What Is Best Meditation Technique For Stress And Anxiety?

[Samuian]

Thanks everyone. Special thanks to Rocky for taking the time to write out all those directions. I spent about 4 hours today doing alternate sitting and walking meditation and now feel better. The embarrassing thing is that I have been practicing pretty regularly for over 20 years and I can still get extremely stressed out over nothing.

it's the minds quantum mechanics - thoughts - that will always keep one at square one!

Razor-like discrimination is used to separate the seer and the seen, so as to break the alliance of karma, and to get past the four mistakes of ignorance, or avidya. The subtler discriminations involve many subtle experiences, as well as mind and consciousness, with the highest discrimination leading to liberation.

Ask yourself!

One of the most simple, straightforward, and useful ways to practice discrimination is to reflect on your actions, speech, and thoughts, and ask yourself, "Is this useful or not useful? Helpful or not helpful? Is this taking me in the right direction or the wrong direction? Is it better that I do this or do that?" Measure your responses on the basis of what brings you closer or further to Self-realization.

Or fix your mind on one object, canlde flame, any point, a flower, a sound, imagine something, paint a picture in your head/heart.

Patanyali pointed ou the eight limbs...carfully preparing step by step for the process "Dhyana" is the 7th step of eight!

Before that:

3.)Asana: Literally means "seat", refers to the seated position used for meditation.

4.)Pranayama: Prana (life force), "ayama", to restrain - control of the life force.

5.)Pratyahara: Abstraction or withdrawal of the sense organs from external objects.

6.)Dharana: Concentration or fixing the attention on a single object.

7.)Dhyana: Meditation or intense contemplation or "let go" and just become the witness.

I feel to do some rounds of hatha yoga asanas, sun salutations, before meditation lets me center much easier - one leads onto the other as it all together is yoga - union!

Start from here....

[Joop50]

Christiaan, as long you approach this subject with your intellect you will not succeed. I have written before, the mind can not understand this. Enlightenment or Self-Realisation is a matter of experience and (later you will) to realise that you know nothing.

But, about the quote from Rupert Spira, why didn't you start with the first page wich says: "To begin with we understand objects as appearing to Consciousness. Then we understand that they appear in Consciousness. Then we understand that they appear as Consciousness."

I will give this metaphor: Suppose you are in the cinema and you watch the movie. You know it is not real (but you can easy identify yourself in it), There are three things needed, the light, the screen and the film. Without the light there is no movie. See the light as consiousness. The screen is lightend and reflects the movie. That is what we are, with our eyes and the brain. The movie is as the images we percieve. I hope it makes it more clear to you. In the dual world where we live in is a tree a tree and rock a rock because our mind learned it that way and tells us they are but are they? I see you have read many, so you must know the Buddha tells us there excist no self or me.

When the "me" died, the Real "I" surfaced effortlessly. The manifested "I" bow down in humble gratitude to the the Omnipresent Awareness, who caused the removal of the false "me". So, there is no point in talking about the "me" as it is just a story about an object appearing in Consciousness.

I like you to concider another thing, when you really practice and sit still for let's say every day 2 houres you will see there will rise a great compassion up into your heart.

You can share this compassion easily with others, for instance with someone who suffers with stress and has the courage to share that and his experiences with us.

Edited October 16, 2010 by Joop50

[christiaan]

Dear Joop50

I however did succeed very well, thank you. When the mind cannot understand it doesnot tell it is the truth, the mind often cannot understand illusions, delusions, lies, insanity and so on. So the fact the mind cannot understand something is not telling the un-understandable is the truth.

The quote you refer to is made complete in the other text of Rupert Spira where in fact is told: .....it is only consciousness and no object anymore.

So I did not need to start with the first page since what I wrote is more the essence of this non-dual story as the quote you refer to.

I am sorry for your metaphor, I will try to tell you the ' metaphor ' as it is in my view but I am almost sure you will keep on telling me I do not see it correct.

And when I write you about this metaphor I hope you can see it is not merely intelligence it is observing thinking.

I live through the situation as you and I tell it. (By the way is this metaphor an attempt to an intelligent aproach of the problem or some ZEN-gym?)

Suppose I am in the cinema and watch a movie.

When I am in the cinema and watch a movie I am clear about everything since I know what a cinema is and a movie and I know about the proces of showing a movie

So I would start with I do not know what a cinema and a movie is and:

Suppose I am in a completely dark room

Suddenly some images start moving in front of me and I start to wonder what this is, what will happen before I can judge about this phenomenon;

I will investigate! I will come into action. I do not continue to sit, , stand or lay, just concentrate or meditate, but I will move to investigate. I will discover when I close my eyes, I see nothing again. So I have eyes. Because I have eyes I can see. I can check this by closing them or by keeping my hands in front of them.

Then I can also notice when I look left or right - in the dark - seeing that movie is out of reach allthough I will still see impressions of light reflecting.

Looking around I can see out of one direction the light is coming and in a straight line somewhere the light is making the image. Since I am not sitting around loosing my self in one sided intelligent or spiritual masterpieceworks without any connection to real material life, I walk around to meet the image. Then I notice the Image has a surface, it can be a soft one - fabric - it can be a hard one, a wall. I can see when the image moves , the structure of the wall does not move, so they are different qualities.

When I turn around I will probaly be blinded by the light, the source of the image. When I move and stand a side I can see the shape of the light, it starts in a point beaming to a broad image.

When I move to the point, the source of the light I will discover this light is coming from some kind of a projector and when I investigate this projector I will see the images do originate from a moving tape - that is maybe why it is called a movie - where light is shining trough, creating an illusion, in fact an artificial memory in light. So it is not only dual, this reality, my experiences show different material qualities and with it also my observational thinking, that makes me aware of the duality. In its core the material existence and my inner action of becoming aware are different qualities, the both parts of duality. Only when a human is in this dark room and do absolutely and totally nothing one can suggest a nonduality. But then we cannot talk of human life, because a human inside a dark room doing absolutely and totally nothing is plain dead just material body also! So this situation of non-dualty can only exist in this dark room for the material qualities inside this dark room. Those material qualities however do not become aware of eachother and their situation and write about it on Thaivisa

Well this is in short how your metaphor would be in real.

Now your metahor as you tell.

When you tell there are three things needed, the light , the screen and the movie it is very clear that when the light is not there the screen still is and also the movie. When the screen will not be there, the light still is and the movie and when the movie is not there......... (I do not think I have to continue, you can think out your self I hope) So it is untrue to write as you write when the light is not there there is no movie. ( Then there is only no projection of the still existing movie.) That is no observational thinking, that is made up, that is creating mysterie and delusion. To write such a thing is not even intelligent. And it seems this is the point where the unthinkable truth starts????

I know the Buddha tells there exists no self but you cannot take that out of its context. He in fact tells that when the self dies - the self that is attached to the body, to the material life - this self dies. (with the material existence) but the ' I ' continues to live its spiritual life within the spiritual world. It is not important to go into this life here, but since the " I " is part of the Omnipresent awareness it is the " I " who transforms the past with the help of the spiritual world.

Then you can trust , as you can see, I consider many things, I would not advise 'starters' just to sit down every day for 2 hours just like that. Some people go nuts or just get dumb doing so or even more stressed. There is no need or force needed to sit down like that. When you transcendent your self, you just will sit down for some, and in time, longer time meditating, probably not paying attention to time at all.

Like in my 'metaphor' (I know that is not a metaphor) a human has to be active in observational thinking. One can do this even sitting still for some time and then the I still can be active. But I would advocate to do this in general in action, in living life.

[rockyysdt]

I know the Buddha tells there exists no self but you cannot take that out of its context. He in fact tells that when the self dies - the self that is attached to the body, to the material life - this self dies. (with the material existence) but the ' I ' continues to live its spiritual life within the spiritual world. It is not important to go into this life here, but since the " I " is part of the Omnipresent awareness it is the " I " who transforms the past with the help of the spiritual world.

Hi christiaan.

Can I ask you?

Where did the Buddha speak of a spirit or of the spirit world?

He did speak of realms (Diva, hel_l, Human, etc) but these are all conditioned and impermanent states.

Can you help me find any record of the Buddha speaking of the spirit world in terms of enlightenment or Nibbana.

I indicated the following on this subject on another occasion.

New to me, I learned recently that some Buddhists have differing views on the Buddhas teachings regarding Re Birth/ Reincarnation.

A lecturing Theravada Monk explained that Re Birth & Reincarnation appeared in Upanishad literature atleat 200 years before Buddha & has been cobbled onto Buddhist thought.

The Monk further suggested that when the Buddha spoke of Birth or Re Birth he was talking about the Re Birth of an incidence of ego, not Re Birth of soul or spirit as we are impermanent & conditioned & there is nothing inside to own our thoughts or to be re born.

Feeling arises in response to stimulation received by our nose, tongue, eyes, skin, &/or mind which then leads to consciousness. Due to defilement's an incidence of self or ego arises which is illusion but gives us the sense of soul or a controller within.

This incidence of ego is dependent on the strength of our becoming, clinging or craving but will eventually subside only to be replaced by another incidence of ego due to further stimulation of our senses. Each of us may experience millions of incidences of ego in our lifetime.

The Monk suggested that the Buddha was really talking about new incidences of ego in ones life, & not Re Birth of a soul into another body.

He further said that Nibhanna is a state in which defilment's have been extinguished, there is no attachment and any incidence of ego no longer arises.

In this state we automatically live our lives with true loving kindness, right view & right action. When we act there is no ulterior motive.

It is an accomplishment extremely difficult to achieve and only a few people in the world will be able to attain it.

He indicated that there are many stages towards this pinnacle which are life changing and priceless.

In summary, as we are conditioned & impermanent & there is nothing inside which can be Re Born, when we die it's all over for our ego, or illusion. The one which we call "l"or "me".

This makes Buddhism stand out from religions.

With religions you exclusively have faith & there is a promise of life after death to soothe our egos.

Buddhism on the other hand requires effort, & through self experience in this life offers profound change.

[Joop50]

Dear Joop50

I however did succeed very well, thank you. When the mind cannot understand it doesnot tell it is the truth, the mind often cannot understand illusions, delusions, lies, insanity and so on. So the fact the mind cannot understand something is not telling the un-understandable is the truth.

The quote you refer to is made complete in the other text of Rupert Spira where in fact is told: .....it is only consciousness and no object anymore.

So I did not need to start with the first page since what I wrote is more the essence of this non-dual story as the quote you refer to.

I am sorry for your metaphor, I will try to tell you the ' metaphor ' as it is in my view but I am almost sure you will keep on telling me I do not see it correct.

And when I write you about this metaphor I hope you can see it is not merely intelligence it is observing thinking.

I live through the situation as you and I tell it. (By the way is this metaphor an attempt to an intelligent aproach of the problem or some ZEN-gym?)

Suppose I am in the cinema and watch a movie.

When I am in the cinema and watch a movie I am clear about everything since I know what a cinema is and a movie and I know about the proces of showing a movie

So I would start with I do not know what a cinema and a movie is and:

Suppose I am in a completely dark room

Suddenly some images start moving in front of me and I start to wonder what this is, what will happen before I can judge about this phenomenon;

I will investigate! I will come into action. I do not continue to sit, , stand or lay, just concentrate or meditate, but I will move to investigate. I will discover when I close my eyes, I see nothing again. So I have eyes. Because I have eyes I can see. I can check this by closing them or by keeping my hands in front of them.

Then I can also notice when I look left or right - in the dark - seeing that movie is out of reach allthough I will still see impressions of light reflecting.

Looking around I can see out of one direction the light is coming and in a straight line somewhere the light is making the image. Since I am not sitting around loosing my self in one sided intelligent or spiritual masterpieceworks without any connection to real material life, I walk around to meet the image. Then I notice the Image has a surface, it can be a soft one - fabric - it can be a hard one, a wall. I can see when the image moves , the structure of the wall does not move, so they are different qualities.

When I turn around I will probaly be blinded by the light, the source of the image. When I move and stand a side I can see the shape of the light, it starts in a point beaming to a broad image.

When I move to the point, the source of the light I will discover this light is coming from some kind of a projector and when I investigate this projector I will see the images do originate from a moving tape - that is maybe why it is called a movie - where light is shining trough, creating an illusion, in fact an artificial memory in light. So it is not only dual, this reality, my experiences show different material qualities and with it also my observational thinking, that makes me aware of the duality. In its core the material existence and my inner action of becoming aware are different qualities, the both parts of duality. Only when a human is in this dark room and do absolutely and totally nothing one can suggest a nonduality. But then we cannot talk of human life, because a human inside a dark room doing absolutely and totally nothing is plain dead just material body also! So this situation of non-dualty can only exist in this dark room for the material qualities inside this dark room. Those material qualities however do not become aware of eachother and their situation and write about it on Thaivisa

Well this is in short how your metaphor would be in real.

Now your metahor as you tell.

When you tell there are three things needed, the light , the screen and the movie it is very clear that when the light is not there the screen still is and also the movie. When the screen will not be there, the light still is and the movie and when the movie is not there......... (I do not think I have to continue, you can think out your self I hope) So it is untrue to write as you write when the light is not there there is no movie. ( Then there is only no projection of the still existing movie.) That is no observational thinking, that is made up, that is creating mysterie and delusion. To write such a thing is not even intelligent. And it seems this is the point where the unthinkable truth starts????

I know the Buddha tells there exists no self but you cannot take that out of its context. He in fact tells that when the self dies - the self that is attached to the body, to the material life - this self dies. (with the material existence) but the ' I ' continues to live its spiritual life within the spiritual world. It is not important to go into this life here, but since the " I " is part of the Omnipresent awareness it is the " I " who transforms the past with the help of the spiritual world.

Then you can trust , as you can see, I consider many things, I would not advise 'starters' just to sit down every day for 2 hours just like that. Some people go nuts or just get dumb doing so or even more stressed. There is no need or force needed to sit down like that. When you transcendent your self, you just will sit down for some, and in time, longer time meditating, probably not paying attention to time at all.

Like in my 'metaphor' (I know that is not a metaphor) a human has to be active in observational thinking. One can do this even sitting still for some time and then the I still can be active. But I would advocate to do this in general in action, in living life.

I am flabbergasted

[Joop50]

Thanks everyone. Special thanks to Rocky for taking the time to write out all those directions. I spent about 4 hours today doing alternate sitting and walking meditation and now feel better. The embarrassing thing is that I have been practicing pretty regularly for over 20 years and I can still get extremely stressed out over nothing.

tc101, things are going to live their own life and we forget this topic is about your stress. I wonder, perhaps you should try something more regular, wich works with the mind before you really can make effort with meditation.

For instance, have you tried NLP and/or some more of these kind of trainings? It might help.

[christiaan]

Joop50:

I am flabbergasted

Christiaan

As I was flabbergasted your movie disapeared when the light was gone

[timber]

I have been meditating most of my life. With me meditation is not a religious spiritual thing,

but a form of self hypnosis. I have been involved in very stressful projects. Meditation was beneficial in many ways.

1) It relieved stress.

2} If I was tired I power napped and got rest.

3} I could view problems in the subconscious and analyze them in a wonderful subconscious manner

Somewhat like a computer.

I find the secret is to go into your subconscious in a relaxed peaceful state where things are

more black and white and clear. Your conscious mind carries a lot of garbage.

At times when stress or problem solving was not a priority, you can reach a wonderful

state of mind. I am sure to some that achieve it, it would feel like a religious experience.

[christiaan]

I know the Buddha tells there exists no self but you cannot take that out of its context. He in fact tells that when the self dies - the self that is attached to the body, to the material life - this self dies. (with the material existence) but the ' I ' continues to live its spiritual life within the spiritual world. It is not important to go into this life here, but since the " I " is part of the Omnipresent awareness it is the " I " who transforms the past with the help of the spiritual world.

----------------------------------------

I have to be more precise as I see and also take in account what other people write about this.

Since it is not sure what Buddha exactly told, as also is stated by other contributors in this forum, I had to write: I know Buddhisme as it is nowadays, tells.....

The Buddha didnot go much and deep into questions regarding the " I " .

It however doesnot tell the Buddha rejected the existence of the " I ".

The addition that when the Self dies the " I " continues to live its spiritual life within the spiritual world probably is not from Buddha and certainly not from nowadays Buddhisme.

And only for people who love dogmas and rigid conservatism - the ego at work - there is no knowledge beside the interpretation and /or real teachings of Buddha

All realms are in their way conditioned and existing according their laws.

The material world is a material realm with material laws and the spiritual world, nibbana, is a spiritual realm with spiritual laws.

The material world is a manifestation of a part of the spiritual world in matter.

As I wrote before, an aware human is living with his spirit inside his soul, this soul is living inside the body and the body is living inside the material world.

As the body is made of matter , the I is not , it is complete spiritual.

The self, the ego is connected to matter, to the body, so with the death of the human the body will fall back to its pure physical state and then all that was connected and part of this body will die too. So all knowledge, all self, all ego that was connected to the world of matter will dissolve with the body too.

Only spititual knowledge will go on as substance of the I

The I however is not from the world of matter but directly from the spiritual world, so it lives within the soul freely,.

When the human body dissolves, the I continues to live in the spiritual world and will not live free in a physical body in the material world

Like a physical body can transform from a couple of cells to a mature human physical form within a physical world the I can transform as a a spiritual identity within spiritual works. The I can transform living in a human physical existence. That is the meaning of creation; the transformation of the ' I ', not denying or killing it, but transforming it. (This all shows there is nothing permanent, everything is always moving, evolving, transforming, also nibbana)

This is something somehow modelled by Siddhartha Gautama.

This is what the life of Buddha is telling me.

Then the life of Buddha is also telling me he gave humanity the wisdom about compassion and love.

These are the most important aspects of the teachings of Buddha to me.

Then I am aware that many things I am aware of have not been teached by Buddha but they are in no way opposite to the teachings of Buddha.

Maybe they seem to be opposite to some interpretations of what Buddha might have been said or meant to say.

But reading those interpretations I mainly discover dogmas, repeating of repeatings, self hypnose, enslaved and lazy thinking.

It is very strange to see the desire of some westerners to give up their independent and autonomous -thinking- Self, (often as a consequence of rejecting western material lifestyle out of combinative thinking) and to subjugate that same self to some general in fact unknown unity.

It is very easy to see the value of the interpretations of what people tell Buddha probably did teach: they are not fruitfull !

Look at Thailand.

When we subtract all the Buddhists - by culture - that are in fact no Buddhists, how many will be left (after 2500 years)?

But the wisdom about compassion and love as teached by Buddha have become known by most of the educated people in the world, I would say surely in the western world, and I also think many Thai know and long for this.

And so these teachings turned out to be fruitful for many many non Buddhists.

That could be a nice topic to meditate about.

[christiaan]

quote:

Suppose you are in the cinema and you watch the movie. You know it is not real (but you can easy identify yourself in it), There are three things needed, the light, the screen and the film. Without the light there is no movie. See the light as consiousness. The screen is lightend and reflects the movie. That is what we are, with our eyes and the brain. The movie is as the images we percieve.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

in reaction to this quote some additions to former contributions since I know some Buddhists choose to investigate by questioning the given experience:

In this quote there is written "without the light there is no movie" and that we have to "see the light as consciousness"

When we would see the screen as the world, the movie as the ego or self - ( allthough not written in the quote I assume the movie could be meant to be the self /ego ) and the light would be consciousness also to be named "aware being', it is quite clear that without awareness we are out of consciousness,

And we are out of conscious when we are sleeping, having some special mental disorder or when we are dead.

So without consciousness no experience, no screen to be aware of no movie to be aware of, no real world, no non-dual world, no dual world, just nothing

To think the world of matter realy does not exist when we are out of conscious means the world of matter disappears when we sleep and comes back when we wake up.(??????)

Even when we would suggest the world is merely a projection of our ego by the light of our awareness, as told in the quote, the quote tells this projection is done on a screen! It has to, because when it is projected on nothing, so no reflection of the light going through the movie we would not see anything at all.

Just imagine you are in an outdoorcinema: the light shines through the movie but there is not such a thing as a screen, would you see the movie, can you see the movie?

This quote is a metaphor to make non-duality clear but does it?

I would say the quote is a perfect example to explain about aspects of duality.

Because what do we have here?

We have 1 the light and 2 the screen. The movie itself is also a screen since the essence of the movie is that it is interfering with the ligth. It partially prevents (parts of ) the light to shine through and reflects that light. It 'distorts' the light.

When we would take te movie (the self/ego) away the light will not be hindered anymore and we would see just the screen.

Then we would see if the screen would be white linnen or painted concrete or some artificial fabric.

So we have a dual situation overhere, the light and the screen.

In my opinion the light is the I and the screen is the world of matter.

Why is the light the I ?

As we noticed already in the quote the light is considered to be consciousness also named: awareness

The awareness living inside a single soul inside a single body is a single awareness in that situation and selfawareness.

So the awareness is " I "

On the moment the 'light' is turned on, (for instance when we wake up) there is I awareness, self awareness, but also awareness of the world of matter. The self awareness is self awareness becos it is receiving back the reflected 'light'. So we can only become aware after sending the light first. When we send the ' light ', our awareness, into the world surrounding us we will be enlighted (to some extend) by the returning reflected light.

The movement of obstructing the light is self, is ego, it is an act of obstructing, distorting the light.

It ads nothing to the light itself, and it ads nothing to the world of matter. When we are becoming or have become aware, when we have become aware of the essence of matter, we can recognise the movie, we can see the light is reflected not only on the screen (the world we live in), but also on the movie.

When we would not put a movie between, the light will be pure light and the returning light will be pure light too but enriched with experience.

I can tell, this observation takes me close to the modelling of Siddhartha Gautama the Buddha and understand what he might have teached.

For people who are not flabbergasted or otherwise speechless, and who have no problem in observing thinking work themself, this... maybe..... could be some inspiration for meditation.

(excuse my limited english, I am not a native english speaker)

[sabaijai]

The topic of this thread is "What Is Best Meditation Technique For Stress And Anxiety?"

If you want to debate self vs no-self vs neither-self-nor-no-self, there are a couple of existing threads where that discussion would fit nicely. Here is one:

Starting a new thread is another option