Problems and Queries with Buddhism

wylo

18AD wrote: »

The question of hypnosis is really interesting. And perhaps I'm going to be a bit too liberal with my use of the term here, but however. wylo, I think you're mistaken in thinking that hypnosis is specifically an altered state of consciousness, or more specifically, that you think there is a regular state of consciousness that isn't "altered" already. Pretty much every belief and behaviour could be considered to be hypnotic.

Take for example the notion that you have a self. Is this not a hypnotic experience? It's not just a belief, it is experienced, or moreso, believed into existence. The experience of no-self is equally a hypnosis, but it seems to be a far more liberating hynotic effect.

I mean most of these experiences are tapped into through language use and behaviour. You can think yourself into no-self or into flying in a dream or into thinking you "are" an accountant. It seems that everything is pretty much in the realm of hynotic concepts.

I haven't given this hypnosis bit much thought. Just an idea.

I can't say I agree tbh. Hypnosis is a particular process that involves being in a trance state (removing the awareness of your surroundings and being totally focused in a highly alert but imaginative state)

That to me is the total opposite of meditation/insight where you are trying to be highly aware of your experience and be in as little an imaginative state as possible.

I think its important to highlight that just in case there's a wrong Idea given off of what this practice is about.

Hypnosis is being totally focused on the story of the movie, where meditation is seeing you that you are sitting in a room looking at a big box display 1000s of pixels.

18AD

wylo wrote: »

I can't say I agree tbh. Hypnosis is a particular process that involves being in a trance state (removing the awareness of your surroundings and being totally focused in a highly alert but imaginative state)

That to me is the total opposite of meditation/insight where you are trying to be highly aware of your experience and be in as little an imaginative state as possible.

I think its important to highlight that just in case there's a wrong Idea given off of what this practice is about.

Hypnosis is being totally focused on the story of the movie, where meditation is seeing you that you are sitting in a room looking at a big box display 1000s of pixels.

But is any perception altering technique not effectively a form of hypnosis?
Hypnosis is not just a method of making people put their hand in the air when they hear the word duck, but this sort of irrationalism is quite common without going to a hypnotist. People who believe that they have to wear a lucky t-shirt or their team will lose. Is this not a form of self-hypnosis?

I think the trance state you are talking about is only one method of achieving hypnosis and changing brain states. Is it not the actual after effects of hypnosis that matter, like stopping a fear of flying? Obviously this isn't happening in a trance state but is experienced in normal waking life.

Your example of the film is just different ways of viewing the film. If you focus on the pixels have you not just induced a hypnotic state of perception? You now view the world differently. It would be good to note that hypnosis in this sense can be positive and actually aid in inducing more focus or insight or awareness. It is not simply dealing with the imagination, but rather with all perception. the goal I guess would be to master self-hypnosis consciously instead of having to go to get hypnotised and trick yourself into thinking you need someone else to do it for you.

Hypnosis is not simply a false belief. What if you are an eternal optimist in the face of constant failure? Is this not a good form of self-hypnosis? And what if you could change your limiting hypnoses (plural for hypnosis?) and replace them with positive ones?

It would seem to me that there is at least some overlap here. Say you wanted to quit smoking. If you successfully change your behaviour into a non-smoking behaviour I think you have effectively hypnotised yourself into a more useful outlook. The example Doc Ruby gave of the endurance is a prime example of positive self-hypnosis. The same would apply for all your habits you have accumulated through your life. Are these not hypnotic effects that you have to become aware of, and re-hypnotise yourself into more useful modes of living? It seems like an effective way to look at things.

Or maybe a trivial example. Say you smile during the day and make people happy by so doing. Aren't you effectively hypnotising them into happiness?

This is all pretty speculative. But it's interesting.

wylo

Its probably just a semantics issue, in terms of what we actually mean by hypnosis. By your definition it seems like any form of experience and influence whatsoever could be considered hypnosis

As someone who was quite big into self hypnosis in the past, I personally really see a huge difference.

When I talk about hypnosis or trance states, im not talking about some guy waking up from a sleep state on stage and quacking like a duck, im talking about a highly alert and focused state where the person is more suggestible on a deeper level to beliefs and ideas (they can be very good , useful, and even real ones that represent something closer to the truth of reality, e.g. "I dont need cigarettes to be happy" <- very true)

Hence the use of it by athletes etc.

I can see how comparisons could be drawn to meditation.

Also, im not knocking hypnosis by any means, it helped two family members give up smoking.

The ONLY reason Im emphasising the difference here is because I consider the practice of Buddhism to be one in which you are discerning your conventional mind from your experiential reality, and with that , shedding ideas and beliefs as oppose to taking on new ones (even if the ideas represent something real).

And that can possibly even include ideas that you thought were good ones.

I consider awakening to be something in and of itself that may take you in a completely different direction to where you expected to go with it.

Whereas I consider hypnosis to be a tool to help you influence your behaviour and decisions to help you achieve something better with your life.

From personal experience,recently ive had to hold back saying certain things regarding death and morales at the risk of coming across like a cold hearted bastard, whereas in truth its actually coming from a place of deep joy and celebration! Im saying that because its not something I would have expected or thought I wanted out of insight meditation.

Just another comment as well, I actually doubt that there are very many really really enlightened people that would have the fire left in them to be an athlete at the top level.

But I think you're right regarding the overlaps in places, they both require alertness and focus, and in truth, people get into enlightenment to improve their lives in the long run, just like hypnosis.

Doc Ruby

I think maybe hypnosis might, for some, be a slightly pejorative term more associated with theatrics than constructive or clinical activities. Also adding to the confusion is that there appear to be numerous types of meditation, each with different goals and methods - the Tibetan mantras for example I would definetely associate with adjusting one's personality by repetition. And this is in no way a bad thing.

I'll need to try some of this myself before reaching any conclusions of course.

Asiaprod

Doc Ruby wrote: »

I'll need to try some of this myself before reaching any conclusions of course.

That would be the key, nothing like personal experience.:) See what works for you.

bou

Why bother?
Why change from how I am now? Because of a perception and/or belief that there could be a better way of seeing and being. Because as I practise, I see more clearly and can feel more a deeper truth of being. I believe in a deeper truth than that which I now understand and experience and that this can be realised. I see more the drawbacks of remaining in my ordinary way of seeing and being and have the intention to let go of the hindrances that block realisation. I suspect that this development will continue on into the future.

I believe that others are just like me, having the potential to realise a deeper truth of being.

Imagine that all dissatisfaction and suffering could end and that the potential is already there within to bring that about. Imagine that everyone can achieve that. If you had already realised this way of being and had complete understanding of how others could achieve the same, you'd probably be open to sharing that with them. Perhaps you would even devote your life to helping them realise.

The Buddha, after becoming enlightened, spent the rest of his life, ~40 years, travelling and teaching those interested to listen. He didn't waste time in other pursuits but devoted his time entirely to teaching. He must have thought it worth while helping others realise what he had discovered. And worthwhile to the extent that he did nothing else.

bou

Regarding the discussion of "life is suffering" etc, I like what wylo has said and perhaps might contribute some more if I can. Time and words are hard to find.

I think this quote of the Buddha's last words is good on this:

All compounded things, all experiences (mental and physical), all phenomena by their very nature decay and die, and are disappointing: it is through being not-blind-drunk on, obsessed by, or infatuated with, the objects of the senses that you succeed in awakening, or obtain liberation.

- http://jayarava.org/buddhas-last-words.html. Note that this translation is an effort to deconstruct the meaing of the original Pali:

vayadhammā saṅkhārā appamādena sampādetha

Cork24

how to gain enlightenment you must first lose everything..

i find that quote very true. How can some one understand something without losing it,

They say you don't understand a mothers love till she is dead.

alot of people i have talked to have change their whole outlook on life due to a death in the family, and they start to question what is it all about,

but going back to my first point, how can one become a enlighten human when we are surrounded by things that we seek that are outside our selfs ?

We buy a new car we are Happy feel on cloud nine, 1 year later we feel that car is nothing a sh*t given nothing but problems ? we then become overcome by the need to have a newer flasher car, so people would look and wish that they had your car, people like this are only fooling themselves.

wylo

Cork24 wrote: »

but going back to my first point, how can one become a enlighten human when we are surrounded by things that we seek that are outside our selfs ?

We buy a new car we are Happy feel on cloud nine, 1 year later we feel that car is nothing a sh*t given nothing but problems ? we then become overcome by the need to have a newer flasher car, so people would look and wish that they had your car, people like this are only fooling themselves.

through practice, self inquiry, direct inquiry, meditation, basically whatever technique actually gets people enlightened, and the one you feel sits right with your current common sense.

This is the issue with the word "desire" imo. It sends off this notion that to be happy you give up material things because being attached to them makes you unhappy.

Its not the material thing that's making you unhappy, its your mind, so you train your mind, or you look deeply etc to find out what the hell is going on, and THEN your attachment the flashy car drops off. Does this mean you are happy to dump to the flashy car in the river? No, it just means you dont give a crap if you have it or not. But while you have it, you might as well enjoy it.

The word desire goes very deep, it is simply the want for things to be different , at the most subtle deep levels. And suffering comes from desire.

This can get very very very subtle. A classic example of desire causing suffering is if you sit down to meditate, wait for yourself to get bored, if you're new to it and you are of a giddy nature, it will probably happen within 10/15 mins. Watch the physical tension and feelings that run through the body as you begin to feel more and more bored. Thats desire causing suffering.
It has nothing to do with material objects.

wylo

Id even go as far as to say that renouncing things is just as much an attachment as anything else. No point renouncing, its not solving the problem itself.
Perhaps others will disagree,and point out benefits to losing everything (assuming we are talking about our regular material stuff). But personally I really dont think it matters.

Its like blaming all cars for road deaths and not the people that drive them.

Asiaprod

A recommendation here.
The concept of giving up material desires is very often misunderstood, I am sure that it means many many different things to different schools. Yet, since its a key concept in Buddhism, there is a position that we can reach that can be agree on by all.
I think pinning this one down will provide great clarity.

bou

Believing in the reality of things as we perceive them is a part of the mechanism of desire/aversion.

We don't see the non-thingness of things and ourselves. Or rather, we can have an academic understanding, to a degree, of the impermanence, interdependence and non-thingness of things but don't allow this understanding to permeate our perception.

From a belief in things, we make all kinds of stories that have no real relation to the reality of how things are. We develop expectations and fears. Hence desire and aversion.

bou

We also believe in the reality of our thoughts and emotions which also arise from causes and conditions.