Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Solitary Confinement
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
And for all three there are various supportive structures that are very helpful... meditation, diet, exercise, hugging trees, and so on.
I would say they are life-saving and invaluable. Though I'm struggling with the 'hugging trees and so on' comment.
Are you being flippant, at all...?
Perhaps.
well cut it out.
Taking the combined experiences of these people, it is astonishing that you can view them and make light of their horrific plights.
Really, sometimes I'm astounded at the sheer lack of compassion here.
What the actual......
What people are we talking about, and what horrific plights? I was just making a small self-aware joke about how meditation etc. is - well, used to be - lumped in with tree-hugging, hippies etc. I was making a bit of fun of myself.
You seem to have a lot of free time @mindatrisk . Maybe you have fallen into the trap of over thinking, over philosophising? Just be. You seem determined to make some kind of a point. Maybe you are striving too hard?
All maybes. Only you know the answer to that of course .
Best wishes.
Well, it's evening time here and it's this or watch a movie! I wish I did think more, and I definitely wish I philosophised more, but this is the first time in a long time that I've engaged in a discussion like this, and I feel better for it... like my brain has done a bit of heavy lifting. Plus it's enjoyable, and so long as I'm enjoying something then not too much cause for concern.
I was under the impression, as you seemed to be responding to my previous post, that you were referring to these three....
I think you might well have missed the post. But it's the 'for all three' which made me conclude a seemingly obvious connection between your post and mine, as I used 3 people to illustrate a point...
No, not at all. I was just adding to my previous post. I thought it was worth mentioning the benefits of meditation, diet and exercise (the three most useful tools for what I'd discussed, and just for life in general), and to inject some lightness into the discussion I made the old tree-hugging joke, which I'm sure plenty of the longer term meditators here are familiar with... me included, and I'm only 35! Which, on a side note, is a really cool thing, because, even for me, when I started this in 2000, meditation, yoga, and all those kinds of things really were a joke in the mainstream, and here we are now with mindfulness, yoga, healthy eating etc. as thoroughly established in mainstream thought. Which is quite remarkable.
... In which case, I jumped the gun, so I apologise. But it seemed very coincidental, hence my remark...
When I lived in FRance, I used to teach Qi Gong and Zham Zhong, and in the summer, I held classes outside for my pupils, during which times we practised under trees. I can't describe how much better an experience it felt working through the slow movements under a canopy of leaves, filtering the summer sunlight.
Such times remain in my memory as true treasures.
In order to 'illustrate' the difference in Chi, Qi or 'Dragon's Breath' Energy to my pupils, I used to invite them to adopt a posture, as if they were hugging a tree. Then, I actually made them hug one, with their arms encircling, but not touching it. Without exception, they all affirmed they could 'feel' the tree's energy.
I often wondered at that point, whether it was the power of auto-suggestion, and that they made themselves believe they could sense a different quality of energy.
I was then fortunate enough to be asked to hold classes at a school, and outside in the grounds, there was a scattered collection, a copse, if you like, of young trees, all beautifully spaced apart, and all with level ground around them, with no disturbance of the ground, by the roots; the lawn did not undulate according to the root structure. it was all quite level. The trunks at that time, were no more in diameter than about a foot, to 18".
So it was here that I decided, one week, to conduct my experiment.
First of all, I asked all present to stand in the hug a tree position for a few minutes, to gauge the sensations, then stand in front of a tree, again adopt the position, and gauge what and how they felt. This took several minutes each time.
But I had today, brought along a blindfold.
Asking my pupils - my friends and collaborators - to wear it closely, keeping their eyes also closed, I would lead them around, and then make them stand with their arms parallel to the ground, and in the 'hug a tree' position. Sometimes, I would put them in front of a tree.
At other times, I would leave them in a free space.
Then I would ask them to guess whether they actually were in front of a tree, or not.
Without exception - without exception - every single person could tell the difference in the energetic quality they felt between their arms, from standing in front of a tree, and not.
I tried it too, and I too, was able to tell the difference.
Around 15 of us, that warm balmy evening, took great delight in connecting directly with Nature.
Interesting! And interesting to hear something about your background. I didn't know that you were a teacher, let alone taught those things. Do you fancy holding a retreat here in Spain?! I'm only half-joking. I would love, love, love to learn those arts, especially as my interest in taoism has increased in recent years. One form of retreat I also want to host here is ayahuasca retreats, and I'd be really curious to drink the medicine and see how I relate to nature thereafter. I don't doubt at all that we can be in touch with nature or that we can gain benefit from things like hugging trees, but I expect it requires developing sensitivity and tuning in somewhat. When I was younger I took a large dose of magic mushrooms under a tree in a valley, and had a very transcendental experience. Thereafter, in a way that I can't really explain, I felt a connection with that tree, such that I'd periodically go back and visit it (and, yes, hug it) almost like an old friend.
Out of interest, where were you based in France? I was in the South for a month this last summer, just outside of Toulouse between Agen and Auch... really stunning scenery. So, so picturesque.
Franche-Comté, North East, Haute Saône. Quite an off-the-track area for tourism, more of a passing through region, than a stop-and-stay one.... Very influenced, cuisine-wise, by the previously-German Alsace-Lorraine region.
I once played the part of a Fortune teller at my daughters' School fund-raising fair one summer. I used 9-star Chi and the baGua to find people's Birth Numbers and thereby tell them their fortune. I remember telling one guy he had an affinity with wood, and that if he could he should find himself a favourite tree and just go there now and again. To my astonishment, he then told me he worked for the Local Authority as a Park Keeper and attendant, and that at lunchtimes, whatever the weather, he would go to a particular tree and always sit under it or shelter from the weather and eat his lunch there, under its boughs. he claimed he always felt better, invigorated and ready to face whatever the afternoon brought.
Weird.
Weird, yeah, from our limited perspective, but I'm sure there is so, so, so much more to reality than we have even a modicum of awareness of, and it's kind of fascinating to ponder on why, karmically, someone would have an affinity with wood... many lives as a tree?! I have a numerology reading with my birth number plus many other numbers attributed to different aspects of my life. One of the numbers said that after the age of 35 I'd experience significant spiritual growth, and, well, here I am having just turned 35 alone in Spain for six months, kind of doing a retreat. There's something in those things, for sure, but explaining the hows and whys of it all is beyond me. Just another peak into the awe inspiring mysteries of existence.
Yup. "A little faith, a little reverence, for the things we cannot see."
Just sayin', I totally touch nature all the time and it is absolutely a form of meditation for me. I spend time on sensory walks every day, listening, smelling, and touching nature. Tree hugging is the least of it, LOL. I'll even admit to tasting, as I frequently eat wild plants and even the snow! But growing up intensely connected to nature is just how my life has been. My tacticle senses are especially strong.
I have imagined myself in such a solitary confinement situation and as a very busy work-from-home parent, there are times I even fantasize about having that kind of time to myself. Of course, it is quite different when you have no choice, or worse yet when you did nothing wrong. But I imagine my senses would come into play a lot in such a situation as well and I would probably spend much time touching every inch of the place. I feel like Helen Keller in the Miracle Worker movie when it finally clicks with her that sign language connects her to the world.
This sounds awesome! Especially if it were combined with mindfulness, which, it sounds like you experience naturally anyway in nature. In the few peak mindfulness moments I've had I've experienced nature in a similar way, but more just visual, watching the wind move the trees and noticing how the light captures certain features etc. I get a real sense of wonder, feeling really captivated by the moment. I'd really like to experience nature in the way you do. Maybe over the months I have here I'll be able to.
Just to return to the previous discussion about the dangers of assigning labels like 'hate preacher' and 'terrorist', this article is in the Guardian today...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/15/i-released-2000-minks-fur-farm-convicted-terrorist
Indeed, with some things when we are figuring out how to manage it, we swing too far the other way. It's kind of amazing how much we confuse ourselves. That we can call people like the man in the article a terrorists, but we tiptoe around calling mass shooters terrorists is insane.
@mindatrisk I was blessed to grow up in a wilderness area with a dad who spent a lot of time outdoors. Before I was walking, I was out camping and canoeing. Lucked out again when my husband got a good job here and we were able to move back.There are pros and cons like anywhere we live, but for me, having nature literally in my backyard cancels out a lot of the cons, lol. It is part of the reason the Lama moved here. He was here for a retreat a few years ago and decided to move here because its so conducive to practice. Not having access to nature would be devastating for me if I ever went to jail! So I try to keep my noise clean and stay away from the cops, lol.
Well this thread took quite a turn in the week I was away! Don't worry I haven't been kidnapped, just had a virus that knocked me out all last weekend, then a skin infection for which I'm on antibiotics, then drove my car into a ditch in my first motor related incident in 18 years of driving, then my 2 year old put his toy hammer through the TV. It's been quite a week but I'm still here to tell the tale.
I must look up Viktor Frankl and Palden Gyatso.
@Lee82, quiet week then....?
I linked them.
Yes just had a look thanks, downloaded the sample of Frankl's book to my Kindle and having a look for Fire Under The Snow now.
I saw Mandela mentioned as well somewhere. I've read Long Walk and it's interesting to see how he coped so long in jail with much if it in solitary. However, as much as you can understand why he did what he did, he still waged war against the state and was rightly locked up in the context. He didn't promote non violence like Ghandi did. Read both autobiographies if you get chance, neither man is saintly but both left a legacy and there's much to learn from them. The films in no way do justice to the true stories, you have to read the books.
So Germans who protected Jews from the Nazis were rightly locked up in that context?
@mindatrisk, Godwin's Law is not up for discussion here.
What's your point?
And I would point out, if any redressing of balance were appropriate, that Gandhi was not entirely blameless.
His son hated him.
And not all of India considers him a 'saint'.
FFS use a better argument ??
No matter your beliefs, there are governing rules and these change based on location and time in history. Uprisings occur by breaking the rules and can of course lead to positive change as they did ultimately in SA. However the government would have had no choice but to declare Mandela a terrorist when he plotted to take down the stage and blow things up. In that context and in that time in history what else would you expect them to have done? I'm not sure if ever there was a pardon or if it would be appropriate but there have been other examples e.g. persecution of gays that led to Turing's suicide and eventually a royal pardon.
Ghandi was a terrible husband and father, neglecting traditional family duties in pursuit of his experiments. I read in horror at some of the things written in his autobiography.
I highlighted the part that I was referring to. The statement that Lee82 made was that within that particular context it was right that Mandela was put into prison. Now maybe Lee82 was loose with his use of the word 'right'... in this case meaning simply that it was correct he went to prison according to the law of the land, rather than any moral argument about what is 'right'... but if it was 'right' that Mandela went to prison for breaking state laws then it would also be 'right' for Germans who helped Jews to go to prison given that they are breaking state laws, which of course no-one in their right mind would term as 'right'. The point being that there are such things as unjust laws.
What is wrong with the argument?
Well, I take a utilitarian view on Gandhi then, as I think I'd rather have Gandhi the world icon / bad father than Gandhi the doting Dad / anonymous cotton farmer. I'm not saying it has to be one or the other, but clearly the character that allowed him to be who he is also meant he couldn't be the best father. So be it. Buddha wasn't a good son or husband or father. What can you do? Sometimes somethings and some people are sacrificed for a higher cause. Would we have been better off if the Buddha had sacrificed his search for truth to raise his child and look after his wife?
As for South Africa... I would have expected them to recognise that their position was wrong, not Mandela's, obviously.
@mindatrisk . In the past week you have maybe strayed into bringing up things that are not suitable or maybe that people find offensive. Straying into examples of " kill yourself to prove your point" or now with the Holocaust example.
In my humble opinion these do not make for skillful arguments and actually offend people.
If it is not your purpose to offend people ( which I am sure it is not) perhaps it would be more skillful on your part not to stray into these minefields.
Metta to you.
There's a clear difference between genocide and slavery/ white rule/ oppression / inequality.
That's not what this discussion was about. The Mandela reference came about because of his imprisonment and the way he dealt with it and stayed strong, much the same as the chap in the OP did.
Maybe you have a point. I really don't know. When I was younger I studied philosophy, and so I learnt how to argue and to discuss. In that field there was no such thing as 'not suitable' and considering what people might find offensive... you just argue the point. And it's not even about winning or being right, but about uncovering the truth of something. Personally, I don't like the idea of not saying what I think on the basis of offending people, because I don't think that serves the human intellect at all. I don't know what more I can say because once this angle comes in then all you can do is dig a hole.
At what point then is it okay to protest unjust laws / states? Was Mandela supposed to wait until a genocide before taking action? I know there is no easy answer to these things, and I disagree completely with some of Mandela's actions, but I think that within the whole discussion the fault lies with the South African government, not with Mandela.
"There is no such thing as not suitable". Emm Yes there is.
"You just argue the point". Maybe a buddhist forum is not the best place for arguing a point to prove a point. Thats not what buddhism is about.
"Maybe you have a point. I really don't know". Sorry @mindatrisk but have you any idea how patronising and arrogant this sounds.
"Then all you can do is dig a hole". I think you are digging a hole @mindatrisk . Perhaps look up and see if it has gotten too deep.
Maybe put the shovel down.?
Much Metta
You started this thread @Lee82 so it is not for me to say. You have stated above that "That's not what this discussion was about". Am I being too harsh suggesting that perhaps @mindatrisk you have gone on a solo run and taken this thread in a direction that was not intended by the original poster?
At the point of violence. Creating an armed wing of a political party. Not really any different to the IRA if he had been successful in his pursuits.
Edited to say that I'm not saying whether he was right or wrong or that the government was right or wrong. It is not for me to judge and I have no interest in arguing about it. Peace to all.
For whatever offence I have caused you, I am truly sorry.
Perhaps @dhammachick deserves to hear your apology more than I.
Hmmm. It is a difficult one. The SA state were certainly violent, and I believe Mandela attempted non-violent action but became impatient with the results, and, because of ensuing state violence, turned to violence himself. It's so hard to comment on things from the outside. These people lived with it, and were obviously desperate for change and justice. Violence is a funny thing in that - as deplorable as the results of it are - almost everyone who engages with it believes they do so justly and that they are good! For me, this is too complex. I really don't know what to think about it all.
@mindatrisk So you are a fan of completely throwing out Right Speech in the name of philosophical argument? It's been pretty rare that I can't slow down, take a minute, and find a way to say what I mean without being outright and knowingly offensive. Sometimes we truly don't intend to be and someone takes it the wrong way. Sometimes, they are in the wrong because of their perception. But even then, it's worth pausing to look at if we did something to offend them and if there is a way to better say what we mean.
I'm not saying your words necessarily cross this line, but there is a reason why verbal abuse is considered just as heinous as physical abuse. And that is because words can have a true psychological effect on the receiver. It's definitely not Right Speech to claim you can just say whatever you want and it's the other person's problem how it is received. There is a reason that telling someone to kill themselves can bring criminal charges (and recently, one girl who badgered someone so much that they did so was convicted of a crime). I know we chatted in PMs and we're fine. But it's a good idea to rethink the way you speak. We can always change what we say to get our point across without bullying in the process.
Anyways. Several years ago, Arun Ghandi spoke at a peace gathering in our town. He seems to be doing well carrying forth Ghandi's legacy of peace without the negative portions. It's pretty difficult to look at Ghandi and say he was a horrible father and husband without saying the same of Buddha, yet we all justify that in our minds somehow.
Well, as all the Moderating necessary has been done for me (!) I think we can quietly close this thread, because it's strayed so far from the original premise - The state of Mind developed by someone confined against their will - that it's almost unrecognisable.
Thanks to all for your contributions.
Watch yourselves, ok?