Jedi & Sith Meditations

meditation is good for you

heres a link with more links

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/what-neuroscience-does-know-about-meditation-180956435/

id quote some of the relevant info but im ony phone and its kind of a P I T A

when i clicked on the link that i just posted it didnt work

i wanted to share that specific article because it links to several other articles and studies

the title of the article was "what does neuroscience know about meditation?"

also here is this, from harvard: https://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/~britta/SUN_July11_Baime.pdf

Gisteron wrote: On that note, in my humble interpretation, meditation as a pathway to inner harmony is a submission to the outside's chaos; an admission that we cannot fight it without cutting ourselves off from the world for how ever few hours it takes, to deliberately stay out of the world, and to not make a difference in it, and to not focus on the whole picture nor the ever so poetically named "now".

It's just another part of the body which can be exercised to achieve some functional growth, and it is just a way to refine perception into more useful modalities. So it is not 'disconnecting', even if some of the intro techniques in various practises might benefit or be said to require it. I think Jedi or Sith who don't meditate are missing out on perhaps the largest area of potential for what the path could offer. Which is why I get confused by those who focus purely on the pragmatic side, as motivation to action is not really a big hurdle for most people.... so I feel like its a bit of a waste to structure a path around that as a goal, but if there is a need I guess why not.

When I say modalities of perception, I tend to mean quite literally modes of perception as they relate to the experience of thought. Not just being satisfied with how we commonly relate to sight, sound, touch, feelings more generally and other things like dreams... alone and in integration with each other. An example could be mnemotechnics , being where "a method or set of prescriptions that adds order and discipline to the pragmatic, natural activities of human beings".

And yet, the materials presented here outside of apprenticeships that differ between the training masters and their students alike, are almost exclusively focusing on the disconnecting and shutting off bit. I for one can barely tell a person who does meditate from one who doesn't, if they have any grasp on their own thoughts whatsoever, even if they tell me whether they do, so I don't understand what part of the body the meditation-part is, or what "functional growth" means or how to identify it.
You say that Jedi or Sith who do not meditate are missing out on some part of the path, yet there is still no mention of what part exactly that is. Which part of any non-fictional Jedi doctrine would have to be altered at all, if meditation was cut out of it? What exactly does it play into, what does it add? Does it add those new modes of perception? First of all, what's so good, or to put it in more accessible terms, so helpful about that? Secondly, how does taking hours out of one's day to try and not think about anything get you there more reliably than instead re-thinking and reconsidering things, i.e. the exact opposite of meditation?
Now I'm no expert on meditation, and I'm not sure that anybody else is, seeing how half the time people talking about it would refer me to experts and the other half insist that no experts on it can exist, but from what little I learned here it would seem to me that meditation is more often in the way of improvement and growth than a pathway to it, and whenever anybody in favour of it speaks of it, they present exclusively arguments confirming that whilst at the same time insisting on the opposite...
This is why I get confused.

"Which part of any non-fictional Jedi doctrine would have to be altered at all, if meditation was cut out of it"

I don't understand the question.

What exactly does it play into, what does it add?

Depends on the individual, but IMO it alters perception, alters thinking, which alters action.

Does it add those new modes of perception? First of all, what's so good, or to put it in more accessible terms, so helpful about that?

Yes, depends on the individual and their practice or progress. But I guess it could change most all aspects of perception given enough focus and care.

Secondly, how does taking hours out of one's day to try and not think about anything get you there more reliably than instead re-thinking and reconsidering things, i.e. the exact opposite of meditation?

Making your mind feel empty is only one type of meditation.... but even that is not really about 'nothing', instead a direction of effort to reveal more about your own perception or self. Settling the pond is not the same as draining it, but maybe cooling it down might let all that steam rejoin its source - changing its realization of its existence (compared to previously). As I'd say some things from meditation constitute results which continue after the effort ceases. But there are various types of meditation including visualizations, physical movements, sounds, contemplation on logic and combinations of all of them.

It's just perhaps the answers are in the questioning, and that you gotta walk your own path in regards to that aspect otherwise your not going to be making proper progress. Being there is a difference when pretending to meditate if you do not develop and proper progress.... I had to stop doing it for about 10 years at one point... but I'd say pretending is a good way to start because no-one can know what its about until one does get results. Imagine perhaps if the result is altered perception, then without altered perception the whole effort will seem redundant. Why alter perception? You don't have too, but if you could would you, and why!? Don't do it if you don't want... I'm sure you have read that people have gone loopey from it. But then again, you might consider how powerful the imagination can be, and what then could be possible. If you cannot think of any advantages then I"d agree you should not bother.

It can be very confusing. Describing meditation in words is a bit like trying to describe music in words. You can try to do it - but it will never adequately do the job, and all descriptions will inevitably be highly subjective. One person's experience may be radically different from someone else's and words will always be a very poor way of describing a non-verbal experience. In addition, there are as many different kinds of meditation as there are different kinds of music. There is no intrinsic, objective meaning to it - it means whatever you decide it should (influenced by the communicated experience of others, or not). Furthermore, like the best music, there doesn't have to be any meaning at all . . .

Calling meditation unnatural is like saying that playing a violin is unnatural - it may be 'true' from a certain point of view (and set of definitions) but it is a fairly meaningless statement! In fact, we do enter meditation states quite naturally as anyone who has experienced a 'flow' or 'zone' experience might attest. It doesn't have to be a zazen (sitting) meditation - when our minds are peaceful, not commenting, judging, naming, consciously calculating and any sense of 'I' has disappeared - we are meditating. This mental state can occur without conscious will during any activity at all (e.g. downhill skiing, tennis, playing the violin, walking, washing the dishes, or simply sitting) or, with practice, we can coax ourselves into it at any time.

Meditative states have utility (for me) because they allow me to experience peace and quiet in whatever I am doing. This has the capacity to improve performance, learning, health and general well-being (whatever that is!). It can lead to better decision making, increasingly empathetic interactions with 'others' and a 'recharging' of energy. I would say that whether you are a Jedi or not, you are missing out if you have never experienced such peace, irrespective of the validity of any other benefits or utility. It is absolutely NOT about shutting the 'chaos of the outside world out', or 'doing nothing'. Rather it is about allowing the pure, unfiltered world in, without so many layers of subjective interpretation warping our awareness.

Control of the mind in this way can also allow one to then develop deep, singular concentration on whatever we wish to focus on. The re-thinking and reconsideration to which you refer Gist, is enhanced. New ways of thinking, new vantage points, new ideas become available to us which may not have been previously attainable.

This is only the crudest of sketches, and not the sort of sketch I would draw without the specific questions asked, but hopefully it forms something of a response.

Gisteron wrote: ...I don't understand what part of the body the meditation-part is, or what "functional growth" means or how to identify it.

Meditation is the exercise of the mind over itself; the ability to beat one's own brain into submission to the will in a way that will ultimately strengthen the cognitive abilities and sensory perception of the individual in question, leaving them more in control of their conscious and subconscious minds than they were before. I call that a benefit.

steamboat28 wrote:

Gisteron wrote: ...I don't understand what part of the body the meditation-part is, or what "functional growth" means or how to identify it.

Meditation is the exercise of the mind over itself; the ability to beat one's own brain into submission to the will in a way that will ultimately strengthen the cognitive abilities and sensory perception of the individual in question, leaving them more in control of their conscious and subconscious minds than they were before. I call that a benefit.

That's a rather brutish approach to meditation

I would consider it an exercise more in mental maturation, where you learn to be more aware of certain thought processes and develop strategies for managing them. Trying to force the process or as you say "beat one's own brain into submission", has in my own experiences just led to further mental noise.

I don't think its really possible to control one's thoughts, despite many claims to the contrary. I think a more successful approach would be to gradually reprogram your ways of thinking by reconditioning how you respond to certain events, and meditation provides a great opportunity to do this through mental focus on role play scenarios.

See, steam, this, too, makes no sense. What kind of "self" is there that is separate from the conscious and subconscious mind to a great enough extent that it can have any control over them? How do I compare the measures to which two "selves" are in control over their respective minds or even brains?

Now, as I stressed before, I'm not necessarily criticizing meditation as such, at least not on this thread this time. I understand that it can have benefits. I'd say that trying to trace it to some sort of "spiritual worth" inevitably opens more questions than it answers, and is frankly as unnecessary as it is futile. There is enough there to recommend it on purely medical or even scientifically sound psychological grounds without needing to rely on New Age sophistry, which frankly never doesn't produce all of the very confusion it claims to be a remedy against. What I have not come to see yet is the kind of Jediism of which meditation would be an intrinsic part, rather than look tacked on for no particular reason that can be found in any subset of the rest of the teachings. Where is the kind of Jediism that would need to drop anything else (and what exactly and why) if meditation ceased to be a part of it?

Gisteron wrote: What I have not come to see yet is the kind of Jediism of which meditation would be an intrinsic part, rather than look tacked on for no particular reason that can be found in any subset of the rest of the teachings.

Oh right I get ya perhaps. From my point of view stuff like the Buddhist Noble Eightfold path are requisite view's for effective progress in that path, and so the Jedi doctrine (again all just my opinion and application) serves the same intrinsic role with meditative/contemplative application. So while the Doctrine can serve outwards as a pragmatic guide - it can also serve inwards in that way.