Hindu answer to Buddhist puzzle

betaboy

In meditation, one invariably encounters the problem of thoughts running here and there. Buddhists say it's the nature of the mind, which is basically a non-answer, an evasion. Plus, if it's in the nature of things, that would make meditation itself hopeless - since there is no possibility of change if we accept it as the nature of the mind.

Hindus, otoh, give a more logical response: most of these thoughts are reactions to stimuli, external or otherwise, and these reactions themselves are more like habits formed due to repeated thinking patterns. So their idea is to just let the mind run its course - it is like a container overflowing, let it overflow and after a while it will be empty. The same with the mind.

In other words, the more you fight the more powerful the mind becomes. Do nothing, let the mind run here and there, it will soon be exhausted. Then there is emptiness.

federica

You really DO need to get out more.....

There's so much wrong with the above post.....
never mind.

:rolleyes: :mad:

Jason

betaboy said:

In meditation, one invariably encounters the problem of thoughts running here and there. Buddhists say it's the nature of the mind, which is basically a non-answer, an evasion. Plus, if it's in the nature of things, that would make meditation itself hopeless - since there is no possibility of change if we accept it as the nature of the mind.

Hindus, otoh, give a more logical response: most of these thoughts are reactions to stimuli, external or otherwise, and these reactions themselves are more like habits formed due to repeated thinking patterns. So their idea is to just let the mind run its course - it is like a container overflowing, let it overflow and after a while it will be empty. The same with the mind.

In other words, the more you fight the more powerful the mind becomes. Do nothing, let the mind run here and there, it will soon be exhausted. Then there is emptiness.

That's one approach. The Buddha, on the other hand, advised more than simply doing nothing and letting the mind 'run its course' since that doesn't always work to quiet the mind. The way I like to look at it, the conscious mind is like a monkey or a committee. When thinking, the monkey-mind swings from branch to branch, and the various factors of mind are akin to committee members with different desires trying to be heard. The unconscious mind is like a bubbling cauldron, with all sorts of things from both past and present brewing. When not thinking, thoughts often just pop up anyway, being the results of past actions and experiences (engaging them being present kamma).

Much like you describe above, there are a number of things that condition our thoughts described in the suttas. In MN 18, for example, the description of the causal processes that give rise to papanca is: contact > feeling > perception > thinking > the perceptions & categories of papanca, with internal/external stimuli being included in the category of contact since contact results in the meeting of a sense organ, a sense object (stimuli), and consciousness (e.g., see SN 12.44 and MN 137). Even just sitting, we're being bombarded with sounds, smells, thoughts, etc., and thoughts can bubble up from the depths of our subconscious based on this or from things arising from the past.

When it comes to what to do with thoughts that arise or are thought, the Buddha suggests a variety of approaches. In MN 19, for example, he suggests dividing them into two categories: thinking imbued with sensuality, thinking imbued with ill will, & thinking imbued with harmfulness and thinking imbued with renunciation, thinking imbued with non-ill will, & thinking imbued with harmlessness. And in MN 20, he suggests five methods for dealing with unskillful thoughts in the course of meditation so that once the mind is calm, clear, focused, concentrated, and temporarily free of the five hindrances, it's then better able to perform the next mode of training—cultivating discernment.

Chaz

betaboy said:

In meditation, one invariably encounters the problem of thoughts running here and there.

true that.

Buddhists say it's the nature of the mind, which is basically a non-answer, an evasion.

It's the relative nature of mind. That relative nature is movement. The ultimate nature is luminosity/emptiness.

Plus, if it's in the nature of things, that would make meditation itself hopeless - since there is no possibility of change if we accept it as the nature of the mind.

The relative is characterized by arising and disolving, so change is certain. Through practice we can tame the movement of mind.

Hindus, otoh, give a more logical response: most of these thoughts are reactions to stimuli, external or otherwise, and these reactions themselves are more like habits formed due to repeated thinking patterns.

Buddhist teachers teach that too. It's referred to as habitual patterns of thought.

So their idea is to just let the mind run its course - it is like a container overflowing, let it overflow and after a while it will be empty. The same with the mind.

What Buddhist teachers say is to recognize the arising thought and let it go.

In other words, the more you fight the more powerful the mind becomes. Do nothing, let the mind run here and there, it will soon be exhausted. Then there is emptiness.

That's not emptiness (sunyatha).

Jeffrey

betaboy said:

In meditation, one invariably encounters the problem of thoughts running here and there. Buddhists say it's the nature of the mind, which is basically a non-answer, an evasion. Plus, if it's in the nature of things, that would make meditation itself hopeless - since there is no possibility of change if we accept it as the nature of the mind.

Hindus, otoh, give a more logical response: most of these thoughts are reactions to stimuli, external or otherwise, and these reactions themselves are more like habits formed due to repeated thinking patterns. So their idea is to just let the mind run its course - it is like a container overflowing, let it overflow and after a while it will be empty. The same with the mind.

In other words, the more you fight the more powerful the mind becomes. Do nothing, let the mind run here and there, it will soon be exhausted. Then there is emptiness.

There is no need to escape. Trust your mind. Thich Nhat Hanh or Shunryu Suzuki said to tame cow or sheep you give it a big pasture to roam. Same thing with mind. You just let everything go. By doing that everything is in it's place and you have come home to the nature of mind. This is a pleasant feeling going with that, but the feeling is not the goal. The goal? To penetrate the kleshas and see Buddha everywhere.

BhikkhuJayasara

betaboy said:

In meditation, one invariably encounters the problem of thoughts running here and there. Buddhists say it's the nature of the mind, which is basically a non-answer, an evasion. Plus, if it's in the nature of things, that would make meditation itself hopeless - since there is no possibility of change if we accept it as the nature of the mind.

it IS the nature of the mind.. a mind that has greed, hatred, and delusion. hence why we practice, to eradicate these roots.

Hamsaka

In meditation, one invariably encounters the problem of thoughts running here and there. Buddhists say it's the nature of the mind, which is basically a non-answer, an evasion. Plus, if it's in the nature of things, that would make meditation itself hopeless - since there is no possibility of change if we accept it as the nature of the mind.

I'd hate for a newcomer to read this and get confused by the 'authoritative' tone of the writing. This takes so many wrong turns it's worse than driving in Seattle. Why not just ask a question? You clearly have a question, it won't make us think you are dimwitted if you ask.

You equate the 'nature' of something with 'no possibility of change'.

The problem is your brand of thinking. It goes splat. You aren't alone in trying to think your way into Buddhism. What you'll come up with is a public display of your brand of thinking. The World According to Betaboy, in other words.

The point of Buddhist philosophy (or whatever better term there is for it) is to see the ultimate dissatisfaction GENERATED by your (or mine, anyone's) personal brand of thinking. Thinking is filthy with assumptions, ignorance, biases, denial and nonsense at baseline -- until the practitioner has realized this, within themselves, and commenced to clean it up with serious practice.

I'm not sure you're chuffed whether or not your thinking is cleaned up or suffocating in a bell jar. If you are just pulling legs to get a reaction, you are successful. If you really have a question but feel too insecure to ask, that's something to notice.

Gassho

anataman

I agree @Hamsaka, I think discussion threads like this should be put as a question to discuss, rather than as a given body of wisdom, and then some mighty fine answers may come from the groups understandings and misunderstandings, rather than irritation giving rise to opposing emotionally evoked responses and accusations.

This is a lesson in humility @betaboy btw - lol

anataman

Chaz

Hamsaka said:

I'd hate for a newcomer to read this and get confused by the 'authoritative' tone of the writing.

The same, I think, could be said about many posts on this board

Hamsaka

Chaz said:

Hamsaka said:

I'd hate for a newcomer to read this and get confused by the 'authoritative' tone of the writing.

The same, I think, could be said about many posts on this board

True dat . . .

It is a good thing take into consideration; are we demonstrating reasonable respect for the subject matter in our posts? Since our 'highest' goal is the cessation of suffering for all living beings, it's good to keep in mind the suffering beings who end up reading here.

Every single one of us was a very vulnerable searcher at one point. It's not reasonable to try and accommodate every single possible vulnerability that might inhabit a searcher. It is reasonable to care about the suffering searcher enough to avoid careless (or thoughtless) ruminations cloaked in 'authoritative' speech -- which has been pointed out countless times to said poster. I'm applying this to myself, too, in general.

Some of the longest threads on this forum are arguments between a few members about who's 'right'. I enjoy a good debate, and it's especially easy to get heated in 'text only' debates, we don't have the usual nonverbal signals that trigger empathic understanding or that we've gone 'too far' and into nonsense. That's just the nature of of the internet beast, but unlike Betaboy, who states the nature of something implies it cannot be changed, I hope as we 'represent' Buddhism, the 'beast' can be tamed. A little :P

I'm not saying at all that we have some kind of obligation to rigidly uphold a certain image of Buddhism. We ought to, however, show it some RESPECT.

@Chaz, I perceive you enjoy a good debate too, and just in case, that's not really where I'm going with this post.

Gassho

anataman

You are right - remember the 8FP follows from the 4NT's - @lobster succinctly summarised the teaching in his recent post.

I will try and moderate myself a little better, as sometimes I let myself have too much free reign. Thanks for the lesson in humility @Chaz...

anataman

What do you call an Aardvark that's just won a fight - a Well Aardvark?