How Much of Buddhism Can Survive the Scrutiny of Science? ~ Shinzen Young

[@mlentsch]

Good to see Shinzen on camera, again! Looks good! The talk wasn't so bad either....

[@mustaqmuntaquim4341]

Shinzen Young is the master!

[@AntarblueGarneau]

Re: Reincarnation Hinduism is a vast institutionalized class struggle of which G Buddha was a part. The priests are at the top of the hierarchy which goes down to untouchability. It seems to represent a huge draconian division of labor. NO UPWARD MOBILITY within the castes EXCEPT THRU DEATH! Hence the belief in reincarnation to keep the hindu workforce in check. They believe if they do the work of their caste they will be reborn into a better situation. The rare cases in which past lives are recounted specifically probably have more to do with a universal mind bank or collective unconscious as well are all part of one life.

[@danhle1032]

on the matter of carl sagan's often used quote "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" Researcher Rupert Sheldrake responds by stating that "extraordinary" is a subjective term. What's extraordinary for one person isn't extraordinary for others. When a huge proportion of the population actually reports psychical experiences at one or several points of their lives, why is that still considered an extraordinary claim?

[@RainaEmeral]

Exactly. I've always wondered that. Plus, there are those who were born clairvoyant who routinely know things, specific things, which they have no way of knowing other than through reading a finer level of energy. They have a part of the brain that's more developed. It's not " magic". There is irrefutable evidence that this ability exists, yet it's still treated as some kind of fringe thing.

[@jeremybiggs8413]

It depends how the psychic experience interacts with objective reality. If something exists solely in the domain of the mind and deals with mental stuff it’s a psychological phenomenon. If the psychic experience makes claims about things outside the mind then it has to accord with objective reality and there must be empirical evidence of its existence. It’s one thing to say “God” (for example)” is an aspect of subjective insight experience that many people feel - we can collect experiential data for this even if there is no way of verifying whether that feeling is identical; it’s another to say that “God” is a sentient being, immaterial and unfalsifiable that created all matter and knows and sees all when there is no evidence to back up this assertion.

[@hrnekbezucha]

It sounds like the more the practice is tedious, annoying, frustrating and painful, the better results you'll achieve. It's so counter-intuitive. The intuitive thing is to stop doing it.

[@kkfalcone]

+Hrnek Bezucha Hi Hrnek. It is so important that you do not seek experiences in meditation. Sometimes the practice is tedious, annoying, frustrating and painful, and sometimes it is not, it is other things. Practice equanimity in either case, be open to whatever arises in your mind and body.

[@Dogitude]

+Hrnek Bezucha its counter intuitive because it can't be understood with intuition or knowledge . You can't know it, you can only be it.

[@wrayy10]

+Hrnek Bezucha Yo you might like Shinzen's Do Nothing meditation video. You basically stop doing everything, let whatever happen, and if you notice yourself trying to control things then you let that shit go!!!

[@Dogitude]

+Wray McOuat I'm skeptical of having that as the basis of your practice as a beginner because I have heard many people go that route and end up "effortlessly" daydreaming for 20 years . I think do nothing is better for intermediate and advanced meditators after they have meditated in a more efforted fashion first and built up some momentum .

[@TheTarutau]

id say none of it. look at its effects.