Dangers of Meditation

Yishai

I feel like this is commonly discussed, but I wanted to bring it up here.

http://www.lorinroche.com/page8/page8.html

I'm not sure of the religious affiliation this person has(tantra or somesuch), but I feel that he brings in a healthy skepticism so that we do not become dead to the world. As you enter Buddhism as a new convert, there are many dangers. Converts tend to be overzealous. This happens in all religion though(Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.) Just wanted to get a good conversation about avoiding these dangers.

Metta to all

sukhita

Loren Roche talks of his experience in the TM movement (which is a Hindu sect) and then goes on about the dangers of meditation not only in the TM tradition, but also in other religions like Buddhism. Is he qualified to talk about meditation in Buddhism? I think not... but I may be wrong. In any event, the approach by the Buddhist teachers is quite different from that of the Hindu gurus in general. Most of the Buddhist meditations is based more on mindfulness than getting into deep trance-like state. Also, in Buddhism, we have monastics and laity with different training rules, but I'm not sure if such distinction is found in the TM movement. Just my thoughts, for what it's worth....

hermitwin

Its good to be skeptical.
Just because a teacher calls himself Buddhist n wear brown
robes doesnt mean he is not a crook.
Approach meditation slowly, gradually, cautiously, you cant hurry anyway,
it doesnt work.

Yishai

Yes, I can completely agree. I feel that there are dangers in which we may lose sight of why we Buddhists meditate. Think of the new Buddhist convert that comes and concentrates on attachment and letting go within their meditation. This person may forsake friends, family, etc.

What I'm trying to derive from that reading is that Buddhists can encounter those problems mentioned if we lose our compassion. Compassion, I feel, keeps us "right".

person

There was some good food for thought in that article. But I feel he was over critical and dismissive of the Religious aspect of Buddhism, dismissing it completely as some cultural relic with no inherent truth. A lot of the dangers he talked about are very relevant in the context of transferring an ancient eastern tradition to modern western society. I think in the Buddhist tradition at least there are more and more long time practicioners from a western background that are able to interpret the teachings for the western mind, from the tibetan tradition I am fond of Thubten Chodron, Pema Chodron, and Matthiu Ricard.

caz

The only real danger comes with Tantra to be honest as it involves meditations on the inner winds and energy channels within the body so it is vital that one always has a teacher.

Sabre

I see many words on chakras, sects, a war on self, the danger of karma, Guru masters etc. This has nothing to do with Buddhism as I know it. This really smells like Hinduism. Not judging anybody who's into Hinduism, but I think you can't talk about Buddhist and Hindu teachings in one essay. They are fundamentally different. Well, maybe there are some sects in tantric kind of Buddhism, but I don't know what is going on there.

If you just live a Western life and keep an open view I don't really see how you can go wrong. It was the Buddha who said we decide or own fate and destroyed the old ideas of fixed karma or the belief in a higher God we have to submit to and "renounce the ego" for. I really, really don't like that termination "ego" for it is very open to misinterpretation. So many people get a wrong idea because of that. But we Buddhist, we try to love ourselves as we are. Loving kindness includes ourselves, that is important.

Good meditation, bad meditation. Does not matter in Buddhism. No God is going to punish you, no monk will ever judge you. And you can always walk away, do stupid things.. no monk is going to curse you or anything.

Personally I know nobody who says Buddhism and meditation hasn't helped them a in their lives. I hear people say they get some fruits out of the meditation especially when combining it with the precepts. Personally it has done me a lot of good. I can say it totally changed me.


With loving kindness to everybody who reads this (and to myself )
Sabre

Sabre

There was some good food for thought in that article. But I feel he was over critical and dismissive of the Religious aspect of Buddhism, dismissing it completely as some cultural relic with no inherent truth. A lot of the dangers he talked about are very relevant in the context of transferring an ancient eastern tradition to modern western society. I think in the Buddhist tradition at least there are more and more long time practicioners from a western background that are able to interpret the teachings for the western mind, from the tibetan tradition I am fond of Thubten Chodron, Pema Chodron, and Matthiu Ricard.

Nice reply. I like them too. Judging on what I've read and seen, I think Lama Ole Nydahl is also a good guy.

genkaku

Two things come to mind: 1. Any time anyone figures they're right about Buddhism, it's time for more practice. 2. The dangers of enthusiasm, belief and so forth are normal human wrinkles. What irons them out is a constant and determined practice on the cushion.

There is nothing so good that it cannot be put to bad uses and nothing so bad that it cannot be put to good uses. The wonderful thing about meditation is that it cannot be put to any use at all.

zenff

The wonderful thing about meditation is that it cannot be put to any use at all.

Yishai

All wonderful replies. I understand Hinduism and Buddhism are separate and not able to be discussed in one essay. Just looking past all misconceptions the author makes, there are little things we can take away. No matter how errant, irrelevant, or wrong something may be, we can take the opportunity to learn from it. If nothing you will have gained some knowledge of Hinduism and Tantra Meditation.

Thanks for being open-minded.

NOTaGangsta

From personal experience:

The danger lies in the intention and method of meditation. I ended up using meditation and other practices to escape from correcting my own faults and behaviours. Instead of transcend my faults, I merely used the practice methods to make myself feel better whenever these situation arises. Hence whenever the conditions are right, my old pattern of behaviour just repeats it'self.

So yeah, attached to the practice without trying to transcend one's fault will yield no improvement.

Glow

So I poked around on that site and while Roche does indeed seem to focus on Transcendental Meditation in the page Yishai linked to, he DOES deal with Buddhist meditation throughout the site, as here, here, here, and here. However, the site is very repetitive and there is a lot of overlap, so here are the basic points he keeps returning to of relevance to Buddhism:

1.) Because the traditions of meditation have been preserved largely by monks living in a feudal society in which socioeconomic mobility and even choice of profession were out of one's control, many of the teachings have a slant that is specific to the particular challenges of one who has entered into a mendicant culture: e.g., renunciation of material wealth and worldly ambition, suppression of sexual urges, and a devaluation of social and familial connection, devaluation of individuality and creativity, etc. Such emphases evolve to make such an existence less painful.

2.) Internalizing such attitudes as a layperson can be unhealthy and turn into an exercise in self-aggression. Such attitudes can potentially "amputate" one of his/her motivation/ambition, creative instincts, one's social and familial connections, etc. Roche mentions people divorcing their spouses because they became emotionally detached, or allowing their social or work lives atrophy as a result of their practice. Such phenomena, he writes, is evidence that these attitudes are specific to conditioning one to the monastic life. In essence, it could lead one to become "lonely, broke, and submissive" with only the motivation to go off and join a monastery/convent.

3.) Roche divides meditation into two categories: "love" meditation, which fosters qualities of appreciation of life as it is, joy and friendliness with things as they are; and "hate" meditation, designed to facilitate disgust, distrust, and ultimately, disillusionment. He recommends the former for most laypeople as something that is "nourishing", but considers the latter "medicinal" and mostly intended as remedies for the ailments of the monastic life (struggling with sexual urges in a celibate setting, dealing with loneliness after one has left his family/friends, etc.).

While I think Roche can sometimes have a rather cynical attitude and possibly throws the baby out with the bathwater, he brings up issues that I have dealt with in my own practice. One point that I keep coming back to, both on this forum and in my private studies, is that, if you look at the Pali discourses, you'll notice that the Buddha seems to have no interest in teaching laypeople/householders his supramundane philosophy. In other words, he had little interest in teaching laypeople to become disillusioned with worldly existence. There are exceptions, of course, with householders occasionally being said to enter nibbana but, for the most part, the Buddha kept these two audiences separate.

If you look at his teachings to laypeople, they are mostly simple exhortations to live virtuously. He doesn't tell married people to detach from their spouses, nor did he try to attempt to get children to detach from their parents. Far from it, he actually gave advice on how best to nurture such relationships. So, where does meditation and contemplation of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and not-self fit in for the lay practitioner? There's not much to go on based on the classical scriptures.

Laypeople interested in the liberative psychology of Buddhism -- on what it has to teach about experience itself -- is the exception rather than the rule. By adopting a Buddhist life path as Western laypeople, we are essentially turning our lives into an experiment. There are few precedents available to us about how to best adapt these liberating teachings to an existence of bills and taxes, spouses and sexuality, choice of career and socioeconomic mobility (which is new not only in Asia, but also in the Western world until quite recently). The few examples we have are either monastics or make a living from teaching and thus represent a rather limited range of professions to which Buddhism has been applied. What is Dharma for someone who is studying medicine? Or for one who makes music or drives taxicabs or runs a store for a living? Even the best teachers I've found sometimes use a very aggressive, life-renouncing vocabulary that can be inappropriate for a lay audience.

The answers will vary greatly from individual to individual, but the important thing is that we maintain some caution and exploration and not buy too hastily into notions of renunciation, disillusionment, and denial without considering the implications. The Buddha asked us to do just this, but people often look outside themselves for confirmation that they're "doing it right." Or they won't even bother to ask themselves questions about their path: Do I really agree with the monastic attitudes to the body/sexuality/worldly life? Is meditation becoming a detour/distraction from life? Do I really want nibbana (extinguishment) or something else? Is this practice pulling me away from my deepest commitments or the people in my life?

These are difficult questions that we can oftentimes put off answering for years because we are so infatuated with the idea of a spiritual life.

fedaalis

An understanding of Buddhism can be dangerous

santhisouk

...and chocolate is good for you.

GuyC

Ajahn Brahm says that one danger of meditation is that if you meditate too much you will lose your hair. :eek:

compassionate_warrior

Lorin Roche and his wife discuss their guidelines for "meditation for sensual pleasure". Is this what Buddhism is about? Does that encourage attachment? Or is that ok for householders? :wtf:
www.exploringwomanhood.com/interviews/meditation.htm

Phoenix

I've heard that meditation is the "cream" of Buddhist teaching and that if you jump into it before you've laid the groundwork (the first 5 aspects of the eightfold path) then it can cause problems.

BuckyG

my meditation practice is definitely a danger to my greed, hate and delusion...

santhisouk

The only thing that I can think of that is dangerous about it is that it may not be used properly. There are rules in the monks' precepts that forbids using powers attained from meditation to harm others for selfish gain.

Sabre

my meditation practice is definitely a danger to my greed, hate and delusion...

Ajahn Brahm says that one danger of meditation is that if you meditate too much you will lose your hair. :eek:

You might even lose yourself !

Dakini

Meditation can cause dissociative states in people prone to that due to whatever unique aspects of their psychology. We actually had a member last year complain of experiencing dissociative moments after meditating. Teachers are supposed to be able to discern between students who are suited for meditation and those who aren't, but in reality, few are trained for that, it seems. Anyway, it's rare that someone would experience serious ill effects from meditation.

BuckyG

Meditation can cause dissociative states in people prone to that due to whatever unique aspects of their psychology.... Teachers are supposed to be able to discern between students who are suited for meditation and those who aren't, but in reality, few are trained for that...

Very insightful, Dakini. I've often wondered about anatta (not-self) and "committee mind" in relation to dissociative identity disorders. I suspect they're manifestations of a similar phenomena filtered through culture. I find the way Buddhists approach "personality" and/or personality disorders much more encouraging than the label, "disorder." Perhaps some of the next "generations" of teachers will be better equipped with the necessary discernment.