[Buddha-l] monks, meditation and trauma

[S.A. Feite]

  Hi Dan:

On Apr 7, 2009, at 3:23 PM, Dan Lusthaus wrote:

> Disneyland used to have a section called Tomorrowland (maybe it  
> still does,
> haven't been there for many years). It touted all the wonderful  
> things just
> around the corner in the future. Futuristic kitchens, gravity-free  
> autos,
> etc, etc, "Better living through chemistry" (a corporate slogan  
> that served
> as a sly punchline in the 60s, and has undermined the ability of  
> our air and
> water to support healthy life). The future eventually arrives, but  
> rarely as
> imagined. Watch some of the predictive films of those times for a good
> chuckle. You are confusing the dreams some have about what the  
> future might
> be, with what is presently the case, and with what sufficient evidence
> indicates has a good chance of being the case in the future. Brain
> plasticity is the "hot" thing these days, tons of research coming  
> out, but
> aside from showing that the brain is not a static organ, and that  
> it can
> undergo modifications -- in complex networks of ways -- due to  
> reactions to
> external experiences or to how such experiences are experienced,  
> little else
> is certain about how "plastic" the brain is or how it really works.  
> Our lack
> of knowledge is replaced by hyperactive theorizing and speculation  
> -- which
> is fine... that leads to experiments and tests, and actual  
> knowledge is
> gained thereby. But on the popular front, people and generalists  
> tend to run
> with the penumbras of speculation as if those are the facts. Think  
> of all
> the "groundbreaking" announcements one hears on the news about some  
> new
> medical breakthrough, which, when you get through the journalistic  
> hype,
> usually turns out to be a very mundane laboratory result that -- if  
> it holds
> up with subsequent experimentation -- may contribute in some way,  
> years down
> the road, to a cure for cancer or diabetes or whatever because it  
> may have
> some noticeable affect on some micro-anatomical process that some  
> believe
> plays a role in cancer, diabetes, etc. Gamblers call this kind of  
> thing
> "long shot."

Well the present in not the 60's and actual science is not Disneyland.

The state of the art is already sufficient to ascertain whatever is  
there is to know about human hardware: both time-of-flight PET and  
fMRI are present realties and the next several generations of MRI and  
PET are already available at the research level.

It's silly to invoke the past or some imagined advancement in science  
that's coming unless you weren't really familiar with what's out  
there, for one. And secondly there's nothing new about kleshavarana,  
obliteration of negative patterns, these are thousands of years old.  
Whether of not we have a science capable of grokking what's going on  
is somewhat moot, since contemplatives know that negative patterns  
can be eliminated and have known that for a long, long time. What it  
may take is appropriate subjects being examined across time and then  
controls learning the same meditative techniques across time to see  
if the results are replicable. This is already well under way. If it  
were the 1970's or even 1980's your 'the future is coming' lament  
might hold some validity, but really it just makes you sound like a  
religious professor who's out of touch with science.

>
>
>> Well, let's look at my original comment then:
>>
>> "I would suspect the aforementioned example would be the exception
>> rather than the rule.
>
> I suspect your suspicion is unfounded. There is a lot of anger,  
> etc., in the
> Tibetan community, about many things (and not just among the  
> youth). Let's
> do a rigorous poll and get out of the suspicion business.

Well let's be clear here, I'm not talking about the Tibetan community  
in general. Tibetan refugees crossing the Himalaya aren't human  
counterparts of the residents of Krypton, some superhuman race and  
the descendants of Jor-El simply because the come from magical Tibet.  
There may only be a few ever coming across with such capacities I'm  
speaking of. Such states as samadhi are still relatively rare in long- 
term contemplative. Sadhana is not a magical bullet.

A good indicator of whether or not contemplative approaches to human  
well-being are sufficient and valid is whether or not insurance  
companies reimburse for their use--and that's already happening.