introduced?

How do we know whether we are involving ourselves in a lifelong path of auto hypnosis?

[garro]

I think that the deep states of joy which accompany new levels of insight are great bullshit detectors. I don't think that these states could be achieved through auto-suggestion. I firmly believe that our minds know when we are following the correct path and while we may be able to fool ourselves through some type of self-hypnosis that this self-deception doesn't run too deep. Of course it could all be one big form of self-hypnosis and we could all be just dreaming the whole thing.

[Brucenkhamen]

Inspired by the life of Buddha and his teachings and by many subsequent authors, I seek my lifes meaning and ultimately enlightenment.

Trapped in this physical vessel and controlled by ego I travel through life experiencing many highs and lows.

For years I've battled with negative self talk and have made many wrong decisions and have avoided regular practice.

Despite this I cling to my vision and persevere that I may one day find my path.

A major factor in choosing this path is the offer of enlightenment through direct experience, rather than belief or faith.

This brings me to my questions which often haunt me.

Is it possible that our experiences of meditation and subsequently enlightenment are the result of auto hypnosis implanted during a very long process whilst in a susceptible state?

To avoid implanting thoughts, and experiences which may result from these, should meditation and self awareness practice be restricted to the technical techniques of achieving self awareness and not include what we will expect to encounter (as detailed in the many texts of Buddhism)?

Shouldn't Buddha's teachings come from within rather than be introduced?

How do we know whether we are involving ourselves in a lifelong path of auto hypnosis?

Firstly you don't know for certain you aren't involving yourself in a lifelong path of auto hypnosis, nothing is certain, so you examine your experience, your reaction to it, your feelings about the uncertainty, this is part of the practice.

Now if you are primarily involved in concentration techniques I guess there is a possibility the above could become true if you weren't practicing correctly and fell into some bad habits, you should seek out a good teacher if you think this is the case.

Wheras if you are primarily doing insight/awareness tehniques then you should be able to observe an increase in awareness, sensitivity, and lucidity, as you progress along the path, I'd have thought that this is the opposite of what you'd expect from hypnosis.

There is no need to feel you have to restrict yourself to techniques of achieving self awareness however, it's worthwhile replacing negative thought patterns with positive ones when you see these arising as problems.

Techniques like Metta or Asubha could be seen as some sort of auto hynpnosis but sometimes you need a chance to heal and gain your strength before going under the surgeons knife. You need to monitor yourself to determine what you need at any given time.

Yes, I think Buddha's teachings should come from within rather than be introduced from outside. For that to happen though you need a fertile ground of a clear mind and contented heart, if not then you might find some of these insights quite painful.

If you have doubts about whether what you are doing is a waste of time ask yourself what you'd be doing if you weren't following the path... Watching TV? Playing sport? Going to pubs? Surely even if what you are doing did not ultimately lead to your enlightenment it's a better way to spend your time and attention than many human endeavours you would otherwise be involved in... Is that enough?

[sabaijai]

One could say that yes it's auto-hypnosis -- deprogramming one's self from worldly distractions, socialization, and bad habits

[IMA_FARANG]

Inspired by the life of Buddha and his teachings and by many subsequent authors, I seek my lifes meaning and ultimately enlightenment.

Trapped in this physical vessel and controlled by ego I travel through life experiencing many highs and lows.

For years I've battled with negative self talk and have made many wrong decisions and have avoided regular practice.

Despite this I cling to my vision and persevere that I may one day find my path.

A major factor in choosing this path is the offer of enlightenment through direct experience, rather than belief or faith.

This brings me to my questions which often haunt me.

Is it possible that our experiences of meditation and subsequently enlightenment are the result of auto hypnosis implanted during a very long process whilst in a susceptible state?

To avoid implanting thoughts, and experiences which may result from these, should meditation and self awareness practice be restricted to the technical techniques of achieving self awareness and not include what we will expect to encounter (as detailed in the many texts of Buddhism)?

Shouldn't Buddha's teachings come from within rather than be introduced?

How do we know whether we are involving ourselves in a lifelong path of auto hypnosis?

Like a man with a lit candle looking for fire...

You do not need to find it,

you are holding it in your hand.

just open your eyes and look.

[rockyysdt]

One could say that yes it's auto-hypnosis -- deprogramming one's self from worldly distractions, socialization, and bad habits

Deprogramming is fine.

What about the reprogramming?

If adherants implant Buddhas teachings into their mind, don't these become beliefs and drive illusions we call enlightenment?

If Buddhism today is two pronged, that is daily practice seeking enlightenment & study of Buddhas teachings, then isn't the daily practice a tool for hypnosis and Buddhas teachings the content being introduced?

Surely the only way to verify these teachings is for them to appear to you on your inward journey, rather than be implanted as beliefs?

Shouldn't all Buddhists embark upon their journey of discovery with neutral external input?

Buddhas teachings can then be viewed once discovered within.

It is one thing to lead a moral life, but totally another to follow beliefs which are not real.

My heart is with Buddha and his teachings but my intellect warns me to beware.

Am I wrong?

Edited June 27, 2008 by rockyysdt

[rockyysdt]

Now if you are primarily involved in concentration techniques I guess there is a possibility the above could become true if you weren't practicing correctly and fell into some bad habits, you should seek out a good teacher if you think this is the case.

My practice is to sit or lay in silence, concentrating on oneness with gravity and the release of all muscular tension and then focus on breathe. When awareness of random though occurs I gently refocus on eliminating muscular tension and then to my breathe.

Wheras if you are primarily doing insight/awareness tehniques then you should be able to observe an increase in awareness, sensitivity, and lucidity, as you progress along the path, I'd have thought that this is the opposite of what you'd expect from hypnosis.

I attempt mindfulness in my conscious daily life and attempt curbing over reactions to situations. This skill requires a lot of effort to maintain.

Techniques like Metta or Asubha could be seen as some sort of auto hynpnosis but sometimes you need a chance to heal and gain your strength before going under the surgeons knife. You need to monitor yourself to determine what you need at any given time.

This is one of my greatest concerns. Meditation can be used as a tool for control by those who seek power, control or money. Everyone of us is capable of doing wrong and so the need for a teacher can leave one exposed.

If you have doubts about whether what you are doing is a waste of time ask yourself what you'd be doing if you weren't following the path... Watching TV? Playing sport? Going to pubs? Surely even if what you are doing did not ultimately lead to your enlightenment it's a better way to spend your time and attention than many human endeavours you would otherwise be involved in... Is that enough?

There's no doubt that learning to live the right way is good.

I suppose my main thought was whether our experience of enlightenment is due to self hypnosis or reality.

[Brucenkhamen]

What about the reprogramming?

If adherants implant Buddhas teachings into their mind, don't these become beliefs and drive illusions we call enlightenment?

If Buddhism today is two pronged, that is daily practice seeking enlightenment & study of Buddhas teachings, then isn't the daily practice a tool for hypnosis and Buddhas teachings the content being introduced?

They can do. It's up to you to observe the process so that doesn't happen.

Doubt and faith are condition phenomena that arise and pass away for you to observe in the same way you observe the breath or knee pain.

The only difference is that it's much harder to do so because it's harder to be objective, which is why teachers encourage you to make mindfulness of the body your first priority.

So when doubt arises just observe it arising, see if you can notice what notices the doubt. When faith arises do the same.

As for hypnosis, I've never been hypnotised so don't know what it's like but surely it's the opposite of what I've described above in that you've lost all awareness and ability to observe what's really going on.

Surely the only way to verify these teachings is for them to appear to you on your inward journey, rather than be implanted as beliefs?

Shouldn't all Buddhists embark upon their journey of discovery with neutral external input?

Buddhas teachings can then be viewed once discovered within.

Then you'd be a Buddha rather than an Arahant, the last Buddhist to do that was Gautama and it can't happen again until his teachings are lost from the world.

The beliefs that have been implanted from outside of you are part of your experience and part of what makes you you. You just observe them in the same way you observe other conditioned phenomena.

Nothing wrong with beliefs that are working hypotheses, it's when they become fixed views and blind beliefs that problems arise.

[sabaijai]

As for hypnosis, I've never been hypnotised so don't know what it's like but surely it's the opposite of what I've described above in that you've lost all awareness and ability to observe what's really going on.

I think that sums it up well. Mindfulness is nothing like hypnosis. And the objective of practice is not to replace old belief systems with a new one, it's go beyond belief and apprehend reality directly. Sati (awareness) is not a belief system.

[rockyysdt]

I think that sums it up well. Mindfulness is nothing like hypnosis. And the objective of practice is not to replace old belief systems with a new one, it's go beyond belief and apprehend reality directly. Sati (awareness) is not a belief system.

Awareness is only one aspect of the meditative process.

We can often take thoughts into our meditative state.

One could argue that deep meditation places one in a state characterized by heightened suggestibility and receptivity.

I'd like to give an example of implanted thoughts during meditation.

Some aspects of Buddhism can be thought of as beliefs. Studying Buddhist principals bring such beliefs into ones consciousness.

One such belief is the subject of Khama as Buddha taught (please correct me if I'm wrong).

Example.

I kill someone which creates negative khama.

As a result I maybe tried and executed, or murdered by a family member of the deceased.

If no one witnessed the murder I may suffer an accident in which I'm killed, or my khama may pass on to another life in which I meet my untimely death in order to bring balance to the khama.

Non Buddhist view of Khama:

Example:

I kill someone which creates negative khama.

As a result I maybe tried and executed, or murdered by a family member of the deceased.

If no one witnessed the murder I get away with it.

In this case khama does not exist.

The Buddhist view of Khama contains subjective elements.

It assumes there is a higher power which keeps and controls a ledger.

It maybe true but requires an element of belief.

Once implanted in your subconscious (a place you have no awareness of) then it becomes your belief.

Any study will appear as a thought in our consciousness and can then be implanted into the subconscious during meditation.

It is very subtle.

Edited June 29, 2008 by rockyysdt

[camerata]

Is it possible that our experiences of meditation and subsequently enlightenment are the result of auto hypnosis implanted during a very long process whilst in a susceptible state?

To avoid implanting thoughts, and experiences which may result from these, should meditation and self awareness practice be restricted to the technical techniques of achieving self awareness and not include what we will expect to encounter (as detailed in the many texts of Buddhism)?

The way I look at it is this. The main thrust of the Buddha's teaching (what I call Level 1 teachings) is elimination of suffering and nibbana in this life. You make an intellectual decision that the Buddha was logical and right in suggesting that suffering comes from desire which comes from self-view, and that self-view is an artificial mental construction. We aren't born with it. It evolves due to language and concepts that are taught to us or socialized into us by parents, teachers and society. So the path involves voluntarily and progressively dismantling the mental construction called self-view or ego, which is embedded deep in the subconscious.

This is quite different from auto-hypnosis in which a possibly false idea is implanted in the subconscious. If we are talking about Level 2 teachings - rebirth in multiple realms, kamma over multiple lives, etc - that can't really be experienced/proven in one lifetime, some of it may be absorbed into the subconscious along the way but I don't see that it hinders the serious Buddhist following the Level 1 teachings. It's only a problem if the level 1 teachings are thrown out in favour of simply seeking a better rebirth.

In other words, one can follow the Dhamma and at the same time be 100% rational.

[rockyysdt]

You make an intellectual decision that the Buddha was logical and right in suggesting that suffering comes from desire which comes from self-view, and that self-view is an artificial mental construction. We aren't born with it. It evolves due to language and concepts that are taught to us or socialized into us by parents, teachers and society. So the path involves voluntarily and progressively dismantling the mental construction called self-view or ego, which is embedded deep in the subconscious.

Although I subscribe to this view, couldn't it also be logical to travel down the middle path.

That is, rather than anihilating the ego, follow the middle path of moderation and also achieve the removal of suffering.

The subconscious contains many things, some good and some not so good.

Could the Buddhist belief of dismantling all aspects of the ego be dangerous or wrong?

If we are talking about Level 2 teachings - rebirth in multiple realms, kamma over multiple lives, etc - that can't really be experienced/proven in one lifetime

Didn't Buddha experience enlightenment (infinite knowledge) in one lifetime?

some of it may be absorbed into the subconscious along the way but I don't see that it hinders the serious Buddhist following the Level 1 teachings. It's only a problem if the level 1 teachings are thrown out in favour of simply seeking a better rebirth.

Can't such absorbtion become a belief?

Once a part of Buddhas teachings are believed accepting the entire works become compelling.

[camerata]

Although I subscribe to this view, couldn't it also be logical to travel down the middle path.

That is, rather than anihilating the ego, follow the middle path of moderation and also achieve the removal of suffering.

The subconscious contains many things, some good and some not so good.

Could the Buddhist belief of dismantling all aspects of the ego be dangerous or wrong?

From the Pali Canon and enlightened monks in the present I think we can see that it clearly is not dangerous or "wrong" if the objective is personal peace and happiness.

But since none of us here is going to be enlightened in this life, it seems academic to me. What matters is whether progressive dismantling of the ego brings the results we want.

On the question of omniscience, I don't believe the Buddha had infinite knowledge although he probably knew all there is to know about human suffering.

Can't such absorbtion become a belief?

Once a part of Buddhas teachings are believed accepting the entire works become compelling.

That seems to be the way the mind works. Ideas that are received over and over from respected sources (or sources with authority) seep into the subconscious and become "belief," whether rational or not. I agree that if one accepts the Buddha as omniscient or accepts his core teachings, it's tempting to believe that everything he taught must be true. The question is how much of the recorded teachings were actually taught by him exactly as recorded?

[Brucenkhamen]

Although I subscribe to this view, couldn't it also be logical to travel down the middle path.

That is, rather than anihilating the ego, follow the middle path of moderation and also achieve the removal of suffering.

That would depend on whether you think the ego is the cause of suffering or not. To me that sounds a bit like "can't you cure cancer without removing it?"

The subconscious contains many things, some good and some not so good.

Could the Buddhist belief of dismantling all aspects of the ego be dangerous or wrong?

It could be, it's up to you to be willing to try and find out for yourself, if you don't want to nobody is forcing you.

Can't such absorbtion become a belief?

Once a part of Buddhas teachings are believed accepting the entire works become compelling.

I haven't found it to be so. The more I move along the path the more uncertain I am about some aspects of the teaching, like rebirth for example. I realise that while I can accept certain principles that are outside of my experience I really don't know the true meaning until I've experienced it myself.

The more I know the more I realise how little I know, and I'm comfortable with that.

It might be different for other people.

[rockyysdt]

After negative experiences during my past I travel with some healthy scepticism.

I've experienced groups who skillfully package and market their form of enlightenment with profit as the motivator.

I've seen large sums of money exchange hands for the promise of quick enlightenment.

I'm also wary of beliefs but currently approach my practice with an open mind, but explore debate.

Questioning Buddhist principals is my way of learning.

From the Pali Canon and enlightened monks in the present I think we can see that it clearly is not dangerous or "wrong" if the objective is personal peace and happiness.

We have discussed in earlier posts that happiness can be subjective.

But since none of us here is going to be enlightened in this life, it seems academic to me. What matters is whether progressive dismantling of the ego brings the results we want.

Why do you believe that enlightenment can't be achieved in a single lifetime?

How do we know how many lifetimes we've already had?

On the question of omniscience, I don't believe the Buddha had infinite knowledge although he probably knew all there is to know about human suffering.

Why do you believe this?

Buddha didn't disappear into the atmos upon his enlightenment.

I've read that those who achieve full enlightenment are either absorbed into the infinite state, or come back to fulfill a purpose such as to teach. As they are no longer driven by ego, those who return rarely share their experience and may adopt a meek unassuming persona. Is this possible with Buddha?

That seems to be the way the mind works. Ideas that are received over and over from respected sources (or sources with authority) seep into the subconscious and become "belief," whether rational or not. I agree that if one accepts the Buddha as omniscient or accepts his core teachings, it's tempting to believe that everything he taught must be true. The question is how much of the recorded teachings were actually taught by him exactly as recorded?

Whether the teachings are accurate or not, then you agree it's possible that all meditators are actually hypnotising themselves to believe Buddhism and their experiences could be a consequence of their beliefs?

One big concern with Buddhism is that it offers rewards as does Christianity.

Although it teaches the deconstruction of the ego, the majority of adherants turn to Buddhism for egotistical reasons.

Why did you choose Buddhism as your philosophy?

Edited July 1, 2008 by rockyysdt

[camerata]

Why do you believe that enlightenment can't be achieved in a single lifetime?

How do we know how many lifetimes we've already had?

I didn't say that. I said "none of us here" will attain it in this life. Since we are not monks, the chances of arahantship in this life are almost zero.

Why do you believe this?

Buddha didn't disappear into the atmos upon his enlightenment.

I've read that those who achieve full enlightenment are either absorbed into the infinite state, or come back to fulfill a purpose such as to teach. As they are no longer driven by ego, those who return rarely share their experience and may adopt a meek unassuming persona. Is this possible with Buddha?

I don't believe the Buddha had infinite knowledge because I haven't seen enough evidence in the Pali Canon to support it. As for enlightened ones returning, this is a Mahayana concept. According to Theravada and the Pali Canon, the Buddha ceased to exist when he died. He won't be coming back.

Whether the teachings are accurate or not, then you agree it's possible that all meditators are actually hypnotising themselves to believe Buddhism and their experiences could be a consequence of their beliefs?

No, not if you're talking about all the teachings. I think that the aspects of Buddhism that can't be verified in this lifetime may simply be belief implanted in the subconscious by oneself or others. But that doesn't apply to the most important aspects, which can be verified by experience. One can practise Dhamma without any blind faith at all.

Why did you choose Buddhism as your philosophy?

I gave it a 3-month trial and found that it really can reduce suffering.

Many Western Buddhists come to a point where they think, "Hey, there's no proof for this!" If they've been practising correctly, they'll simply shift focus to the teachings that can be verified by experience. If they haven't, they'll start thinking about giving it all up. I've seen this happen especially with younger Buddhists on other web sites. Ajahn Sumedho is a good example of a Western Buddhist who focuses on personal experience and pretty much ignores (although he doesn't reject) the rest. His books have been my main inspiration and are well worth reading.

[awakened]

I gave it a 3-month trial and found that it really can reduce suffering.

Many Western Buddhists come to a point where they think, "Hey, there's no proof for this!" If they've been practising correctly, they'll simply shift focus to the teachings that can be verified by experience. If they haven't, they'll start thinking about giving it all up. I've seen this happen especially with younger Buddhists on other web sites. Ajahn Sumedho is a good example of a Western Buddhist who focuses on personal experience and pretty much ignores (although he doesn't reject) the rest. His books have been my main inspiration and are well worth reading.

Sorry to interject. Mind if I ask what this entailed and in what way did it reduce suffering? Did it last?

[camerata]

Sorry to interject. Mind if I ask what this entailed and in what way did it reduce suffering? Did it last?

For what it entailed, see my post on Right Speech. Once you understand how the mind works, you can use that knowledge to change yourself so that interpersonal relationships improve dramatically. You can also use it to start letting go, because trying to control the external world (which is impossible) is the source of much of our suffering. If you want a specific example, I've suffered from tinnitus for 30 years but now I've learnt to tune it out. The whining and buzzing is still there, but I don't suffer from it.

The results of practice do last if you keep working at it. It's really just a matter of watching your mind constantly.

[rockyysdt]

Sorry to interject. Mind if I ask what this entailed and in what way did it reduce suffering? Did it last?

For what it entailed, see my post on Right Speech. Once you understand how the mind works, you can use that knowledge to change yourself so that interpersonal relationships improve dramatically. You can also use it to start letting go, because trying to control the external world (which is impossible) is the source of much of our suffering. If you want a specific example, I've suffered from tinnitus for 30 years but now I've learnt to tune it out. The whining and buzzing is still there, but I don't suffer from it.

The results of practice do last if you keep working at it. It's really just a matter of watching your mind constantly.

Camerata.

I'll study your post.

Right Speech is something I definitely need to work on.

I'm discovering that personal suffering, either physical and or psychological, seems to provide the impetus for many to search for meaning in their lives.

My impetus was also physical and which led to much suffering and disatisfaction.

NB: Have you tried using a "Personal Tinnitus Comfort Unit"?

Tinnitus sufferers hear, as you describe, a constant whining and buzzing. The PTCU provides an opposite sound resulting in pink noise or neutralised whining and buzzing. True Pink Noise is impossible but such units can reduce the intensity you suffer. Particularly useful when you retire and find the sound at its loudest.

[camerata]

I'm discovering that personal suffering, either physical and or psychological, seems to provide the impetus for many to search for meaning in their lives.

I'm sure it does. And whenever I find some rabidly anti-Buddhism ex-Buddhist kid mouthing off in a forum, it's always obvious that he's yet to experience any significant dukkha in his life.

NB: Have you tried using a "Personal Tinnitus Comfort Unit"?

No, but my the aircon in my condo and my office works well as white noise and I have a particularly good CD of ocean surf. Anyway, it's not a problem anymore. At the same time I managed to let go of the tinnitus, I also let go of the creaky air conditioner, the screaming neighbours, and a whole lot of other things that used to irritate me. Letting go of the tinnitus was a conscious decision - one day I just knew I could do it and so I decided to do it - but the other irritants seemed to subside on their own.

[jamesc2000]

I travel through life experiencing many highs and lows.

Despite this I cling to my vision and persevere that I may one day find my path.

This brings me to my questions which often haunt me.

How do we know whether we are involving ourselves in a lifelong path of auto hypnosis?

I have absolutely no idea what auto hypnosis is so I cannot answer the question which often haunts you!

The words "which often" haunts you is very interesting. Does it only haunts you when you think about it? Or do you wake up in cold sweats because of it? (I just hope you say it only haunts you when you think about it. Then that makes it easier for you! Haunting is not the problem, thinking is!)

The other thing - what is a high and what is a low? Marriage is a high and divorce a low? Or is the freedom of a divorce a high and the chains of marriage a low.

Before anyone starts thinking, I am saying marriage is a high or low or divorce is a high or low - I would like to say - our mind conditions us to see things one way or another. Death of a child a low and birth a high?

And we suffer because of it! Chasing the highs and avoiding the lows. Maybe if we can examine how our minds classify things, we can change the classification and even eliminate it.

I always hear people meditating very hard to be enlightened! People are free to do as they want but I always thought meditating is not about achieving something like enlightenment but the exact opposite and is about letting go and freeing up.

Lastly - I cling to my vision. Who is this I and what is this my?

And if enlightenment is really your aim then I always read enlightenment is like riding an ox looking for an ox! I can only assume it means we are all already enlightened, just maybe we don't know it yet!

If anyone can throw some wisdom on the above, please do!

Edited July 2, 2008 by jamesc2000

[Kido]

I travel through life experiencing many highs and lows.

Despite this I cling to my vision and persevere that I may one day find my path.

This brings me to my questions which often haunt me.

How do we know whether we are involving ourselves in a lifelong path of auto hypnosis?

I have absolutely no idea what auto hypnosis is so I cannot answer the question which often haunts you!

The words "which often" haunts you is very interesting. Does it only haunts you when you think about it? Or do you wake up in cold sweats because of it? (I just hope you say it only haunts you when you think about it. Then that makes it easier for you! Haunting is not the problem, thinking is!)

The other thing - what is a high and what is a low? Marriage is a high and divorce a low? Or is the freedom of a divorce a high and the chains of marriage a low.

Before anyone starts thinking, I am saying marriage is a high or low or divorce is a high or low - I would like to say - our mind conditions us to see things one way or another. Death of a child a low and birth a high?

And we suffer because of it! Chasing the highs and avoiding the lows. Maybe if we can examine how our minds classify things, we can change the classification and even eliminate it.

I always hear people meditating very hard to be enlightened! People are free to do as they want but I always thought meditating is not about achieving something like enlightenment but the exact opposite and is about letting go and freeing up.

Lastly - I cling to my vision. Who is this I and what is this my?

And if enlightenment is really your aim then I always read enlightenment is like riding an ox looking for an ox! I can only assume it means we are all already enlightened, just maybe we don't know it yet!

If anyone can throw some wisdom on the above, please do!

In Buddhisim there are no suffering, no time, no space, no stress,no trap in body, no language,no speech, no life and death.

This is not what we learn from book as other religion does, this was more that teaching, it's understanding.

We heard a great famous doctor kills his wife, He was a knowledge person but why act such manner?

What we learn we will forget in old age but the real knowledge of Buddhism was not from learning it's from our own nature like new born babies know how to suck milk , basic instict of life.

Wild life animal will know earth quake or tsunami coming but human lost these sences for long time as we worry too much in life.

[rychrde]

Rocky, in answer to your original question, why not do the experiment and see for yourself? I mean, try hypnosis for a while and see what it really feels like rather than believing what others (many who from their comments have no experience of hypnosis) are saying. Hypnosis was developed as a secular tool in psycotherapy. It can implant ideas into your head if you let someone else do so, but it can also be liberating in shedding the effects of past experiences. It can also lead to profound spiritual experiences. Just try it, and report back :-) To avoid some of the suggestions implanted into many self-hypnosis tapes just use the same method and record your own. Eventually you'll be able to go down into that state without the verbal props. Remote viewing techniques are also very similar and, I suspect, lead to the same state but for a different purpose. Free materials at the farsight institute and monroe institute. The mind is still the most mysterious part of space.

[rockyysdt]

Rocky, in answer to your original question, why not do the experiment and see for yourself? I mean, try hypnosis for a while and see what it really feels like rather than believing what others (many who from their comments have no experience of hypnosis) are saying. Hypnosis was developed as a secular tool in psycotherapy. It can implant ideas into your head if you let someone else do so, but it can also be liberating in shedding the effects of past experiences. It can also lead to profound spiritual experiences. Just try it, and report back :-) To avoid some of the suggestions implanted into many self-hypnosis tapes just use the same method and record your own. Eventually you'll be able to go down into that state without the verbal props. Remote viewing techniques are also very similar and, I suspect, lead to the same state but for a different purpose. Free materials at the farsight institute and monroe institute. The mind is still the most mysterious part of space.

Hi rychrde

I've used hypnotherapy in the past.

The psychologist was a little rushed and not flowing when we had our session.

She taped it and invited me to play the recording daily during relaxation sessions.

I ended up adopting her speech mannerisms, some quite annoying, but my issue remained.

There's no doubt hypnotism works and can be powerful.

My concern was:

Are Buddhist beliefs real or is the experience a product of auto hypnosis and not real?

Most have indicated that a teacher or guide is needed to facilitate growth and enlightenment.

There in lies the problem.

Approved Buddhist teachers or guides provide the input or material for hypnosis.

Some self teach by reading Buddhist works.

It becomes auto hypnosis because you apply it during the sitting.

Does following such instruction (suggestion) during sittings end up creating the illusion of enlightenment or is it real?

[camerata]

Does following such instruction (suggestion) during sittings end up creating the illusion of enlightenment or is it real?

If you are talking about enlightenment, the answer is pretty easy. Nibbana is unconditioned and beyond conceptual thinking. Since all words, all thoughts, all instruction is based on language and concepts, nibbana can't be programmed into you any more than the colour red can be programmed into someone blind since birth. Even the Buddha could only tell us what nibbana was not.

If nibbana could come about from suggestion like a conversion or born-again experience for Christians, the world would be crawling with arahants. Instead, there are only a handful in the world at any one time, as far as we know.

[Brucenkhamen]

Are Buddhist beliefs real or is the experience a product of auto hypnosis and not real?

Most have indicated that a teacher or guide is needed to facilitate growth and enlightenment.

There in lies the problem.

Approved Buddhist teachers or guides provide the input or material for hypnosis.

Some self teach by reading Buddhist works.

It becomes auto hypnosis because you apply it during the sitting.

Does following such instruction (suggestion) during sittings end up creating the illusion of enlightenment or is it real?

As Camerata has pointed out if it were so easy that one could become enlightened through hypnotism the world would be crawling with Arahants.

You have to answer these questions for yourself, nobody is going to be able to answer them for you.

If you are practicing correctly you'll be noticing thoughts and feelings as they arise and pass away. Can you notice your thoughts and feelings about the teachings you've received, your meditation, your progress or lack thereof. Can you see any tendency arise to learn things by rote, to settle into complacency, if you notice these they are just as likely to pass away. If you don't they could become habit patterns that you aren't aware of, this is true of any skill you undertake in life.

Having been caught up in the "brain washingness" of fundamentalist religion in the past I can say that Buddhist practice couldn't be more different, I have total freedom to think for myself and develop my practice how I see fit, I've never felt that anyone was manipulating me to think in a particular way.

Now there is a certain kind of Buddhist that gets his eyes fixed on the goal and starts ignoring the present moment, if you've felt like that yourself then maybe it's time to settle back into the present moment and observe your experience rather than worrying about this or that, then you'd be able to answer your question yourself.

[rockyysdt]

Does following such instruction (suggestion) during sittings end up creating the illusion of enlightenment or is it real?

If you are talking about enlightenment, the answer is pretty easy. Nibbana is unconditioned and beyond conceptual thinking. Since all words, all thoughts, all instruction is based on language and concepts, nibbana can't be programmed into you any more than the colour red can be programmed into someone blind since birth. Even the Buddha could only tell us what nibbana was not.

If nibbana could come about from suggestion like a conversion or born-again experience for Christians, the world would be crawling with arahants. Instead, there are only a handful in the world at any one time, as far as we know.

I must preface by saying that I believe in Buddhism, but at my current stage of awareness it is only a belief.

The problem with Nibbana is that it is theoretical.

We don't know anyone who has attained this and come back to tell us.

I think even you've indicated in an earlier post that you thought Buddha didn't reach that level.

quote: I don't believe the Buddha had infinite knowledge because I haven't seen enough evidence in the Pali Canon to support it.

If that's the case, the lower levels are powerful experiences but short of Nibbana.

Being powerful experiences, could they have been triggered by auto hypnosis?

One believes they're having a powerful experience, as their brain floods with seratonin, endorphins and other chemicals which give us profound experience.

Nibbana maybe a belief of Buddhism.

Edited July 7, 2008 by rockyysdt

[rockyysdt]

As Camerata has pointed out if it were so easy that one could become enlightened through hypnotism the world would be crawling with Arahants.

You have to answer these questions for yourself, nobody is going to be able to answer them for you.

To answer it for myself, I may have to devote my life and even then may not succeed.

If I do succeed, how will I know it is real or the result of hypnosis?

If you are practicing correctly you'll be noticing thoughts and feelings as they arise and pass away. Can you notice your thoughts and feelings about the teachings you've received, your meditation, your progress or lack thereof. Can you see any tendency arise to learn things by rote, to settle into complacency, if you notice these they are just as likely to pass away. If you don't they could become habit patterns that you aren't aware of, this is true of any skill you undertake in life.

I don't really think about this issue during my sittings.

It just comes up during my day to day life as part of my scepticism which is a form of self protection.

For example, my friend wants me to join his Church. I am sceptical.

Having been caught up in the "brain washingness" of fundamentalist religion in the past I can say that Buddhist practice couldn't be more different, I have total freedom to think for myself and develop my practice how I see fit, I've never felt that anyone was manipulating me to think in a particular way.

Aren't the works of Buddha and the beliefs within the vehicle of our practice?

Although we are free to develop our practice don't Buddhas teachings restrict this freedom if they become our belief?

Now there is a certain kind of Buddhist that gets his eyes fixed on the goal and starts ignoring the present moment, if you've felt like that yourself then maybe it's time to settle back into the present moment and observe your experience rather than worrying about this or that, then you'd be able to answer your question yourself.

I'm very much at the beginning.

After some bad experiences my practice concentrates on pure self awareness without much other input (teachings).

I try to avoid reading about Buddhas teachings because I want my experience to come from within.

I restrict input at this stage to:

Selfless charity.

Daily sitting practice.

Self awareness of my daily conscious state.

Refrain from harming others.

My analytical and sceptical ego puts forward this topic during my conscious state.

Edited July 7, 2008 by rockyysdt

[camerata]

I must preface by saying that I believe in Buddhism, but at my current stage of awareness it is only a belief.

The problem with Nibbana is that it is theoretical.

We don't know anyone who has attained this and come back to tell us.

I already mentioned that the totality of Buddhism is not a belief. There are aspects which don't require belief at all. They sound logical, you try them, and they work. And these happen to be the important aspects.

I think you're misunderstanding what nibbana is. It's a state of being which anyone who puts in enough effort can experience in this life. Traditionally, the term nibbana also covers the period after an enlightened one dies, which makes it a bit confusing. But we know that the Buddha and his disciples attained nibbana and talked about it. If what you're looking for is proof of some continuation of the nibbana experience after death, there isn't any. But the goal is nibbana, not some kind of existence after death, so no need to worry about that.

I think even you've indicated in an earlier post that you thought Buddha didn't reach that level.

I just said I don't think he had "infinite knowledge" as believed by some. In other words, nibbana does not equate with omniscience. The Buddha reached the ultimate goal as far as Theravada Buddhists are concerned.

Traditionally, there are four levels of enlightenment. The first is actually the most difficult because it entails the eradication of self-view. I really don't see how anyone could hypnotize himself into losing self-view. It's a total change in the way of thinking. As Ajahn Chah said, "Suddenly I was thinking differently from everyone else and they were thinking differently from me." This is not some kind of seratonin high, it's a revolution in the way of thinking.

Nibbana maybe a belief of Buddhism.

Well, we can go on forever claiming this or that is a belief, but then we lose sight of the goal. This is just another trick of the ego to stop you seeing the truth - that the ego is an illusion and you don't need it. The ego will try anything to prevent you seeing how it controls you. To me, what's important is to establish what the goal is and then work towards it. Nothing that can be experienced by me in this life is a belief. I could get a black belt in karate. I could get a PhD in Asian Studies. I could attain nibbana. It's the same thing. All possible, though highly unlikely in my case.

[rockyysdt]

I already mentioned that the totality of Buddhism is not a belief. There are aspects which don't require belief at all. They sound logical, you try them, and they work. And these happen to be the important aspects.

I think you're misunderstanding what nibbana is. It's a state of being which anyone who puts in enough effort can experience in this life. Traditionally, the term nibbana also covers the period after an enlightened one dies, which makes it a bit confusing. But we know that the Buddha and his disciples attained nibbana and talked about it. If what you're looking for is proof of some continuation of the nibbana experience after death, there isn't any. But the goal is nibbana, not some kind of existence after death, so no need to worry about that.

I think even you've indicated in an earlier post that you thought Buddha didn't reach that level.

I just said I don't think he had "infinite knowledge" as believed by some. In other words, nibbana does not equate with omniscience. The Buddha reached the ultimate goal as far as Theravada Buddhists are concerned.

Traditionally, there are four levels of enlightenment. The first is actually the most difficult because it entails the eradication of self-view. I really don't see how anyone could hypnotize himself into losing self-view. It's a total change in the way of thinking. As Ajahn Chah said, "Suddenly I was thinking differently from everyone else and they were thinking differently from me." This is not some kind of seratonin high, it's a revolution in the way of thinking.

Nibbana maybe a belief of Buddhism.

Well, we can go on forever claiming this or that is a belief, but then we lose sight of the goal. This is just another trick of the ego to stop you seeing the truth - that the ego is an illusion and you don't need it. The ego will try anything to prevent you seeing how it controls you. To me, what's important is to establish what the goal is and then work towards it. Nothing that can be experienced by me in this life is a belief. I could get a black belt in karate. I could get a PhD in Asian Studies. I could attain nibbana. It's the same thing. All possible, though highly unlikely in my case.

Once aspects are accepted we tend to accept or embrace the lot.

Aspects can be logical but other aspects can involve a leap of faith.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting what Nibbana is.

I thought the preceding steps or levels (Ecstacy & Bliss, Love, Calmness & Tranquility, Equanimity & Peace) aren't Nibbana but steps or milestones towards it.

Powerful as they might be, I'd imagine they're quite a bit short of infinity.

I thought Nibbana was Union with the Divine (the release from the cycle of rebirth and the extinction of all desires and aversions; the attainment of enlightenment).

I guess what I think comes down to a lack of direct experience and a certain amount of belief.

Edited July 7, 2008 by rockyysdt