> Thanks for your input, Earthquake.
> I am only guessing the points being made here,
> (sorry im cooking lunch), and I can appreciate if
> there is any view that mediation may make one
> focused in a way that other things are not
> noticed. This can be true.
> Yes I guess that's broadly the point of the
> initial post, that meditation can make you accept
> (or overlook?) suboptimal circumstances instead of
> improving them. I disagreed with some of the
> arguments used to substantiate that idea, but I'm
> not sure what to think about the idea itself. I
> think it needs better evidence than what was
> provided. Whether that evidence exists, I don't
> And then later there was a link to an article that
> was about meditation being used in the military.
> This information was provided to support the idea
> that meditation in itself doesn't make you a
> better person, i.e. meditation is amoral. I think
> that's plausible.
This all could depend on the meditation itself. The application itself, but also crucially, the surrounding framework.
A person can approach meditation from a purely relaxation perspective. Or, maybe they are indeed trying to control thoughts. Or, like in Vedanta, they might be doing the opposite, entertaining the thought flow.
The framework around and within 'meditation' will have a bearing on the desired outcome. it's not enough to simply meditate and think one size fits all. For example, there's a difference in the path of Buddhism and that of a Navy Seal.So, differences are within and around.
Could this have a bearing on things guys? In that, essentially, it's not an and/or but a 'both'?