BigSkyDiamond

me too, i second the motion. what it brings to mind for me is making the distinction between the Tao Te Ching (which resonates deeply for me); and the religion of Daosim which later sprang up and developed (which does not resonate for me at all) including the alchemical practices such as neigong and neidan. but i am curious to hear more on what is referenced above.

regarding bold above, i am curious to hear more. in what way is the sequence crucial? thank you.

i don't see it so much as group processes. i see it more as women innately being more tuned into their intuition. and seeing sensing what is going on and bypassing and not being distracted by mental thought processes, or emotional feeling processes. It is my view that intuition is the still small voice of Divinity within us that we can tune in to directly. Everyone has it but comes more naturally for women to be able to not only hear it, but also to be able to distinguish it from the mind that thinks, and the emotions that feel. It is separate and distinct. that is at the human level. at the level of Divinity, at the level of the soul, there is no gender.

my religion teaches recognizes that women are closer to Divintiy than men are, and that it comes easier for women, it is more natural for women. It is also the reason why men have more visible religious duties and responsibilities and roles than women do. They have more homework because they have farther to go. To reach the level women are already at.

it just dawned on me how "real" is at the core of Realization. an earlier post mentions that, it is about recognizing what is real. i like this very much:

yes. big difference between reacting and responding.

I tend to favor the simple and straightforward. "Meditation is an exercise that trains attention and awareness. Its purpose is often to curb reactivity to one's thoughts and feelings, which, though they may be disturbing and upsetting and hijack attention from moment to moment, are invariably fleeting." from Psychology Today a secular source, but what it states is at the core of many practices aimed at Realization

oh, OK, thank you. That makes sense. On a different forum i read a lot from someone who posted there, that is where i learned the bit i do know about Hindusim. She talked a lot about Brahman, Atman, Advaita. So it sounds like as you say, a different flavor, a different hierarchy. Thank you.

I am not familiar with Shiva and know very little about Hinduism. But I appreciate that in this forum i learn by hearing people share their own paths and perspective and framework of understanding. My intention is to understand what is being discussed, not to dispute or challenge it. As "the supreme being, ultimate reality" then is Shiva at the top in Hinduism? In my very, very limited understanding of Hinduism I thought Brahman was the source, sustainer, and ground of all being. so i am confused

.

i balk at "destroys." changes, transforms, dissolves, releases are all fine for me. destroys though, no. the imagery (for me) is too violent, malevolent, jarring. also what is changing and transforming is my perception and perspective seeing with greater clarity is not destroying anything. i am just seeing whatever it is differently. enhanced clarity feels to me more like illuminating rather than destroying. turning on the light in the room doesn't "destroy" darkness because darkness has no existence or substance of its own. it is just the absence of light. that's just me. individual words carry nuance and deliver a whole host of related associations and imagery and transmission. For me, it has to be a "fit" for all that it brings with it. It is a personal preference, resonance, affinity. Systems that rely on "opposites" (including true false) don't really work for me. Divinity, including me as an expression of divinity, is not pieces or parts. it is wholeness. and for me Divinity is all there is. everything, everywhere, all the time. There is no place where Thou art not. And that includes my inner world. The process of chopping things up into ever smaller pieces and analyzing them feels (for me) exhausting and fragmenting. That is how i experience it, as a spinning mental process, frantic even, driven, scattered. Whereas when i instead see everything as an expression of Divinity, the experienced felt sense is like slow breathing, restful, calming, stillness, a deep peace. Putting things back together (wholeness, nurturing, nourishing) feels better to me than breaking things apart (divisive, contention)

Yes, ACT is discussed also: "The new tendency began with dialectical behavior therapy, which uses standard behavioral and cognitive techniques along with mindfulness meditation in a form of individual and group treatment originally developed to prevent self-mutilation and suicide attempts in women with borderline personality. Dialectical behavior therapy has also been used for eating disorders, addictions, and other conditions. Marsha Linehan, the originator of the technique, refers to a "dialectic of acceptance and change" in which meditation serves as a means for the patient to accept feelings that she has been rejecting because family members and friends have declared them unjustified or invalid. Acceptance and commitment therapy, developed by Stephen Hayes and others, further breaks down the distinction between cognitive behavioral therapy and older spiritual teachings. ....Acceptance and commitment therapists oppose what they call cognitive fusion and experiential avoidance." "Acceptance and commitment therapy rejects the assumption that what needs to be changed is the content of a thought or feeling. ...The alternatives include meditation and a variety of mental exercises, metaphors, and stories that resemble Zen paradoxes and parables." https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/Meditation_in_psychotherapy

i had to look that up tsa lung trul khor. And I watched the introduction video on the Cancer Center's website. It is a Tibetan Bon meditation practice with breathing, movement, and awareness. For calming the mind and connecting to the heart. Qualities highlighted are: gentle, relaxed, nurturing, clear. Stated benefit: enhanced quality of life. that is wonderful. Of note, it is offered and used not just with patients, but also with caregivers and family. Therapeutic benefits, yes.

interesting observation. yes this or that word does have a particular personal tone or resonance. for me when i hear "contemplate" it brings to mind the contemplatives, who were religious mystics. and yes i associate that with abiding and being, observing and awareness. meditation for me is exactly there. whereas i associate "mind" with intellect and logical thinking and thought process.

Having worked in healthcare for 30+ years, much of that time was working in mainstream hospitals and medical centers which relied heavily on data-based research, particularly when it comes to using and introducing less mainstream treatment modalities. At one time acupuncture was seen as "alternative" medicne and now it is mainstream in hospitals and often covered by insurance. Meditation is also finding its way into mainstream medicine, particularly in the area of therapy. "The systematic method of regulating attention known as meditation is now being incorporated into psychotherapeutic practice and linked in surprising ways to other healing traditions, including cognitive behavioral therapy. The most highly developed forms of meditation are associated with Buddhism, but there are parallels in other spiritual and religious traditions, as well as modern secular versions under the names of relaxation response training or mindfulness meditation." more here, source Harvard Medical School, Meditation in psychotherapy https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/Meditation_in_psychotherapy

attitudes of disdain and superiority, yes, are transmitted in some posts loud and clear. It is my view and experience that is a behavior that is not warm-hearted.

the post is to illustrate using examples, what beliefs about meditation look like. And as stated, it is for discussion about the beliefs and views, not about people posting. my interest is discussing, clarifying, exploring, learning about, and understanding the beliefs. it is not about the people. every voice and view on this forum has something to offer. Disagreement and different view points are part and parcel of any robust discussion.

I have found in the qi gong world there are some practices which intentionally direct and move and push qi around to specific parts of the body through specific routes; compared to other qigong practices which specifically AVOID and actively WARN AGAINST doing that very same thing. They still cultivate qi but the qi is not forced to certain areas, instead it is allowed to flow to wherever it goes in the body. My preference and affinity is for allowing flow of the qi and not using force on the qi. I trust the wisdom of the body and the wisdom of the qi, to flow where it is needed, and taking the route that is optimal. I do not impose it. For this reason i actively avoid practices which move qi around through a specific route to a specific destination. There are many associated risks and dangers to forcing and directing qi. Some of these have been mentioned in this thread. I absolutely agree (and medical documentation and literature supports this) that there are medical and personal history contra-indications for qi gong and meditation. And that some forms are inherently riskier than other forms, even for someone without medical contraindications. I opt always for gentle and safe, that's just me. There is always a safe and gentle method (That is my belief) for me to approach whatever it is, whether that is qigong or meditation.

Here is a list with more examples of beliefs about meditation, all of which are taken directly from this thread alone. and yes as stated above, this is discussing the beliefs, ideas, views, opinions, not the people posting them more beliefs about meditation / all are from this thread meditation is about seeing things as they really are The meditator is doing things inside the body -- moving energy, gathering elemental forces, setting up a cauldron, etc silent sitting, uniting with the Dao from the heart for religious reasons to clear the mind a process leading to realization it is an advanced stage for a student, usually requiring a bunch of prerequisites, physical and mental priming it's not something as simple and straightforward as some believe meditation can be simple and straightforward Most (prob 90%) of meditation taught in the West is just beginner stuff, light and without much depth meditation should never be taught as therapy it is too dangerous there are safe and gentle forms of meditation sit and empty the mind quieting the mind is not the point of meditation the dreaded mindfulness meditation has therapeutic benefits awareness is flow, not forcing or hoarding should not sit down to meditate with goal of calming down when upset, or settling feelings thoughts in disarray should not sit down to meditate when physically unwell meditation is beneficial for calming down when upset meditation can help when physically unwell meditation can bring clarity, balance, order, and harmony it is a healthy, nurturing, nourishing, loving self-care practice it is a way to see reality meditation is being some forms of meditation are more useful for shifting emotional states, than other forms neigong and inner alchemy don't want to pilot a space ship in an out-of-balance emotional state

no, not wrong. different belief, different view, different opinion

bold above is an example of a belief about meditation

it is actually funny in a way. This forum (Dao Bums) is excellent and i give it an A+ for allowing and supporting and demonstrating a respect and regard for a whole range of paths of "religion and spirituality and esoterics" across the full spectrum of beliefs and practices. yet apparently when it comes to the beliefs we hold around meditation and how it is practiced, that goes out the window and the very same rabid fevered feral fervent attitudes come out in full force as seen on say other less tolerant forums around the topics of God and religion.

Yes, absolutely. and i 100% support that.

because it is no different than listening to people disagree and argue about what God "really is." Or which religion is "correct." Along with the attendant and displayed attitudes of superiority (for their own beliefs, their own path) and disdain (toward other beliefs, toward other paths).

yes, i agree. And this varies from person to person.