www.philorum.org
Abstract
The presentation will provide a basic introduction to meditation, explores what European philosophy has to say regarding meditative experiences, and proposes that meditation and Buddhism may have something valuable to offer secular Humanism.
Introduction (2 mins)
I'd like to talk this evening about meditation, philosophy & humanism.
I'm grateful for the opportunity to speak here this evening.
May I first acknowledge John Bentley for the insight and courage to create what is Philorum today.
I thank friends who were inspired to come this evening for their interest in meditation, I know there are a few that are experienced in the vispassana tradition for instance.
Most of you here today I think have had some experience of meditation? Or at least done some related activities such as yoga or stress reduction techniques. And I invite you to incorporate these experiences into the Philorum meeting here today.
I'd also like to thank friends who have come today due to their affinity with humanism. Friends such as John August who is loyal member of the NSW Humanist Society. I think those of you that were here last month would agree that he gave an excellent overview of Humanism.
I will begin today's talk by providing a basic overview of meditation; both in conceptual understanding and practical understanding before addressing two important questions.
Firstly, is our understanding of meditation furthered by European philosophers?
Secondly, and I think more interestingly, could and should meditation be an essential part of modern secular Humanism?
Definition (3mins)
Let's begin defining what we mean by meditation. The English word meditation comes from the Latin meditation, which originally indicated every type of physical or intellectual exercise. But it later evolved to specifically refer to "contemplation".
In the general sense of this word we have all had "contemplative type" meditations here at our philosophical reflections here at the Philorum.
However the working definition that I will would like to use for meditation today is "focusing the mind on a single object or concept such as a an image, one's breath, or a mantra" One must keep in mind that there are kinds of meditation in which you focus on awareness itself, without any sign or symbol, but I will save that for another day.
Meditation is popularly known as it is practiced in Brahamic faiths. Though meditation is found not just in Hinduism and Buddhism but also in other religions such as The Baha'i Faith, Gnosticism, and Abrahamic faiths. The Bible for instance mentions meditation or meditate twenty times.
But the practice of meditation in itself need not be considered a religious practice. Indeed western cultures in the past few decades have been adopting secular meditation practices in rapidly increasing numbers.
Autobiographical prelude (4mins)
Let it be clear in this presentation that I do not profess to be some sort of meditation guru or Buddhologist. Far from it. However I hope I am able to share some perspectives that I have gleaned from my past experiences and at least provide a springboard for today's discussions.
I have been fortunate to have had a fairly eclectic experience of meditation.
I have been interested in meditation since I can remember for when I was a youngster my parents for many years were part of a new age type personal development course and they would bring me along to meditation sits. I continue to value these kinds of experiences and at the same time I increasingly value analytical thinking, philosophy, psychology & science.
In the past five years I have experienced meditation in many different contexts; Secular, Buddhist, and even Christian. In the secular context I have been on several courses in Sydney. In the more traditional context I have practiced meditation at various Buddhist centres around Sydney which subscribe to different traditions and links to different cultures; Thai, Tibetan, Chinese or even Korean cultures. In the Christian context I was even part of Maranatha mantra meditation.
I have also been on a few extended silent meditation retreats including Goenka's Vispassana retreat and a retreat with Allan Wallace which I returned from only last Friday.
Practical (7 mins)
But before we fully engage our philosophical debate of meditation I would like to invite you to spend just the next 5 minutes participating in a very basic meditation exercise.
Whether you have meditated for years or never meditated before this is a very simple breathing exercise with an emphasis on relaxation.
- Stretch and relax our muscles particularly our shoulders and our face and our stomachs
- Settle comfortably in our chair with both feet on the ground and hands resting comfortably on lap or knees
- I will keep an eye on the time and let you know after five minutes to close the meditation
- Three really deep breathes in and out
- Breathe normally in and out just as it comes. If breathe is short just notice that and if it is long just notice that.
- Focus our attention on our breath just as it is for the next 5 minutes
- If mind wanders to thoughts of any kind just notice that and gently return to breathe.
For some meditation and yoga are simply a form of relaxation.
Personally I would use this approach for the first 5 to 10 minutes before moving focus of attention to more subtle sensations. If I am able to maintain relaxation, stability and vividness I am able to become increasingly aware of the unconscious contents of the mind and then even to glimpse something of the nature of mind which a state of greater blissfulness and possibility.
European Philosophy (1 min)
Now let me move from my comfortable seat of relaxation to European philosophy. European philosophy is a vast academic tradition and I do not pretend for a moment to know as much on the topic as many of you here today. I hope to learn from you from your comments after this presentation.
In exploring the contribution of European philosophy to our understanding of what meditation I do not have time to treat Aristotle's wonderful concept of Eudomism in any detail. However just to note here that Eudomism is a conception of ethics that puts human happiness and the complete life of the individual at the centre of ethical concern and that a person needs to balance reason, contemplation and desire. I see many similarities of this with both Buddhism and Humanism. Perhaps this could be the topic for another talk!
I will travel in time through the dark ages through to modern European philosophy. Here there are two European philosophers who explore Buddhism in some depth; namely Arthur Schopenhauer and Friedrich Nietzsche.
Both of these philosophers were Germans in the nineteenth century. As such they were quite unfamiliar with the Buddhist tradition of meditation. They may have had aesthetic appreciations through local art galleries and walks in the countryside but there only understanding of Buddhist meditation would be indirectly through reading of a limited range of Buddhist texts and philosophies.
Schopenhauer - Triple Tradition (3 mins)
Whilst studying philosophy at university the orientalist Friedrich Mayer introduced Schopenhauer to the Upanishads and various Buddhist texts at around 1810.
Schopenhauer's philosophy became very similar to Buddhism. We could describe his atheism, his belief in reincarnation, his stress on compassion as the basis of morality, his indifference to the "achievements" of human history, as well as his insight into impermanence.
Key to Schopenhauer's philosophy was the concept of the Will. Just a note that Ellen Watson gave a nice presentation here at Philorum of Free Will last September and look forward to her thoughts this evening.
According to Schopenhauer the Will enslaves the human intellect to such impulses as the emotions, the sex drive, and the subconscious. According to Schopenhauer, people ought to transcend appearances through artistic contemplation and negate the Will through asceticism.
For Schopenhauer, one way to escape the suffering inherent in a world of Will was through art. Interestingly Schopenhauer thought that music was the only art that embodied the will itself.
There is some analogy of negating the will through asceticism with the practice of meditation. However the results of this kind of asceticism tend to be more like fleeting states of trance than the states of consciousness described through continuous Buddhist meditation.
Not only are some aspects of the Will incompatible with Buddhism but Schopenhauer's successors, such as Nietzsche, point out several other philosophical flaws.
Having, perhaps somewhat quickly, dismissed Schopenhauer as offering any valuable insights into meditation, I turn now a fellow German; Friedrich Nietzsche.
Nietzsche - Active and Passive Nihilism (3 mins)
Like Schopenhauer, Nietzche was relatively familiar with Buddhism and relatively accepting of it as a philosophy. For instance Nietzsche delivered praise to Buddhism in his 1895 work "The Anti-Christ", taking care to exclude it from his condemnation of Christianity. He stated that "Buddhism is a hundred times more realistic than Christianity", because unlike the dogmatic desire for a pleasurable afterlife through the avoidance of earthly sin, the Buddha's aims of non-suffering through adjustment of self were attainable in life.
Both Nietzsche and Buddhism emphasise the centrality of humans in a godless cosmos and neither looks to any external being or power for their respective solutions to the problem of existence. For Nietzsche the problem is overcoming nihilism, for Buddhism it is the unsatisfactory nature of our lives.
Both understand human being as an ever-changing flux of multiple psychophysical forces, and within this flux there is no autonomous or unchanging subject or ego.
However Nietzsche considers meditation and Nihilism is a form of existential suicide at worst or passive Nihilism at best.
To begin with for those within a Buddhist understanding existential suicide is not possible as one will be simply be reborn with similar existential conditions.
Passive Nihilism
Humanism and Buddhism (2 mins)
There is currently very little ancient Buddhist wisdom or practice of meditation incorporated into Humanism. Perhaps John August may have some commentary on this.
Here is something from the Richard Norman's excellent short book 'On Humanism'.
What are the things that 'lift the spirit', the things that make us want to go one, that make life worth living?
... before continuing further he puts this caveat.
"Again we risk descending into banality, but I think we all know from experience what these things are"
He offers the following:
- Satisfaction of creative achievement.
- Excitement of discovery.
- Relationships with others.
- The life of emotions.
- The enjoyment of beauty in art and nature.
I would argue here that the list isn't bad at all but it is slightly pedestrian. Furthermore we don't necessarily know all the answers to these questions because we may not have had the opportunity to experience certain things, particularly aspects of ourselves.
Buddhism extends the concept of the training of the mind from formal education to the culture of the mind through psychological exercises particularly the cultivation of mindfulness and concentration. There is nothing equivalent to this in humanist practice.
It provides a powerful tool to motivate individuals to do that which is deemed good, whereas both theistic religion and even secular humanism have to rely on the compulsive force of the law and the use of its sanctions as a deterrent.
We have seen that humanism too has its problems particularly in the identification of its set of values. To some extent its values are derived from the Christian religion which was the background from which modern humanism sprang. Much of the humanist discussion on ethics concentrate on the issues in which it differs from Christianity (e.g. euthanasia, abortion on demand, homosexuality). Implicit in this in the belief that when it comes to the rest is agrees with Christianity.
If this background is widened to encompass other philosophical systems which have evolved in other parts of the world it can only be to the gain of Humanism. An explicit consideration of the values inculcated by Buddhism can be very useful in this regard.
Follow Up (2 min)
I would welcome the opportunity to explore related topics to what has been raised today. For instance I have already prepared for the topic of "Buddhism and Science".
But today focus discussion on Meditation and philosophy.
My answers to the questions raised are as follows:
First of all in relation to the question of:
Western philosophy has little to say with regards to meditation. Many ancient philosophers have come up with similar philosophies to Buddhism without emphasis on meditation. Those few philosophers, such as Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, that do provide specific reference to Buddhism do so not on the basis of substantial understanding or experience of meditation.
Buddhism has been providing the richest framework for the understanding and practice of meditation for over 2,500 years.
Secular Humanism is currently philosophically positioned as a positive philosophical advancement on atheism. However this philosophy does not provide any substantial methodology with regards to cultivation of happy and meaningful lives. In this regards meditation should be an essential part of modern secular humanism
Thank you all for coming today and I look forward to hearing all of your thoughts.