BEYOND PSYCHOLOGY:HOW TO TRANSCEND THE MIND

[kundalini48]

"Only an enlightened being can elaborate about psychology. The man who is in the mind cannot be objective about it. A made man can't do research on madness- a perfectly mentally healthy human being is required who has transcended the mind. Only one who is sane is able to look at all the dimensions of insanity in its totality. The man who is mad is not able to understand what mind functions like. The same is the situation about the mind. One is in the mind and is trying to create a psychology: A man with a mind can create only fictitious psychology only- that's why there are so many fundamentals about psychology. There are so many schools too contradicting each other. Lets have a closer look at Psychoanalysis and Psychosynthesis. This group is a tiny and humble endeavor to understand what psychology exactly mean. OSHO~Unless western psychology incorporates meditation, it is going to remain attached with the ego. It cannot leave the ego, because without ego then there is no center to man. At least there is something -- it may be false -- but something to hang around... but it destroys the whole life of man. It drives him into more and more, it makes him speedier without knowing where he is going, why he is going, without even inquiring who he is."

[pert -5]

Ignorance was spoken here in days past.  May it R.I.P..

[ErikAndersen]

"Only an enlightened being can elaborate about psychology. The man who is in the mind cannot be objective about it. A made man can't do research on madness- a perfectly mentally healthy human being is required who has transcended the mind. Only one who is sane is able to look at all the dimensions of insanity in its totality. The man who is mad is not able to understand what mind functions like. The same is the situation about the mind. One is in the mind and is trying to create a psychology: A man with a mind can create only fictitious psychology only- that's why there are so many fundamentals about psychology. There are so many schools too contradicting each other. Lets have a closer look at Psychoanalysis and Psychosynthesis. This group is a tiny and humble endeavor to understand what psychology exactly mean. OSHO~Unless western psychology incorporates meditation, it is going to remain attached with the ego. It cannot leave the ego, because without ego then there is no center to man. At least there is something -- it may be false -- but something to hang around... but it destroys the whole life of man. It drives him into more and more, it makes him speedier without knowing where he is going, why he is going, without even inquiring who he is."

Meditation has become a mainstream option in modern psychotherapy. There are definitely psychologists and psychiatrists and social workers out there who can help if you think meditation will be useful. Some people find it boring, others find it theraputic.

Good luck!

[sakoz]

kundulini48;
                   "Only an enlightened being can elaborate about psychology." I happen to agree, but how many readers understand, 'enlightened being' and 'transcend the mind' ?
I would write, "Only from a meta-perspective.......etc." That might attrack more readers.
A simple example of 'meta-perspective' is the perspective of witnessing any image 'in the mind', witnessing is not 'in the mind' the way the image is.
Abide as witnessing and ignore the image for a moment, I believe that's the crux of meditating.

[pert -5]

Meditation has become a mainstream option in modern psychotherapy. There are definitely psychologists and psychiatrists and social workers out there who can help if you think meditation will be useful. Some people find it boring, others find it theraputic.

Good luck!

Given that the poster of this thread used the forum name kundalini48, and further given the words and analogies that he/she used, I find it highly unlikely that the poster's use of the term meditation alludes to what the average person calls meditation; which would include the implications you are referring to Erik.  This person was (I'm like 75%-85% sure of this) talking about either Raja Yoga--which in the Bhagavad Gita was called Meditation--or the practice known as Laya Yoga.  Most probably the latter, though I wouldn't necessarily rule out the former.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raja_Yoga
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laya_yoga

And no, I am not sourcing Wikipedia as the antecedent of this information.  I just find the Wiki pages to be a useful primer for introducing topics.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abide as witnessing and ignore the image for a moment, I believe that's the crux of meditating.

I am not sure if it was your intention or not, but the meaning I take from your words describes a highly advanced level of meditation.  Either way, cool post.

Namaste

[ErikAndersen]

Meditation has become a mainstream option in modern psychotherapy. There are definitely psychologists and psychiatrists and social workers out there who can help if you think meditation will be useful. Some people find it boring, others find it theraputic.

Good luck!

Given that the poster of this thread used the forum name kundalini48, and further given the words and analogies that he/she used, I find it highly unlikely that the poster's use of the term meditation alludes to what the average person calls meditation; which would include the implications you are referring to Erik.  This person was (I'm like 75%-85% sure of this) talking about either Raja Yoga--which in the Bhagavad Gita was called Meditation--or the practice known as Laya Yoga.  Most probably the latter, though I wouldn't necessarily rule out the former.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raja_Yoga
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laya_yoga

And no, I am not sourcing Wikipedia as the antecedent of this information.  I just find the Wiki pages to be a useful primer for introducing topics.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abide as witnessing and ignore the image for a moment, I believe that's the crux of meditating.

I am not sure if it was your intention or not, but the meaning I take from your words describes a highly advanced level of meditation.  Either way, cool post.

Namaste

Namaste to you as well, Pert-5!
I am sure there are plenty of groups out there who practice the kind of meditation kunalini48 is interested in! It wouldn't surprise me to learn that there are licensed psychotherapists who do as well. I have no extensive knowledge of the Bhagavad Gita other than the fact that I read it in college, but my suggestion would be to ask around the community to see if there is a nearby practitioner of the types of meditation you are interested in who is also a licensed therapist. If you'd like me to help, just shoot an email!
Good luck!
-Erik

[Enigma]

Psychedelic drugs work pretty well for transcending the mind. 

[pert -5]

Namaste to you as well, Pert-5!
I am sure there are plenty of groups out there who practice the kind of meditation kunalini48 is interested in! It wouldn't surprise me to learn that there are licensed psychotherapists who do as well. I have no extensive knowledge of the Bhagavad Gita other than the fact that I read it in college, but my suggestion would be to ask around the community to see if there is a nearby practitioner of the types of meditation you are interested in who is also a licensed therapist. If you'd like me to help, just shoot an email!
Good luck!
-Erik

I do have quite an acute knowledge of the Gita, so no thanks.  Let me ask you this Erik, what is your definition of meditation?  Also, what is your definition of yoga?  I appreciate it.

Namaste

[ErikAndersen]

Namaste to you as well, Pert-5!
I am sure there are plenty of groups out there who practice the kind of meditation kunalini48 is interested in! It wouldn't surprise me to learn that there are licensed psychotherapists who do as well. I have no extensive knowledge of the Bhagavad Gita other than the fact that I read it in college, but my suggestion would be to ask around the community to see if there is a nearby practitioner of the types of meditation you are interested in who is also a licensed therapist. If you'd like me to help, just shoot an email!
Good luck!
-Erik

I do have quite an acute knowledge of the Gita, so no thanks.  Let me ask you this Erik, what is your definition of meditation?

Namaste

I mistyped - I meant to direct my suggestion towards OP.
I do not have any educational training or clinical practice in helping people meditate, but retreating into my own mind and calming down and feeling better usually comes naturally to me!
Are you a Buddhist scholar or practitioner?

[pert -5]

I mistyped - I meant to direct my suggestion towards OP.
I do not have any educational training or clinical practice in helping people meditate, but retreating into my own mind and calming down and feeling better usually comes naturally to me!
Are you a Buddhist scholar or practitioner?

A practitioner, though not exactly Buddhist.  What you describe is the practice that most people associate with the term meditation.  There is no fault in it, it is good at calming the mind, as you say.  What I meant by "meditation" is a bit more than that.  Suffice it to say that what you describe, while a good thing, is but a warm up practice for the Yoga (meditation) that I am talking about.  I'll explain it, if I may.  I'll keep this short.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3Y0MUht5HU[/youtube]

The video that I linked above represents what one can expect from your average yoga class. The video that I linked above also represents what I do not, I repeat, DO NOT mean when I talk about Yoga. The so-called yoga in that video is nothing more than glorified stretching and atypical postures; and it's commercialized at that. Like other New Age miracle cures and practices on the market, it is a product which people are selling to a susceptible, unwittingly ignorant (yes, that's a tautology...) public under the cloak of the mystique generated by the terms Yoga and Meditation. To be fair, what the typical yoga class is teaching could be considered a preliminary for what is known as Hatha Yoga, which is, itself, a preliminary aimed at conditioning the body for other Yogas. To call what people do at yoga classes "Yoga" is like calling someone who puts on a pair of running shoes a marathon runner. It is true that marathon runners put on running shoes. But anyone physically able to can put on running shoes, and that in no way makes everyone who can wear running shoes a marathon runner. Again, I'm not saying that what is taught in these classes is bad or wrong, especially if it provides benefits for people. I just want to point out the distinction between yoga class and Yoga.

Yoga means Union. The Union that is implied is a union of the Subject and Object of awareness, or the I and the Not-I. The Bhagavad Gita gives us four types of Yoga. These are Raja Yoga (meditation), Jnana Yoga, Bhakti Yoga, and Karma Yoga. Don't worry, I'm not going to bore you with the details.

On a side note, one other thing I want to point out is that I am not an advocate of Hindu dogmatism. I do not believe or preach that there are beings which exist independent of our consciousness. My interest in Yoga is the empirical investigation of the changes it produces in the consciousness.

Peace to you Erik.

[ErikAndersen]

I mistyped - I meant to direct my suggestion towards OP.
I do not have any educational training or clinical practice in helping people meditate, but retreating into my own mind and calming down and feeling better usually comes naturally to me!
Are you a Buddhist scholar or practitioner?

A practitioner, though not exactly Buddhist.  What you describe is the practice that most people associate with the term meditation.  There is no fault in it, it is good at calming the mind, as you say.  What I meant by "meditation" is a bit more than that.  Suffice it to say that what you describe, while a good thing, is but a warm up practice for the Yoga (meditation) that I am talking about.  I'll explain it, if I may.  I'll keep this short.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3Y0MUht5HU[/youtube]

The video that I linked above represents what one can expect from your average yoga class. The video that I linked above also represents what I do not, I repeat, DO NOT mean when I talk about Yoga. The so-called yoga in that video is nothing more than glorified stretching and atypical postures; and it's commercialized at that. Like other New Age miracle cures and practices on the market, it is a product which people are selling to a susceptible, unwittingly ignorant (yes, that's a tautology...) public under the cloak of the mystique generated by the terms Yoga and Meditation. To be fair, what the typical yoga class is teaching could be considered a preliminary for what is known as Hatha Yoga, which is, itself, a preliminary aimed at conditioning the body for other Yogas. To call what people do at yoga classes "Yoga" is like calling someone who puts on a pair of running shoes a marathon runner. It is true that marathon runners put on running shoes. But anyone physically able to can put on running shoes, and that in no way makes everyone who can wear running shoes a marathon runner. Again, I'm not saying that what is taught in these classes is bad or wrong, especially if it provides benefits for people. I just want to point out the distinction between yoga class and Yoga.

Yoga means Union. The Union that is implied is a union of the Subject and Object of awareness, or the I and the Not-I. The Bhagavad Gita gives us four types of Yoga. These are Raja Yoga (meditation), Jnana Yoga, Bhakti Yoga, and Karma Yoga. Don't worry, I'm not going to bore you with the details.

On a side note, one other thing I want to point out is that I am not an advocate of Hindu dogmatism. I do not believe or preach that there are beings which exist independent of our consciousness. My interest in Yoga is the empirical investigation of the changes it produces in the consciousness.

Peace to you Erik.

I would love to know the details of the four different types of Yoga! I am always interested in hearing about changes in consciousnesses, and of course, especially in how they are affected. Just because it wasn't taught in Med School doesn't mean it's not relevant. If you have any gems I could use in clinical practice, I'd love to hear them.

I made the leap that you are a licensed practitioner of the art of psychology. Do you have a formal practice?

[pert -5]

Here's a paper by one, Dr. Charles Tart. The paper is from the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology. I don't know much about the Journal, but this article is pretty cool.  I'll post more tomorrow or so, if you are interested.
http://www.mindfulnessblog.nl/images/pdf/Adapting_Eastern_Spiritual_Teachings_to_our_Western_Culture.pdf

[pert -5]

It's cool that you are interested in this topic Erik, but I have a few questions for you.  In your words, how would you compare what I'm talking about to New Age topics? (E.g., tarot readings, chi, feng shui, reiki, psychic mediums, crystal healing, chakras, astrology, etc..)  What is it about what I say that interests you and sets it apart, in your mind, from these things?  I am aware that in the parapsychology section you said, "I'm glad they have a subforum for 'parapsychology', as it's mostly nonsense that might pollute the rest of the forums."  What am I saying that you find different from what you called there "nonsense?"  Why the interest in this, as opposed to that other stuff I mentioned?  I'm just curious.

[ErikAndersen]

It's cool that you are interested in this topic Erik, but I have a few questions for you.  In your words, how would you compare what I'm talking about to New Age topics? (E.g., tarot readings, chi, feng shui, reiki, psychic mediums, crystal healing, chakras, astrology, etc..)  What is it about what I say that interests you and sets it apart, in your mind, from these things?  I am aware that in the parapsychology section you said, "I'm glad they have a subforum for 'parapsychology', as it's mostly nonsense that might pollute the rest of the forums."  What am I saying that you find different from what you called there "nonsense?"  Why the interest in this, as opposed to that other stuff I mentioned?  I'm just curious.

I am not familiar with all of the terms you used in the list of so-called New Age therapies, but meditation is something most people can tap into for relief on their own, whereas New Age (I'm going with your term) techniques do not come from within the mind but rather from a outside practitioner.

Parapsychology somewhat infuriates me, somewhat disheartens me, because it is (by definition) not evidence-based. Therefore, in a therapeutic milieu, parapsychology can't offer anything other than a placebo effect, and it in turn can do a lot of harm if the theory is malicious or ignorant.

[SWM]

Parapsychology somewhat infuriates me, somewhat disheartens me, because it is (by definition) not evidence-based. Therefore, in a therapeutic milieu, parapsychology can't offer anything other than a placebo effect, and it in turn can do a lot of harm if the theory is malicious or ignorant.

I think if you were to dig a little you will find this generalization about parapsychology to be untrue.  parapyschology may have some oddities that are not evidence based or grounded in objective rational inquiry. however, parapsychology is the investigation of unusual psychological phenomena through research and the aquistion of evidence .


i do not know of any psychotherapy that is based on parapsychology. it has nothing to do with therapy, that i am aware of.

I personally think it is one of  the most interesting subjects in psychology and does not get its well deserved recognition.

[sakoz]

kundalini48; I'm sure you know; the 'self-deception'I wrote about in my post," What Occurs When A Thought Is Believed", cannot occur when mind is transcended.
 Transcended mind is the ULTIMATE THERAPEUTIC PERSPECTIVE.  Until then, we do the best we can, which leaves a lot to be desired.
Einstein: "You can't solve a problem with the same level of thinking that caused the problem".  A meta-perspective is implied. "Mutation" comes to mind as an analogy; new, original,insight required.
What's "behind" or 'drives' evolution? There's a 'trust';'unfolding'; 'growth', analogous to E=mc2 (Einstein again).
All the information in memory can't solve the 'problem', something new, original, insight is required, coming from a different source then memory/past experiences. That source would be unformed 'energy'. Even the big bang seems to come from "out of'' void/energy.

[SWM]

perhaps there is another problem that has not been considered.

if "only one who is completely sane is able to examine the insanity in its totality" then from perspective of a sane mind he is only able to examine the external appearances of insanity. 

how does one understand madness if one has never been mad?

how does one explore the moon while confined to the earth?

[sakoz]

SWM;   Your two questions;  by observation then predictability. If you can predict how a insane person will react or the phase of the moon, then you have 'some' understanding.
( I can't resist this lol; You don't have to eat a rotten egg to know it's rotten.)
I admit our understanding won't be absolute, but we do what we can to increase our understanding.

[pert -5]

I am not familiar with all of the terms you used in the list of so-called New Age therapies, but meditation is something most people can tap into for relief on their own, whereas New Age (I'm going with your term) techniques do not come from within the mind but rather from a outside practitioner.

Relief would be but a trifle epiphenomenon of it, at least what I mean when I say meditation, but I like how you put it.  Meditation is self-sufficient (in so far as the Ruach is transcended ), and New Age therapies require outside intervention.  Well said.

Parapsychology somewhat infuriates me, somewhat disheartens me, because it is (by definition) not evidence-based. Therefore, in a therapeutic milieu, parapsychology can't offer anything other than a placebo effect, and it in turn can do a lot of harm if the theory is malicious or ignorant.

Parapsychology isn't bad.  It is those who attempt to utilize and manipulate it for profit that are the scumbags.  If you want my advice, and this is just my opinion, I would take your disdain of parapsychology, multiply it tenfold, and re-apply it to those practices that I called New Age.  Those practices are the breeding ground of charlatans and skullduggery of every kind; con men who wish only to rob those who are earnestly, but naively, seeking answers to that which troubles them.

That said, I'm not sure of any therapeutic benefits of parapsychology proper (due to my own  ignorance of such applications, not personal persuasion), but it isn't inherently bad at all.  In fact it can benefit in opening one's mind.  Are you familiar with the concept of the Lucid Dream?

[SWM]

SWM;   Your two questions;  by observation then predictability. If you can predict how a insane person will react or the phase of the moon, then you have 'some' understanding.
( I can't resist this lol; You don't have to eat a rotten egg to know it's rotten.)
I admit our understanding won't be absolute, but we do what we can to increase our understanding.

"some understanding" is not as the OP states "knowing in the totallity".

we can know that the egg is rotten but we cannot know what it is like to be an egg. only a chicken with a good memory might know what it is like to be an egg.

[sakoz]

Parapsychology?  Consider this;
The Double Slit Experiment: The expectation of the experimenters influences the 'electron' whether it behaves as a wave or particle.
It's alleged Einstein said; "the intent of the experimenters influences the outcome of the experiment."
( I don't know which came first, the experiment or Einsteins saying.)
PEAR  engineers spent 30 years trying to dispute Einstein's statement.
Visit    www.princeton.edu/~pear.

[gone]

I think what Einsteins meant as common sense was that experimenters experiment to prove a thoery of thiers, sometimes they are so arrogant in believing their theory right they don't even bother with the experiment but instead make up the evidence. As bias. This has nothing to do with parapsychology. This is to do with human nature.

[sakoz]

SWM, did you watch the PEAR video?

[SWM]

not yet.

[gone]

In the double split experiment it is not believed that the thoughts or expectations influence the result (this a complete fabrication) It is not known. I don't know where 'thoughts' came from but yes 'observation' has been considered (none of the others in a scientific world)..

Now the interesting thing here is observation, we need light to observe. I once worked with wavform monitors and technical equipment and my knowledge of 'light' is very good. Now there is no way 'thoughts' can interfere with electrons. In the experiment there are electrons, slits and a screen. 3 things. When we observe, we interpret what we see with light, so we have introduced both light and how that light forms our image/result, we have introduced two new things to the experiment light and human which interfere with the results.


It is interesting and I've copied and pasted this
"Is it possible to minimise the disturbance being caused by the light bulb? We can turn down the intensity of the light it is emitting. However, if we try it, just at the point that the light is getting so faint that we are missing some of the electrons, the interference pattern starts to come back! In fact, if the light intensity is, say, such that we are missing one-half of the electrons, we have one-half an interference pattern and one-half a particle distribution. So this attempt to minimise the disturbance didn't work out: we still don't know what is going on at the slits when we see the interference pattern.

There is yet another way to minimise the disturbance. The light contains energy, and it turns out that if we increase the wavelength of the light, towards the infrared, the energy of each part of the light goes down. Perhaps if we decrease the energy in the light we won't be scattering it off the electrons so violently. So, we start increasing the wavelength of the light emitted by the light bulb. We continue to see all the electrons, and at first we always see that one-half of them are going through the upper slit and one-half are going through the lower slit.

However, our ability to resolve two positions in space by looking depends on the wavelength of the light that we are seeing with. And just at the point that the wavelength of the light from the lightbulb gets so large that although we can see the electrons we can't tell which slit they went through, the interference pattern comes back"

source above from http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/PVB/Harrison/DoubleSlit/DoubleSlit.html

Humans can only observe when there is light, I think light plays a very large part in this apparent mysterious experiment. As it is light and seeing that alters the result.

[sakoz]

psycho mother , Did you watch the PEAR video? Please comment after watching it.

You did not comment on what you thought about KorzybskiesStructural Differential, either.

[gone]

I followed the link but there was no video, I read a little but it didn't keep my attention and I was reminded of MK-ULTRA for some reason. Where's the video?

[SWM]

keyboard batteries have wimped out so typing via phone.

of course there is light present it is light photons  that are being observed. there does not need to be human physically present. the image is recorded on light sensitive material. the expectations or beliefs (read thoughts) of the experimenter influence the results.

not as you previously stated fabricated evidence based on personal bias.

[SWM]

meh. losing patience with phone. give up.

[sakoz]

psycho mother; When you click  www.princeton.edu/~pear.
"Princeton Engineering Amomalies Research"     comes up, can't miss the blue square, click white arrow head in the square.