Charles Faulkner

So even the split between vision and audition is an arbitrary conception. In terms of meditation it is a mistake to separate senses because to do so would presuppose and necessitate multiple centers to perception so perception ceases to be total with a single center. For each center of perception a new action arises in the body so conflict arises within the body as it is being driven in multiple directions. This habit of separating perception in any way (say between thoughts and feelings, eyes and ears) creates tension in the body and results in unnatural movement.

While I agree with most of your post (I think we both agree that these sensory delineations are more epistemological or metaphoric than actual)... I'm going to disagree on your comment about meditation. There are numerous kinds of meditation, including some which rely on sensory delineations. A recent study of vipassana meditation showed distinct neurophysiological changes resulting from the practice of making delineations and naming emotions, senses, and thoughts (in accordance with the "objectives" of the meditation - neuroplasticity in particular areas of the cerebral cortex associated with attention, memory, and integration of emotions. In short, these areas were thicker in experienced Vipassana practitioners than in the non-meditating control group ).

I think there are probably a few people here who are readers of the Journal of Hypnotism... In my "Hypnosis and Meditation" column, I've written about this study in the past and the forthcoming issue (December, I think) has some more.

Another sensory delineation form of meditation that I sometimes offer to my Meta-Magick students is the "ajna monkey" meditation, in which sensory experience is delineated, then "given" to a single chakra. This produces a rapid experience of "drawing to a point."

This is in contrast to, for instance, zazen, in which sensory delineations would be hindrance, as you describe.

Another common example of single pointed focus of the mind is how dancers spin without losing balance or getting dizzy. They call it "spotting". They put the center of perception on the wall. This means all their action comes from a unified perception and the body does not get disturbed during very fast action. This also has the side effect of their movement looking very harmonious from the outside.

This raises an interesting point in that the centre of your perception doesn't even have to be inside your body. On the wall is just fine too. It often doesn't matter where as long as it is singular. Perception doesn't follow the same rules as physics. The mind can go anywhere instantly. It doesn't have to travel through space.

Martial artists often use as a central point 2 inches below the navel. This is convenient because it is a part of the body that is also your physical centre of gavity and it moves little compared to say your arms so is easier to concentrate there. There is nothing magical about this spot, it is just convenient for the job. Spotting the wall is not convenient in a fight but is fine for a dance performance.

While I agree with most of your post (I think we both agree that these sensory delineations are more epistemological or metaphoric than actual)... I'm going to disagree on your comment about meditation. There are numerous kinds of meditation, including some which rely on sensory delineations. A recent study of vipassana meditation showed distinct neurophysiological changes resulting from the practice of making delineations and naming emotions, senses, and thoughts (in accordance with the "objectives" of the meditation - neuroplasticity in particular areas of the cerebral cortex associated with attention, memory, and integration of emotions. In short, these areas were thicker in experienced Vipassana practitioners than in the non-meditating control group ).

I think there are probably a few people here who are readers of the Journal of Hypnotism... In my "Hypnosis and Meditation" column, I've written about this study in the past and the forthcoming issue (December, I think) has some more.

Another sensory delineation form of meditation that I sometimes offer to my Meta-Magick students is the "ajna monkey" meditation, in which sensory experience is delineated, then "given" to a single chakra. This produces a rapid experience of "drawing to a point."

This is in contrast to, for instance, zazen, in which sensory delineations would be hindrance, as you describe.

Yes. I am only talking about the forms of meditation that are designed to enable natural and efficient movement of the organism. That is not the goal of all meditation methods. Some actually encourage separation of mind and body which interferes with natural movement.

I am concerned with unification of mind and body as a meditation. i.e. What makes the mind and body work in unison. This is the kind of meditation that is most useful for anyone who ever wants to move without disturbing the natural function of either mind or body. This kind of meditation I also find interesting as its so easily testable and so hard for people to delude themselves that they are doing it when not. You can test for it physically.

Similarly, there are different types of relaxation, some of which separate mind and body, others with unify.

Hi John,

Thanks for your posts, very interesting!

Violeta

I am concerned with unification of mind and body as a meditation. i.e. What makes the mind and body work in unison. This is the kind of meditation that is most useful for anyone who ever wants to move without disturbing the natural function of either mind or body. This kind of meditation I also find interesting as its so easily testable and so hard for people to delude themselves that they are doing it when not. You can test for it physically.

Very cool. I'm an aikido student and find similar concerns in that realm. I'm curious how you might test. Is it anything like this stuff?

Meta-Magick - NLP, Neuroscience and Ritual - Philip H. Farber

Meta-Magick - NLP, Neuroscience and Ritual - Philip H. Farber

Hi Philip

Here's the skeptics point of view. Bear with me and do your best to look at this from the highest level

You said "epistemological or metaphoric than actual"

A skeptic would say that it is ritualistic

That sounds negative, but it offers a point of agreement.

From what I know about research into shamanism, there is no empirical recognition of trance, altered states, or hypnosis within shamanism.

Yet they seem to make change

The rituals, including moving through several senses, V A K etc, are useful rituals.

As such, they have no efficacy. We are in placebo land again, which makes the intervention one that is categorically a non-effect.

But shamans continue to do their thing. We are back to examining the value of placebo, and even the value (or one of the valuable things) of pseudoscience.

Now, correct me if I err, but that sounds like a reasonable way forward in connection with the research world.

Rich

Rich,

I believe you missed the point and context of what I said was "more epistemological or metaphoric than actual". I was talking about our delineation of how many senses we perceive.

I'm not even really sure how you jumped from our discussion of senses and meditation into shamanism. There is a wide body of research on shamanism and I would suggest you start at a library and address your questions to the books within as it is not quite my area of expertise.

Phil

Sure, the literature is fascinating eg

Shamanism: Traditional and Contemporary Approaches to the Mastery of Spirits and Healing

Healing Powers and Modernity

Traditional Medicine, Shamanism, and Science in Asian Societies
Edited by Linda H. Connor
and Geoffrey Samuel



Rich